Horrendous, disgusting, ridiculous. Apparently we haven't progressed any further than the Puritans and their scarlet letters. I've always been stridently against any database or continual punishment. This is just one more way of saying "Your real sentence is life of shame and revocation of pursuit of happiness in as public a way we can make possible as randomly as our money and whims decide to be"

I make no excuses for the horrible crimes which most if not all of these offenders have committed. But this is going too far. Why not just hang a noose on a tree out in the front yard? By evicting sex offenders from our society we are setting them up to fail again -- and at much greater costs to our children. We need some smarter thinking about this issue, rather than these showy PR stunts by individual police departments.

And finally, children should be properly supervised when trick-or-treating. Period.

Are they just for pedophiles or for all sex offenders? I do think there is a difference. And I agree with the above posters' points - it seems too far and too sweeping

I do not have a problem with this if it is applied to pedophiles. I am sorry but there is no known cure for pedophilia (they always, always, always reoffend!) and it is proven that exposure to children increases their desire to reoffend. So in order to protect children and place the pedophile out of temptation's way, I think they absolutely should be prohibited from participating in halloween.

Plus this is not about supervision at the time. What if you are with your child for trick-or-treating and someone sees your child for the first time when you knock on their door and takes a liking to your child? they could just go ahead and stalk your child until you do leave them alone. what then?

Oh come on. "Evicting sex offenders from our society"? What, by making them put up a sign and stay in one night out of the year? This hardly constitutes an eviction from society. Greater burdens are placed on teenagers who have done nothing wrong (I'm referring to night-time curfews) and we have no problem with that. Why? Because it's in society's best interest to curb crime, and because it imposes a relatively minor burden. When you commit a heinous crime, you give up some of your freedom. This is necessary for society to continue functioning. Why is that so hard to accept? Yes, offenders should be rehabilitated and reintegrated into society as much as possible, but that does not mean that our children should be the victims of our well-meant efforts. And if you doubt that for a second, please see countless studies proving that sex offenders are more likely than other types of criminals to re-offend. Anyone who cares more about a sex offender being allowed out on Halloween than about his own child's safety should have his head examined.

AH HA HA HA HA HA HA!!! What a great way to avoid having to buy Halloween candy -- I'll put a sign on my door saying "Registered sex offender inside. Keep away." There's supposed to be an element of "trick" in "Trick-or-treat" isn't there?

Then again, it might not look good when word gets around. So I think I'll put that sign on my neighbour's door...

My wife and I will not be at home during Trick or Treat hours, so we're not getting any candy. I hope that does not make us sex offenders.

I think the state should provide alternatives. For instance, if you attend some state-sponsored function where your time and attendance is accounted for during the requisite period, then you shouldn't have to put up the "No Candy" sign.

Sure, we need to protect our children. As a society, we have decided, however, to make the life of the convict our business. And we need to act accordingly. While they may be criminals, the convicted are still people too. Further traumatizing and stigmatizing them doesn't help matters any.

I'm not in favor of these signs, what a terrible idea. It sets people up for derision, prejudice, and subsequently it sets them up for failure.

Why can't these people just be asked to turn off their porch lights, like the rest of the people who don't participate in trick-or-treat? Kids in our neighborhood know this is a signal not to ring the doorbell. If you're really worried about this, take your child to a Halloween event instead of trick-or-treating.

I don't have much sympathy for sex offenders in general or for pedophiles in particular, but this is going too far. How about putting signs that say "I'm a drunk driver" on your car on New Years'Eve if you've been convicted of driving under the influence? Where does it stop?

I'm with dcn8v: the signs are too much and invite vigilantism. Let them turn off their lights just like everybody else who doesn't want to pass out candy.

scmgi wrote:
"And if you doubt that for a second, please see countless studies proving that sex offenders are more likely than other types of criminals to re-offend."

Funny, you don't include any links. I wonder why (Yes, I'm being sarcastic. I don't think you have any studies to back up your claim. I find your claim specious.).

Horrendous, disgusting, ridiculous. Apparently we haven't progressed any further than the Puritans and their scarlet letters. I've always been stridently against any database or continual punishment. This is just one more way of saying "Your real sentence is life of shame and revocation of pursuit of happiness in as public a way we can make possible as randomly as our money and whims decide to be"

Posted by: EmeraldEAD | October 23, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

I actually think most sex offenders should get life sentences, since research shows that they are likely to continue their criminal actions even after they get out of jail. We should simply have the guts and wherewithal to put them in jail and leave them there. I can't say I have much sympathy for the shame they must endure when they are released back into society. Being a sex offender is not really comparable to being an adulterer. I doubt that in 400 years, pedophilia will be seen as perfectly fine and not subject to criminal penalties. So my feeling is if we can't keep them in jail, it's fine to shame them publicly, in the interest of making sure our kids are protected. I don't feel bad about it at all.

semcgi--

http://www.csom.org/pubs/mythsfacts.html

"Myth:
"'Most sex offenders reoffend.'

"Fact:
"Reconviction data suggest that this is not the case. Further, reoffense rates vary among different types of sex offenders and are related to specific characteristics of the offender and the offense.

"Persons who commit sex offenses are not a homogeneous group, but instead fall into several different categories. As a result, research has identified significant differences in reoffense patterns from one category to another. Looking at reconviction rates alone, one large-scale analysis (Hanson and Bussiere, 1998) reported the following differences:

" # child molesters had a 13% reconviction rate for sexual offenses and a 37% reconviction rate for new, non-sex offenses over a five year period; and
# rapists had a 19% reconviction rate for sexual offenses and a 46% reconviction rate for new, non-sexual offenses over a five year period.

"Another study found reconviction rates for child molesters to be 20% and for rapists to be approximately 23% (Quinsey, Rice, and Harris, 1995).

"Individual characteristics of the crimes further distinguish recidivism rates. For instance, victim gender and relation to the offender have been found to impact recidivism rates. In a 1995 study, researchers found that offenders who had extrafamilial female victims had a recidivism rate of 18% and those who had extrafamilial male victims recidivated at a rate of 35%. This same study found a recidivism rate for incest offenders to be approximately 9% (Quinsey, Rice, and Harris, 1995).

"It is noteworthy that recidivism rates for sex offenders are lower than for the general criminal population. For example, one study of 108,580 non-sex criminals released from prisons in 11 states in 1983 found that nearly 63% were rearrested for a non-sexual felony or serious misdemeanor within three years of their release from incarceration; 47% were reconvicted; and 41% were ultimately returned to prison or jail (Bureau of Justice Statistics).

"It is important to note that not all sex crimes are solved or result in arrest and only a fraction of sex offenses are reported to police. The reliance on measures of recidivism as reflected through official criminal justice system data (i.e., rearrest or reconviction rates) obviously omits offenses that are not cleared through an arrest (and thereby cannot be attributed to any individual offender) or those that are never reported to the police. For a variety of reasons, many victims of sexual assault are reluctant to invoke the criminal justice process and do not report their victimization to the police. For these reasons, relying on rearrest and reconviction data underestimates actual reoffense numbers."

So AT BEST, you are overstating your case.

I have no sympathy for pedophiles. If it were up to me, this wouldn't be an issue for most of them since they'd still be in prison.

Having said that, this notion that you're going to protect kids by scarlet lettering pedophiles is ridiculous. Are you going to ban them from shopping malls, movie theaters, and McDonalds, too, on the basis that kids tend to gather at those places?

I'd be willing to bet that ostracizing policies like this are a lot more likely to drive pedophiles to commit new crimes than they are to prevent them.

nbahn,
I understand the point that you are making does not suggest that sexual offenders reoffend more than other types of criminals. Even if this is true, the statistics you quote on the rate of recidivism -- for child molestors 13% reconviction rate for sexual offenses and a 37% for new crimes --- for rapists 19% reconviction rate for sexual offenses and a 46% reconviction rate for new crimes -- do not ease my worries about these offenders. As I said before, keep them in jail, and if we can't, do whatever is necessary to protect childen. If that means sex offenders have to be grounded on halloween, I am not going to lose any sleep over it.

emily8 wrote:

"nbahn,
I understand the point that you are making does not suggest that sexual offenders reoffend more than other types of criminals. Even if this is true, the statistics you quote on the rate of recidivism -- for child molestors 13% reconviction rate for sexual offenses and a 37% for new crimes --- for rapists 19% reconviction rate for sexual offenses and a 46% reconviction rate for new crimes -- do not ease my worries about these offenders. As I said before, keep them in jail, and if we can't, do whatever is necessary to protect childen. If that means sex offenders have to be grounded on halloween, I am not going to lose any sleep over it."

It seems to me that you are choosing to live your life in fear. May I in all seriousness suggest that you move to a gated community?

Those of you who think these folks shouldnt be ostracized.....let them hang out with YOUR kids for a while. Your tunes will change toot sweet. No one made them do what they did. They made that concious choice to attack a child. Sexually. Think hard about that for a minute.

As usual, these laws are great for political points but not for liberty. An 18yo has sex with a 17yo and now the guy is branded a sexual predator for the rest of his life. Even a 15 year-old girl has had her life ruined because she has sent a nude photo of herself to her boyfriend. Now she is considered a pedophile.

But don't worry about the murders, they are ok to be around. Note, kids dressed as Police Officers should stay away from the William Ayers household.

http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com

Show me the law which states they must comply with this BS!

Also, you will notice it's for those on probation or parole, and doesn't affect all sex offenders.

If they are not on probation or parole, and there isn't a state law, then they cannot enforce it, because there is not a law.

This is one of those SCARE tactics, where they try to get you to obey them.

Check for yourself, it's not a law, period!

I think if you're a convicted child molester, you should be castrated & forced to wear a sign around your neck saying what a pervert you are. They don't deserve to live a nice quiet life. Ask the little kid who was molested how s/he feels - maybe you won't be so quick to forgive & forget. And no, I was never molested. I just have no sympathy for criminals.

It seems to me that you are choosing to live your life in fear. May I in all seriousness suggest that you move to a gated community?

Actually, I don't live my life in fear at all. I think we are pretty safe these days, despite being bombarded by sensational crime news. But I also don't waste my time or sympathy worrying about the quality of sex offenders' lives. Just not my priority, I guess.

"Those of you who think these folks shouldnt be ostracized.....let them hang out with YOUR kids for a while. Your tunes will change toot sweet. No one made them do what they did. They made that concious choice to attack a child. Sexually. Think hard about that for a minute."

Last I checked, trick-or-treating consisted of a 30-second ritual of door-ringing and candy-claiming. Not exactly hanging out.

I'm not defending pedophiles. What they do is horrible and should be punished. But isn't one of the bedrocks of our nation the idea that once that debt to society is paid, it's over? How are we protecting anyone if we continue to persecute people who have already served their sentences?

We need to deal with sexual offenders on a case-by-case basis just like all offenders. Some are one-time offenders due to some circumstance. Some are habitual, that require more care. I live next door to someone who is on the registry. He feels ostracized from the community. Some area churches have asked him not to attend. This is many years after the fact. He is re-married and she knowingly shares his "shame" on a daily basis. He has shown us through his actions and deeds that he was a victim of circumstance. He has paid his debt to society and should no longer be required to endure public scorn.

Our son will be ringing his doorbell on Halloween.

Emily- I find it much more ethical and appropriate for our system to simply say "your punishment is to be in jail forever" rather than pretend a sentence is over. I think it's sad that so many Americans don't want a justice system, they want a vengeance and punishment system.

Emily- I find it much more ethical and appropriate for our system to simply say "your punishment is to be in jail forever" rather than pretend a sentence is over. I think it's sad that so many Americans don't want a justice system, they want a vengeance and punishment system.

"I think it's sad that so many Americans don't want a justice system, they want a vengeance and punishment system."

I'll agree with you on this. Many sex offenders deserve to be in jail for life. I am talking about habitual pedophiles, not victims of circumstance. I wish we had the wherewithal to simply put these folks away for life, instead of subjecting ourselves to having to police them when they are released to society.

On the justice issue, I guess it all depends on what your definition of justice happens to be. If a habitual pedophile could somehow be reformed by a stint in jail, then perhaps a stint in jail would serve justice. But if he is not reformed by time in jail, then I don't think justice is served by letting him loose and giving him another chance to prey on children. Where is the justice for children in that equation?

Also, justice can sometimes be seen as retributive. Punishment and justice are not mutually exclusive.

I agree that sex offender registries are not ideal. But not because they embarrass those who have to sign up, but because they impinge on the rights of free citizens. In this case, I am thinking of innocent children who should be protected from dangerous people.

Here, when I say pedophile or sex offender, I am not referring to some 18 year old who had sex with his 16 year old girlfriend. I agreee that such cases should not be on sex offender registry.

I think the title of this post is confusing people. "No candy here" does not equal "sex offender." I, personally, would put up such a sign because I don't hand out treats to kids (I'm usually out celebrating myself), and I'm certainly not a sex offender. I highly doubt anyone who sees these signs is automatically thinking "pedo," but rather someone who doesn't want their doorbell rung 47 times when they're just trying to enjoy a quiet evening to themselves.

Those No Candy Here signs are too cute. They might actually attract children. Having worked as a public librarian for 28 years, I can tell you that a lot of people don't read signs. Instead of a pretty pumpkin, the maybe the sign should just have the universal don't symbol in black and white.

We're assuming that the children can read??

Since when did protecting children become the be-all and end-all of American society? I'm sorry, but offenders who have served their time have rights, too. Rights that aren't trumped just because parents think the entire world should revolve around protecting their precious children. If you're so worried about your kids trick-or-treating, then go out there with them.

This is the type of issue where it is not terribly hard to imagine the " I hate criminals" types rounding up a few of their neighbors and burning them alive because,well gee whiz barney "I hate criminals"
News flash: Most people don't like criminals, ecspecially ones that harm or victimize children. Murders, rapists, pedophiles, white collar criminals-I have NO sympathy for ANY of them. period.
That being said: pay attention to your own damn kids and stop DEMANDING that everyone else and the govt. be responsible for them.

Stop assuming all sex offenders have harmed children. Not all have, and it's not fair to treat them all as if they had.

See these children ensnared in these laws, some as young as 4 years old, labeled a sex offender for simply hugging a teacher:

http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/12/child-sex-offenders.html

And what about all these corrupt officials, who more than likely, get a slap on the wrist, which Joe Smoe, who does the same thing, goes to prison.

http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/search/label/%2BCorruption

I have an issue with this because of how people get on these lists.

A friend of mine is being investigated for sexual abuse against a minor. The police investigated the complaints from the minor and the mother. The police are NOT pressing charges because there is not enough evidence to prosecute. Despite the fact that there isn't enough evidence to press charges Social Services can STILL decide there is enough evidence to place my friend on a list of sexual offenders.

My friend has to hire a lawyer to fight Social Services to prevent being placed on this list. If you are going to stigmatize someone for potentially the rest of their life... I think you should be making darned sure that she/he is guilty. If she/he isn't 'guilty enough' to be prosecuted by the courts then how does she/he become 'guilty enough' to be prosecuted by their community? Shouldn't we all be thinking hard before destroying someone's life?

Are there some documented epidemic of sex offenders attacking trick-or-treaters to their homes? Or is this just a solution searching for a problem?

I don't mind the "no candy here" signs, but the demand should only be made to pedophiles, not to "my new girlfriend lied about her age, and her dad called the cops" cases, which do happen. (A lady in our church has a son in prison on just such a charge -- the fact that the young man is developmentally disabled just makes it all the worse.)

Also, to avoid stigma, I think that such signs ought to be offered for use by anyone that doesn't want kids traipsing across the lawn. I put out non-food items every year (in a bucket by the front door, so I don't have to answer the door), but there are a lot of people that don't want to bother, and this might work for them. Then they can stay home, with the lights on, and not get bothered.

I have seen some of the treatment sex offenders get. Jail wont help anyone. They need places where they can get help and treatment so they get better.

EVERYONE CAN GET BETTER!!!
Also i knew a sex offense that happened locally a guy was living with his ADULT GF. He left her and his best friend at home while he went to do something. He came back they were having sex so he got so mad he hit his best friend and raped his gf to "teach her a leason" OK this is an anger issue. Not a sex issue. He just used sex as a way to get back at her for having sex with someone else. If the guy was not a hot head he would have just gotten upset and left.

What about the guy who dated a 17 or 16 yr old while he was over 18? There are so many sex offenses but yet they are all lumped together.

For you people who are trying to punish everyone by putting them in jail or killing them or hurting them that makes you no better then them so i guess we should just make you do everything a sex offender does.

Why are we not worried about drug dealers, murderers, robbers and other crimes?

Its funny that almost always the only people who are so against sex crimes are those who have been raped or molested or those who fear what they do not know.