t'Sade's Rodo

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

This site contains adult and mature content. If you are less than 21 years old or it is illegal for you to view this type of content, you must go somewhere else! This site does contain explict sex and violence in various fantasy settings which means it may offend those of more sensitive sensabilities.

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Public Lists can be Bad  (Read 444 times)

t'Sade

  • Administrator
  • Committed
  • *****
  • Karma: 48
  • Posts: 2,309
    • View Profile
    • t'Sade: Shadow Between Worlds
Public Lists can be Bad
« on: April 17, 2006, 09:54:49 AM »

http://www.sploid.com/news/2006/04/vigilante_kills.php

I've written about it before, but this article is very much against (with lots of link to other places) creating a centralized database of "offenders." Of course, people can't really argue with putting sex offenders on the list, but it still sets it out there. There were other cases of people attacking people they thought were sex offenders (one I wrote about before was a mentally retarded person who lived in a house after the sex offender moved without notice).

Some time ago, there was also a case where the Bush admistration removed a bunch of people from some international organizations becuase they were contributors for his opponents. I can't find the article, but I remember reading it. Another case of public lists are bad things, which is why I like my privacy.

Imagine if someone wrote out a list of all gays, Wiccans, or blacks. At first, it wouldn't be such a bad thing, but what happens when someone decides they don't like them? What if that person is the government. Of course, if the Red Scare was an example, they don't need a list to really nail people.
Logged

t'Sade

  • Administrator
  • Committed
  • *****
  • Karma: 48
  • Posts: 2,309
    • View Profile
    • t'Sade: Shadow Between Worlds
Re: Public Lists can be Bad
« Reply #1 on: April 26, 2006, 08:30:27 AM »

http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2006/04/25/sex_offenders_killer_studied_other_states_lists/

Just a continuation of the above article. One thing really jumped out from this article:

Quote
A man who was convicted 19 years ago of having sexual relations with two underage students in the school where he taught said he is now married with two children, a master's degree and job as a consultant.

Since a new law made him register as of last November, his business has lost clients and his children have been ostracized at nursery school, said the man, who declined to give his name. But he is more concerned about his family's safety by being listed.

I had an essay "On Redemption" that I never finished. It was actually on this topic, the idea that you can never be redeemed, even if you do the prison or pennance. The person in the above quote did something almost two decades before, but the law sees that he can and will never be safe. I refuse to believe that no one can change after twenty years. Even the person I was ten years ago is not the me. Nor will I be the same person in another ten years.

Of course, the main idea of the "for life" lists is dedicated to people who cannot stop themselves. However, I think just putting them on a list isn't the right thing to do. Making lists of people just makes it easier to find someone that "doesn't" agree. Yeah, sex offenders are "terrible people" but not all of them are. Some of them were just stupid, or guilty of statutory rape (which is consensual and not really rape), or just in the wrong place. But, if you actually go to the sites that actually point out sex offenders, such as the ones from here:

http://www.mcwetboy.net/maproom/2005/07/google_maps_hacks_sex_offenders.phtml

You'll notice that none of them tell you the crime they did, just that they are sex offenders. The Illinois site has three categories and has a little bit more information, including threat level, but it still just creates a list of people who are "bad." The concept of "bad people" I'm treating as a simplistic phrase, because it is. Many people view the world as black and white, either you are on our side or against us, never degrees. The more zealot someone is, the more likely they'll view the world in black and white, at least that is how it seems.

Even though it is a crime to attack, harrass, or do nasty thing that are on this list, it doesn't stop people. And, to prove that someone was rude or stopped doing business because they were on a list is just as hard as to prove racial discrimination in a job interview. And, do you really thing police officers, who are just as human as the rest of us, are really going to give their full effort to someone who says "I was harrassed because I'm a registered sex offender?"
Logged

t'Sade

  • Administrator
  • Committed
  • *****
  • Karma: 48
  • Posts: 2,309
    • View Profile
    • t'Sade: Shadow Between Worlds
Re: Public Lists can be Bad
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2006, 01:42:15 PM »

http://www.sploid.com/news/2006/05/perv_registry_s.php

Another example of using the public sex offenders list to basically attack someone based on what they appear to be instead of who they actually are. The sad part is that it will take years (assuming it is possible), to get rid of the stigmata of the neighborhood. Now, imagine the goverment doing the jumping to conclusions, such as the name-based No-Fly List or just getting the wrong person at the wrong time.

It really comes down to the question: personal rights or the need to protect society. Sadly, I feel that people who serve their time and repayed their debt should be allowed to live their life. If they still need to be punished, then they shouldn't be free. But, I'm sure I don't understand everything.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up