'So in essence Advocate and Nak we should just continue bashing our heads into the wall until enough people get on the registry and it eventually changes? " - - Independent

History is our teacher. Nak

So, lets look at history. Internment camps for Japanese during WW2, Hitlers extermination camps, oppression and killing black community. gay community, women's rights, . . Let's make a list of groups of people who have been wrongly prosecuted and what happened to change their status? It will take more than a dozen people putting on a rally to change this.

I've spoken with politicians. Some agree but still will vote to 'save the children'. I've put in my time fighting the fight. I've spend a lot of money and my time and the only thing that gives my son a little relief is that I have a lawyer to fight the small things. No one says to stop fighting it, but be realistic or you won't live your life. You'll just live the life you wish he had if this didn't happen to you.

Designate your time and energy in a sane manner.

Independent:
"I am not as interested in how things came to be. I have my own beliefs on that, I largely think it was and is the media running with if it bleeds it leads news stories that have been sensationalized and has gotten everyone in a worry tizzy. Politicians jumped on board because they at first thought it was a problem and by golly they were going to legislate out of being a problem. Then they saw they can guarantee elections by being “tough on crime” and they have continue to do so ever since. What I see happening in politics is that this is the one thing most politicians on both sides can agree upon. It is gimme-legislation that shows how tough they are on crime. And of course you are right, humans throughout history like to rationalize their behavior, “At least I am not like that guy over there…”

I am more interested in what now. How do we go about changing the belief of the public?"

We have to take away the fear and shame of sexuality in the society at large before we can change the public view of SOs. I totally agree that this is a win-win for any politician. Who would argue with banishing "monsters". I think LGBT rights is a good first step because there are still MANY who equate them with sex offenders.

Although the priest scandal certainly did not help the cause, it can be used as a case study. They were opportunistic offenders shrouded in shame and secrecy. And why was there such a high rate of offenders in that profession and how can we apply that knowledge to the public at large? It can really be used as a learning tool for the psychology of sexuality.Did they primarily offend with boys not because they were gay but because in their minds it is slightly less harmful to do what they do with boys than to violate a little girl/virgin? But if they were allowed to marry or even just be sexual beings, maybe their rate of sex offenses would decline to match that of any other part of the population? And if so, can we not incorporate healthier sex education from a young age?

Just some thoughts.

I have not followed this thread closely, but when dealing with sex offenses the biggest problem is that many of the registrants are also victims themselves----victims of a broken criminal justice system.

I can think of no other category of crime that includes so many innocent people and people severely over punished than sex crimes. Their family---collateral damage----is also adversely affected and they, too, are made to suffer. If their sentence was not unfair, the registry surely is.

They are either innocent or have been steamrolled by the system and given a very harsh punishment---even a draconian one--- one in which the punishment does not even begin to fit the crime.

As a result, it is difficult for these offenders----and their family members---- to have too much sympathy for victims, as they are victims themselves.

Why and how do these crimes include so many innocent people? Because a sex crime is the only crime I can think of in which a person can be convicted without any evidence except the testimony of the accuser.

I know all the stories here----

Advocate's son was treated like some modern day Jack the Ripper because he had pictures of teens---not children--- on his computer. Illegal? Sure according to the letter of the law, but in no way can anyone twist his set of circumstance into a situation which makes him anything but a victim of the justice system.

Nak's son did not even intentionally download the illicit images and how has he been treated? Terribly, like some kind of monster. Just overpunishment, and yes, he is a victim of the system.

Fearydark's situation and my situation is such that we were not even guilty of the crime. Pure injustice and yes more victims.

Jackie's son looked----didn't touch, didn't distribute---at a few naughty pictures, but he received a five year federal prison term, a decade of probation, and a lifetime on the registry. Was he also a victim? Sure he was----he was a victim of a runaway system in which defendants get chewed up and spit out by a society that does not understand the real problem or by politicians posturing for the next election.

Sometimes when we think of an injustice, we think of an innocent man being punished, but injustices come in all shapes and sizes. An extremely excessive sentence is also an injustice.

Personally, when I hear the word "victim" I think back to my own situation in which there was no victim at all, but someone who was coached to "play" victim. Then I get a pain in the pit of my stomach.

Frankly, I don't have time to deal with victims of a crime, as I am too involved in helping the victims---the defendants and their families--- who have been raped by the court system.

I could go on and on and recite examples of the posters here to show that not only has the offender become a victim, but their families as well. This is not true in all cases, but it is true in enough cases to cloud these offender's image of a victim.

My personal belief is that anyone who has served their sentence and is then made to be on the registry is a victim. The registry is just additional punishment tacked on after the sentence, and it has enhanced said sentence.

That is an injustice.

I have always said that any registrant that thinks the registry is needed or somewhat fair, just did not get screwed hard enough by the system.

I care about people and there are those that are truly victims at the hands of a perpetrator of a sex crime, but you cannot expect a registrant who has been treated unfairly to worry about victims.

rewdiazeapm

Well said Rew,

I wanted to add a point. My son hasn't had any issues, yet, with his photo on the internet. It's the 15 years probation at his young age of 25 that hinders him. He could have a music career and a life but he's so restricted that he can't take the chance. I'm sure more issues, like him wanting to travel even after probation or many other things that we won't be ready for. But probation stinks.

Nak,

Even if your son deliberately downloaded those very few images, 15 years probation and being on the registry is just a travesty. Regarding his crime, he was a victim of the system and did not deserve anything close to the punishment he received.

If he needed to be punished, he sure as hell did not need 15 years worth for a non-contact crime of only looking at some images.

We have admitted war criminals appearing on talk shows and hawking their amateurish paintings and we cannot even arrest them, yet your son receives 15 years probation.

No wonder this country is in bad shape---we have gone crazy.

rewdiazepam