The Weekly Feed: Experimentation Edition
Morning Roundup: Change Edition
Former Blade Staffers Launch 'DC Agenda'
D.C. Insurance Dept. Denies Birth Control Coverage Meddling
Controversy Over Rhee Now to Include Sex, Congress
Sure, everyone had a good laugh about them. One intrepid reader even wrote a song about them. And - I'm sure like many others - I was the victim of some friendly ribbing by office colleagues who felt it appropriate to paste them on my door with specific instructions not to answer the door.
But as much as we want to have a joke at their expense, Maryland police credit the now notorious "No Candy At This Residence" signs with being wildly successful, assisting them to a safe Halloween.
Out of the 50 offender residences that officers checked on October 31st, 47 had the signs prominently posted and were not opening their doors. Many of those residences that police visited before Halloween were even receptive to the sign. The three offenders which police couldn't reach were more than likely working, but an investigation is underway to determine their whereabouts.
So, were the signs a good thing? Sounds like it.
Does it take the sting out of my entire office clamoring that I probably needed to talk to human resources about the sign on my door? Uh, not really.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
The three offenders which police couldn't reach were more than likely working, but an investigation is underway to determine their whereabouts.
What? Police resources are actually going toward determining the whereabouts of sex offenders on Halloween? Just because...they weren't home behind locked doors that night? Not because they've been accused of any actual wrongdoing on the night in question? What? Shit, I never thought I'd feel sorry for sex offenders. But either these are dangerous criminals who need to be locked up, or they're not. You can't have it both ways.
So, were the signs a good thing? Sounds like it.
What, in this article, are you basing this statement on? Not a smidge of evidence is offered that these signs prevented a crime. The police are patting themselves wildly on the back simply because they saw that most of the signs were in place. But how many sex offenders committed crimes on Halloween in years past, before the signs existed? That would be useful - dare I say, necessary - information to declare the program a success. All the police can say now is that most sex offenders are willing to put up the damn sign just to be left alone. So they'll endure a little humiliation. Okay, that's nice to know, but I don't see how it proves that children are any safer.
They're receptive to the signs because they've been conditioned to do whatever the heck the police want, lest they be further humiliated by silly signs on their front doors, being listed on offender web sites, having their names circulated, having the right to live wherever they want revoked, etc. etc.
Reasonable measures are called for, but how can we be sure that only the most serious offenders that actually pose a threat get branded this way. This is a huge slippery slope, but no one will exactly step up and be an advocate for sex offender's rights. I don't blame the police at all in these matters, but rather the public and the politicians that clamor for these measures in the name of saving the children. We need to work harder to find the right balance. After all, we don't publicly out murderers, rapists, and other criminals to this degree, so who defines the line?
Not only that, but the signs also ward off tigers. Were there any tiger attacks at homes with those signs?
So. There.
The signs do work--not a single rug-rat rang my doorbell this year.
But, I have been getting some serious skunk-eye from the neighbors.
And how is it the police found 27 at home, when they were supposed to post the signs and not answer the door?
Another example of wasting taxpayer resources on security theater.
Since no child in the history of the United States from day one has EVER been harmed by a convicted sex offender -I repeat NEVER - the only thing 'wildly successful' here was furthering this Facist Police State. Our children were 'protected' against NOTHING. A non existant bogeyman.
Again, no child was harmed by any sex offender this past Halloween night in ANY state, signs or not - trampled Constitutional rights or not. NOT ONE CHILD.
It may be the sex offender's door this past Halloween, but how long before it's YOUR door they're requiring signs for?
"...When the Nazis came for me, there was no one left to speak up..."
CORRECTION::::
Since no child in the history of the United States from day one has EVER been reported harmed *** ON HALLOWEEN NIGHT ***by a convicted sex offender -I repeat NEVER - the only thing 'wildly successful' here was furthering this Facist Police State. Our children were 'protected' against NOTHING. A non existant bogeyman.
Sorry for any confusion.
The sex offender public registry is bullshit.
It was supose to be for the dangerous sex offenders but now you have people on it who urinated in public.
A sex offender who had lived in my apartment complex for over ten years was outed by a new tenant who posted his infromation page inthe loby. The apartment complex didnt kick him out but would not renew his lease. He now is sleeping in his car as he cant find another place to live.
How is this making the streets safer?
Actually, a rapist is a sex offender, and therefore we DO require them to identify themselves as such.
And the reason we require them to identify themselves is because statistics show that they are highly likely to offend again.
Firechief--how are so sure that no child has ever been assaulted by a convicted sex offender on Halloween night? Even if you could somehow comb through decades of recorded sex offenses to prove that there were no documented cases on Halloween, everyone knows that lots (the majority?) of sex crimes are never reported.
Knowing that sex offenders are more likely than not to repeat their crimes, I think I deserve to know if a pedophile is living next door to me. A pedophile molesting (or worse) my child is more traumatic than a serial burglar stealing my car. The fact is that sex crimes are considered heinous enough that extra steps should be taken to prevent them from happening.
I'd love to know where Betty gets her sources from, because every major government, university, and corporate study has recidivism rates far LOWER than any other type of crime. How are we so sure a convicted sex offender has never assaulted a child on Halloween? How about you research and find a case. Good luck with that. The only reported "sex crime" on Halloween this year was a bunch of streakers at some yearly event. How about checking the facts every now and then? Here's a good place to start:
www.oncefallen.com
Now, this article answers a question I posed on my radio show a couple of weeks ago. Legislators are going to take credit for stopping a non-existent problem. Apparently those signs DO have magical powers, stopping aliens, meteors, the loch ness monster, dragons, the bubonic plague, the undead, and the New England Patriots from invading your house on Halloween, not just Tigers.
The laws today are named for one, Megan Kanka, who was seven years old when Jesse Timmendequas, a repeated violent sexual offender who lived across the street from her, kidnapped, raped and murdered her.
We have the RIGHT to know who they are and where they are! We don't want them anywhere near our children or in our children's lives! The registry works and our children deserve it.
If you don't want to be on the registry then just keep your filthy hands to yourself!
One assault against a child and they need to be locked up forever. (That goes for you too Derek Logue aka fallenone.com tier III sex offender in Ohio.)
Joseph Duncan who went on to kidnap Dylan and Shasta Groene and ultimately murdered Dylan after killing their mother, brother and family friend had this to say about his sex offender status:
"The truth is I am not an exception, I am the rule! Most sex offenders are just like me."
Why give them another chance to victimize a child again? Or murder her mother for trying to protect her? We must protect our citizens.
yea because its not like they wouldnt have taken them down after the cops left, right?
And "Zwoman" cannot quote any stat proving the effectiveness of the laws, instead resorting to personal attacks and hate filled comments, as well as resorting to using a screen name that mocks and harasses another individual. Classy. That is exactly why registries and other public shaming laws, like this Halloween sign law, should be abolished. How many sex crimes were reported on Halloween night in 1998? 2003? 2007? 1987? None. This year was no different, only this time, some LE are patting themselves on the back for doing nothing. Instead, if anything, these laws were bullseyes for people with "Zwoman's" vigilante mentality. Personally, who'd want to cater to others' kids at Halloween? If anything, I'm sure a few people used those signs for a peaceful evening at home. Another dumb, pointless law just to make your politicos look good.
I have no problem with sex offenders who pose a threat being on the web site. I do have a problem with people who pose no threat being on the web site.
Last year a man who had commited incest with his sister YEARS agao was placed on the web site. Even his siter didnt want it.
Yes what he did was horrible but he posed no threat to anyone so he shouldnt have been on the web site.
As one who worked in Law Enforcement for over 25 years and is now retired I can tell you like I see it. First of all working with sex offenders I found them to be for the most part very easy to deal with compaired to other criminals. Now someone on this said that sex offender = rapist. NO IT does not in many states you can be on a sex offender registry for non-contact crimes such as peeing in public. Sex offender does NOT = childmolester. And the fact is that most of in Law Enforcement have known since the start of the sex offender registry, for the most part it is a feel good law. It does little or nothing to protect the public but it makes the public feel good. Now as to sex offenders on halloween, no reported sexual assault has taken place on halloween done by a sex offender on the sex offender registry. Also the US Dept. Of Justice study states that sex offenders have one of the lowest recidivism rates amoung all criminals. 3.5% of them are reconvicted of a new sex crime within 3 years of release from prison. That is very low. Now if those in office realy wanted to protect the public they would pass a law that ALL KNOWN SEX OFFENDERS MUST PAY FOR TESTING THAT WOULD SHOW HOW MUCH OF A DANGER THEY ARE TO RE-OFFEND. This testing is avaliable and would then lead the public and the police to those sex offenders that they have to keep an eye on. In that the USDJ states that 95% of all sex crimes are commited by a person with NO prior arrest record then are we watching these sex offenders because the crime they commited is one we hate or are we watching them because they are a danger. I submit it is because we hate the crime they commited. Also the USDJ states that 90% of sexual assaults are commited by a person well known and trusted by the victim with over 50% of them being a family member. And yes many sex crimes go unreported but a majority of those are in the family area. And futher every crime including murder is under reported.
Zwoman is part of a cyber-terrorist group, Absolute Zero, that does nothing more than go around harassing and defaming people. They even tried to claim that Patty Wetterling has a "sex offender son."
http://absolutezerounites.blogspot.com/2008/04/biting-off-more-than-they-can-chew.html
Zwoman and the Absolute Zero group also promote sexual violence and murder:
http://absolutezerounites.blogspot.com/2008/10/azu-gets-off-on-thoughts-of-rape-deep.html
These individuals are dangerous extremists and should be ignored, or better yet, incarcerated.