They put a fucking 17 YEAR OLD in JAIL for this?!

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Uh, Flint, I don't think literality was what you wanted.

This case showed up on O'Reilly tonight. Three-way jabberfest between two female guests of varied professional credentials and O'Reilly -- beyond that I can't say it left much of an impression. O'Reilly as usual took the position that it's better to keep it zipped; he doesn't reckon volunteering for trouble by sailing in phallus first is ever a good thing, whether actual trouble ensues or no. In this case, it ensued.

Well, if anyone would know it would be O'Reilly, the king of falafel.

Noone disagrees that teenagers do stupid things. I think serving a sentence normally reserved for actual forcible rape for a 2 year difference in ages is ridiculous.

[Kitsune]

Just an update on what my wonderful state is doing to control sex offenders. They're forcing them to live under bridges.

The Julia Tuttle Causeway, which links Miami to Miami Beach, offers no running water, no electricity and little protection from nasty weather. It's not an ideal solution, Department of Corrections Officials told CNN, but at least the state knows where the sex offenders are.

Don't ever, ever get caught urinating in public, here.

[BigV]

We house them on McNeil Island.

Washington state took over the penitentiary from the federal government in 1981. It is now called McNeil Island Corrections Center. According to the state, it is the only facility in the U.S. to have been a territorial, federal, and state prison, and is the only prison left in North America that is only accessible by boat or air. It is presently the site of the state's primary Special Commitment Center, where sexually violent predators are committed for treatment after completing their standard prison sentences.

--snip--There is no commerce or stores on the island and access to the island is strictly controlled by the Department of Corrections making it the most exclusive island in the entire Puget Sound.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Kit'sLink

Five men -- all registered sex offenders convicted of abusing children -- live along the causeway because there is a housing shortage for Miami's least welcome residents.

Do these rules only apply to pedophiles or is that just a coincidence?

[Kitsune]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Do these rules only apply to pedophiles or is that just a coincidence?

Only to "sex offenders" (child molesters, people that expose themselves in public, etc). Most cities here have a limit on how close convicted offenders can live within places where children congregate (includes schools, school bus stops, playgrounds, churches, day care centers, city/county parks, etc) Tampa, like Miami, is working to push the minimum distance to a level that effectively closes off the entire city so that convicts have no place to live. Now it appears even the state is attempting to pass a law that will push the accused to very remote areas or simply force them to go on the run.

[BigV]

Same here. They make the minimum radius of the no-go zone so large and apply to so many locations, that the circles all overlap, and the baddies are pushed out by sheer force of legislation.

No fan of sexual predators am I, but, I find this part very unsettling:

It is presently the site of the state's primary Special Commitment Center, where sexually violent predators are committed for treatment after completing their standard prison sentences.

I don't fully understand the "committed after completion of the sentence" part. Your thoughts?

[Kitsune]

Originally Posted by BigV

I don't fully understand the "committed after completion of the sentence" part. Your thoughts?

I don't get it, either. Once you serve out your sentence, you're done. If the commitment to an institution is part of the sentence, fine. I would rather see treatment and rehabilitation than what most cities and states do with sex offenders, which is to essentially stitch a red letter 'A' to their clothing and ostracize them from society in the hopes that the problem remedies itself. Someone convicted of murdering a child that has served their time doesn't receive as many restrictions as this once they've returned to the world.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Kitsune

Now it appears even the state is attempting to pass a law that will push the accused to very remote areas or simply force them to go on the run.

Soon to come: roving packs of itinerant pedophiles.

[DanaC]

Soon to come: roving packs of itinerant pedophiles.

Soon to follow: roving packs of paedophile hunters.

[Kitsune]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Soon to follow: roving packs of paedophile hunters.

I was thinking this, so I'll note it: the people living under that bridge are in for it now that it is public that they live there. Good as dead.

[DanaC]

*nods* yep. Just what any civilised society needs, rampant vigilantism.

[BigV]

While we're all just thinking out loud here...

This is an example of the difference between lib/con/red/blue/right/left etc that generates much confusion, headlines and friction.

*Mandatory* sentences, maybe mandatory life sentences would eliminate this problem altogether. You did the crime, game over. Maybe even capital punishment. Even shorter anguish. It masks the problem with a superficial simplicity. "Problem solved".

But then what of the other thread floating around out there, what about the 17 year old in jail for this?!?! thread? Should the subject of that thread be "simplified" permanently with a life sentence or a death sentence? If not, where do you draw the line? Under what circumstances are you willing to consider other factors?

Which brings me to the base conflict: Simple answers that are easy to apply but fit most situations poorly, or better more appropriate solutions that require more effort/cost to develop? Simplicity versus Nuance?

Which is probably a good indicator of why I'm a Liberal--I am willing to spend the extra effort to find a better answer and I consider those who prejudge a situation and apply an answer without much thought lazy. It's very frustrating.

I don't have the answer to McNeil Island or that freeway enclave. But I do know that it's messed up and that a better answer can be found. But only be talking and working together, and just turning your back on the situation and calling it good since you can't see it anymore.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Kitsune

Only to "sex offenders" (child molesters, people that expose themselves in public, etc). Most cities here have a limit on how close convicted offenders can live within places where children congregate (includes schools, school bus stops, playgrounds, churches, day care centers, city/county parks, etc) Tampa, like Miami, is working to push the minimum distance to a level that effectively closes off the entire city so that convicts have no place to live. Now it appears even the state is attempting to pass a law that will push the accused to very remote areas or simply force them to go on the run.

Wait a minute, back up. The star of this thread, the 17 year old that got a blow job, is a sex offender. Does this Miami law apply to him as well as pedophiles?

[Kitsune]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Wait a minute, back up. The star of this thread, the 17 year old that got a blow job, is a sex offender. Does this Miami law apply to him as well as pedophiles?

In Florida, there is no difference between a pedophile and a sex offender. Any "sex offense", from urinating in public to molesting a toddler, gets you listed in the state's database (your name, address, etc, but not the specific offense you committed) and forces you to abide by the same restrictions and lack of rights after your sentence is served.

[TheMercenary]

While trying to find some info on the Florida Law I found this:

http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.co.../label/Florida