This was pretty much my idea too....

[Brunhidden]

a judge in a town named Hudson in Kansas seems to have had the same idea i had a while ago.

when a 72 year old man admitted to molesting children in a court of law (four counts of 'indecent liberties' with a 9 year old girl and an 11 year old boy) the judge sentenced him to five years probation and house arrest instead of three years prison, with one little twist.

On all four sides of his house are large signs saying 'a sex offender lives here' and his car has a big decal on each side saying 'a sex offender is in this car'.

the child molester says its a living hell.



now, for years ive told people that if your big concern with sex offenders is they arent serving enough prison time and are released back into society and you don't know who they are- remedy the problem.

my suggestion- tattoo the name of their crime on a criminals forehead instead of jail.

obviously you cant let thieves and murderers out this way, but if someone has "i raped a 8 year old girl" on their forehead no parent will let their kids near them, and the rest of that persons life will be full of misery.

think its too severe? don't rape people. and as far as 'severe' goes if anyone touches my daughter i will feed them their fingers TWICE, so i think the tattoo is the kinder solution.


still, i like that judge, hes got some wicked humor

[Sufurin Scorda]

I laughed hard.

[Reese Tora]

hmm, yeah...I have to disagree on this in general, as cruel and unusual punishment, and because where does this cut off? 

We have a stupid law here in California that says sex offenders can't do a lot of things, like living within a certain distance from schools and parks, etc.  Sounds good at first glance, but then you realize that this includes anyone who's gone streaking or other minor offences and been caught after the age of 18.  A life long stigma attached to a minor indiscretion at a party? Where can I opt out?

Then there's people who are wrongfully convicted of crimes because the prosecution convinces the child to say the "right" thing.  Anything as permanent as a tattoo needs to be cartefully considered when you may potentially be branding for life someone that may not have done what they were convicted of.

Yes, the people who are wrongfully convicted are few and far between, but you need to consider the ramifications of what will happen if a system like this is put in place.

The last thing I have against it,a dn the tatooing specifically, is the fact that I don't believe that ANY governemnt or regulatory body should have the right to perform permanent body modification on anyone, ever, without the express concent of those who are to be so altered. 
(A convict faced with jail time as the alternative and under coersion of those handling him might be considered under duress, and therefore inelligible to give that consent.)

[Fuyudenki]

Hmm, l'mme think about that for a bit...

Nope, still gonna side with Brun.  If you know the consequences are going to be severe, and you still do it, I think you deserve what you get.  Softening the blow only encourages people to try it again.

For example, availability of abortion and contraceptives produce an increase in teen pregnancy.  If you can use a magical pill or rubber sock to avoid the consequences, then there's no reason not to go wild.

If, however, you know that grabbing a little girl is going to land you a free advertising job like the one above, you might think twice about it.

[edited]I hope the revised version pleases Darkmoon.  It's a bit closer to the point I was trying to make, and significantly less squicky.[/edit]

[Valynth]

For example, availability of abortion and contraceptives produce an increase in teen pregnancy.

And here I thought having unprotected sex was the only way to get pregnant.  Boy was I wrong.

[Reese Tora]

Don't get me wrong, I fully agree that the people who commit crimes of that nature should be properly punished, but I think that the fact that the justice system is flawed in the way it is should be taken in to account to allow anything done to be reversed if it's discovered that there was a false positive.

If you've got 100% incontrovertible proof that a suspect did in fact perform depraved sexual acts with an unconsenting second person, I'm all for throwing the book at them(short of the tattooing thing), but I can not, in good concious, support extreme punishment that can ruin a person's life in a system where so many people can and have been convicted of such crimes on the basis of false or faulty memories of untrained eye witnesses.

[Webcomicjunkie]

my suggestion- tattoo the name of their crime on a criminals forehead instead of jail.

Don't they do that in Snow Crash?

Waring: Low Impulse Control

hehehe...

[blood butterfly]

You think this precedent will become a standard punishment in all courts?  that would rock out loud, yo.  i'm sure half of MY block would be covered in those signs if it did.   

I subscribe to the belief that people who commit crimes of that or a greater nature forfeit all rights and privileges and are at the complete and unquestionable (most of the time) mercy of the courts and its juries. 
Criminals have no rights, yo!!

[TheGreyRonin]

 I rather like this idea. Also re-read the first post; he admitted his crime.

As far as cruel and unusual punishment goes, all punishment must be unusual, or it serves no purpose.

And all punishments must be of a sort considered cruel in the eyes of the person in the wrong. If a criminal is assigned a punishment that does not cause them a high amount of discomfort, whether physical or mental, then they have no real incentive to stop.

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

For example, availability of abortion and contraceptives produce an increase in teen pregnancy.

And here I thought having unprotected sex was the only way to get pregnant.  Boy was I wrong.

Contraceptives aren't 100%. There is, I believe, something like a 3% chance of getting pregnant whilst using a condom in the proper manner - ie, that goes way up if you screw up when putting it on, or it splits. [source]

If you look at that list, it also includes the changes in "typical use" situations - in the case of condoms, that's about 14%.

To put those in perspective, you need to have sex about 30 times, with a condom, in proper use, in order to get pregnant. Or, in typical use, about 7 times.

That's a scary little number, there, isn't it? Particularly when you think... the average adult has sex 3 times a week.

[Brunhidden]

I rather like this idea. Also re-read the first post; he admitted his crime.

As far as cruel and unusual punishment goes, all punishment must be unusual, or it serves no purpose.

And all punishments must be of a sort considered cruel in the eyes of the person in the wrong. If a criminal is assigned a punishment that does not cause them a high amount of discomfort, whether physical or mental, then they have no real incentive to stop.

first statement- my idea is only for those who plead guilty, admit the crime, and fully understand the penalties. child molestation is an odd one because most of the culprits fess up when cornered, not completely believing they did anything wrong and its their sexual 'preference' like a homosexual or someone with a foot fetish.

your second statement- you seem to agree with Heinlein when he stated that all punishments should be cruel and unusual. if its not cruel then it is not punishment, and it SHOULD be unusual for the need to punish to even come up. although his method was to publically flog people, which may sound brutal but the real punishment was that everyone who saw knows your crime and will remember. in the novel 'world war z' a similar idea came to mind, in addition to public floggings for serious crimes lesser crimes would be punished by forcing the convicted to hold a sign with their crime in town square or other public area- being forced to announce to everyone you were petty enough to steal your neighbors stuff is probably more fearsome then going to jail for many.


and finally my idea of the tattoos goes like this- lets say someone is guilty of crime X, its a 'minor' crime and they're considered kinda dangerous but not like they have to be locked away for public safety. the guilty person goes before a judge, pleads guilty so there is no contest on whether they're wrongfully accused, and the judge gives three options

1- seven years jail
2- five years house arrest with signs on your home and car which humiliate him
3- three years house arrest with the tattoo, after which time its removed
3.5- if i see you back in here again that tattoo aint comin off, dig?

i don't care if they need a solid gold laser to take the tattoo off, if even a fifth the minor criminals choose be safely let into society without fear of them doing anything (like anyone will let any info slip to a lady who has 'identity theft' on their forehead) the savings on feeding, clothing, housing, and guarding them is well worth it. plus you can use the bed which would normally have been used an indecent exposure inmate to keep the second degree murder inmate for two thirds of his sentence instead of half. yes, prison overcrowding, lovely thing that lets those aforementioned child molesters go free into society (with privacy protection as they've 'completed' their term) after three years of a seven year sentence.

[Sofox]

You know, having a 'a sex offender lives here' sign on a house in your neighbourhood is going to have an effect on the house prices. I imagine a nearby neighbour who was intending to sell their house will find they've lost thousands, possibly tens of thousands, off the amount they would otherwise have received in a sale.

[Cogidubnus]

I'm going to have to agree with Reese Tora on this one.

In the middle ages, cruel punishment was the norm, obviously - I hardly have to go into detail to describe the various forms in which 'crime' was punished in those days - usually things that today no-one would begin to think of as illegal. The stocks, for example, don't look too terribly bad, except for heat and hunger and muscle cramps. The other part of the public punishment was your neighbors throwing rocks at you and kicking you around for amusement, and this was encouraged. To me, half the point of making a punishment public is so that the public itself will become part of the punishment - I don't necessarily believe this should always be the case.
Think of some of the more extreme tortures, like the dunking stool (drowning was not unheard of) or some of the implements of the Spanish Inquisition. Did they discourage the activities prohibited? Certainly. Were they truly some of the most horrific horrors ever devised by men? Absolutely.

And for what? Not being Catholic, perhaps, or in some places actually being Catholic, or perhaps just pissing the wrong person off.

"But Cog, this isn't like that. These are Child Molesters, and it isn't for something stupid like all that!" - Weeel, perhaps not. But, if we can do it to child molesters, is there any reason why we couldn't do it to others? Surely tattoos and signs are not nearly so bad as medieval tortures - not as bad by far - but I am still of the opinion that such powers should never, ever be given to the government. We can all agree on Child Molesters, true, but what about the clerk in a sex shop?
Until February 12 of this year, it was illegal to sell sex toys in Texas. The clerk himself might have been forced to register as a sex offender under Texas law at that time.
To state something that has less to do with sex, what about branding 'I am a Thief" on the forehead of one guilty of robbery? Or indeed, as has been mentioned, "Identity Thief" on the forehead of someone guilty of identity theft?

To summarize, I don't think those sorts of powers should be given to the government, irrespective of merit or effectiveness. I am most certainly not arguing that child molesters don't deserve it - there is no sympathy in my heart for them, truly. But I do think its a dangerous road to go down.

[Sunblink]

the child molester says its a living hell.

He seems to think the general public cares.

I certainly do not.

On some points I agree with Cog, but when it comes to child molesters, I am a hideously frothing-at-the-mouth, seething, vengeful little bitch.

~Keaton the Black Jackal

[blood butterfly]

i agree with cog on a few points, but i don't believe in torture...what point is there in teaching the criminal a lesson they made a point of avoided or violating in the first place?  no, death and execution are necessary to deter future offenders and keep OTHERS from committing the crime again.  death sentence all the way...and i stand by my previous statement about them having no rights after doing the crime.

[Alondro]

That's a scary little number, there, isn't it? Particularly when you think... the average adult has sex 3 times a week.

*Charles hasn't had it 3 times in his entire life... or even once for that matter*

40 year-old virgin?  Bah!  I can beat that!   

[Fuyudenki]

That's a scary little number, there, isn't it? Particularly when you think... the average adult has sex 3 times a week.

*Charles hasn't had it 3 times in his entire life... or even once for that matter*

40 year-old virgin?  Bah!  I can beat that!   

I thought you were married.

In any case, I don't care about the teens getting pregnant.  Their children, on the other hand...

[TheGreyRonin]

your second statement- you seem to agree with Heinlein when he stated that all punishments should be cruel and unusual. if its not cruel then it is not punishment, and it SHOULD be unusual for the need to punish to even come up. although his method was to publically flog people, which may sound brutal but the real punishment was that everyone who saw knows your crime and will remember. in the novel 'world war z' a similar idea came to mind, in addition to public floggings for serious crimes lesser crimes would be punished by forcing the convicted to hold a sign with their crime in town square or other public area- being forced to announce to everyone you were petty enough to steal your neighbors stuff is probably more fearsome then going to jail for many.

Heinlein put it more elegantly than I did, of course. Flogging is an idea that has merit for certain lesser crimes, though I believe more serious offenses require more drastic solutions. Anything that results in the willing loss of the life of another of course, and any crime that by nature has potential adverse life-long effects on the victim should be included as well.

On the subject of criminal being wrongly accused, the percentage of wrongly accused criminals who are convicted of such drastic crimes is extremely small. On the other hand, I have seen far more cases where criminals that perform violent and abusive acts are convicted, serve time, then are released back into society only to perform them again.

[Reese Tora]

The fact that they(convicted innocents) exist isn't enough?

I'll be the first that wopuld agree that the current system of incarceration does not lead to rehabilitation for many, but you need to design a system towards both effectiveness and accuracy(or the ability to restore what is damaged or lost by inaccuracy), not just effectiveness.

[Feroluce]

first statement- my idea is only for those who plead guilty, admit the crime, and fully understand the penalties. child molestation is an odd one because most of the culprits fess up when cornered, not completely believing they did anything wrong and its their sexual 'preference' like a homosexual or someone with a foot fetish.

I would like to point out a strange note here. In all the psychological research I have seen done with regard to pedophiles, there is little belief that what they do is right. In fact, most of them are honest in saying that what they do is wrong, and there is a very high rate of suicide for convicted pedophiles - they have low self esteem and high self-hate. The problem is that their sexual urges are oriented towards children, and they are too human - they cant supress them forever, and any outlet that might occur to them like kiddieporn only increases the problem.

And thanks to the healthy hatred and stigma society puts on pedophilia, no pre-offending pedo would ever dare to try and seek help. so they sit in a sexual pressure-cooker until they snap, admit what they did when they are caught, and wind up killing themselves or getting killed later. or they stop caring, dont fess, become repeat offenders and generally get killed in police "accidents".

before you say they should have more self restraint, ask yourself how long you could go without sex or masterbation in a world where even porn is illegal.

not that Im defending what they do. there are always choices and other options, and no excuse is good enough to cover the permenant psycological damage of a child. Just pointing out that these people are the largely misunderstood scum of the world.

[Suwako]

before you say they should have more self restraint, ask yourself how long you could go without sex or masterbation in a world where even porn is illegal.

Let's go back to the middle ages and chop things off so they can't and don't get the urge anymore, what? It worked back then.. 

[Sofox]

You guys know that the majority of pedophiles and child molsetors were sexually abused as children? Often on an ongoing basis by their parent?
It's one of the reasons they have such screwed up views of the world and such a warped view of closeness and physical contact.

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

Let's go back to the middle ages and chop things off so they can't and don't get the urge anymore, what? It worked back then.. 

Actually, no. There's no indications that removing parts of the anatomy has any effect on the likelihood of recidivism.

And thanks to the healthy hatred and stigma society puts on pedophilia, no pre-offending pedo would ever dare to try and seek help. so they sit in a sexual pressure-cooker until they snap, admit what they did when they are caught, and wind up killing themselves or getting killed later. or they stop caring, dont fess, become repeat offenders and generally get killed in police "accidents".

I feel sorry for the police in these situations. Suicide by Cop is hard on the guy holding the gun, and he (or she) has no control over the situation.

And yes, the whole "you're sick and evil, and if you look for help, we'll lock you up anyway" attitude doesn't help much, either.

[Sunblink]

Let's go back to the middle ages and chop things off so they can't and don't get the urge anymore, what? It worked back then.. 

Actually, no. There's no indications that removing parts of the anatomy has any effect on the likelihood of recidivism.

I heard of a former child molester/sex offender requesting to be chemically castrated before, actually. However, I'm not familiar with the process so I'm uncertain if that would actually eliminate all the urges or the problem itself.

You guys know that the majority of pedophiles and child molsetors were sexually abused as children? Often on an ongoing basis by their parent?
It's one of the reasons they have such screwed up views of the world and such a warped view of closeness and physical contact.

That doesn't mean they shouldn't be held accountable for their actions. It's horrible that someone was sick enough to sexually abuse them in the first place, but I don't think THAT excuses them of hurting others, especially children. There is no excuse. I have no sympathy for the devil.

~Keaton the Black Jackal

[rabid_fox]

Psychologically and socially destroying someone is not justice.

[Brunhidden]

Psychologically and socially destroying someone is not justice.

the point is not justice, there is no way you can un-rape someone or un-murder someone.

the point is punishments that actually deter things like this from happening again, which is clearly not what punishments do very well now

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

For that, the requirement is that you get people to believe they will be caught. The punishment is almost irrelevant, as long as it's not trivial, as long as you catch enough people to make the chance of -not- getting caught minimal.

The main reason people continue to commit crimes is because they believe they can get away with it. As long as that's the case, it doesn't matter how harsh you make the punishment, as they think they won't run into it...

[Darkmoon]

Hmm, l'mme think about that for a bit...

Nope, still gonna side with Brun.  If you know the consequences are going to be severe, and you still do it, I think you deserve what you get.  Softening the blow only encourages people to try it again.

For example, availability of abortion and contraceptives produce an increase in teen pregnancy.  If you can use a magical pill or rubber sock to avoid the consequences and then flush the baby down a garbage disposal if the contraceptives fail, then there's no reason not to go wild.

If, however, you know that grabbing a little girl is going to land you a free advertising job like the one above, you might think twice about it.

I think we've talked this bit out enough, especially since, as far as I'm concerned, it was a barely related topic that was brought up because the person (Volfram) wanted to get on a soapbox. The obvious conclusion is that this person hates the though of abortions, and would like to relate it to something else that he views as evil.

This side of the conversation better stop now, or I will simply close the whole topic and ban the people that continue this stupid side of the discussion.

[Valynth]

The main reason people continue to commit crimes is because they believe they can get away with it. As long as that's the case, it doesn't matter how harsh you make the punishment, as they think they won't run into it...

Considering how prison has become nothing more than a school for criminals I don't think they consider getting sent there as "getting caught," but more like "getting a scholarship."

[Brunhidden]

also of note is psychologists have determined there IS such a thing as a criminal mind. the difference being a normal person would freak "aiieee! death scentance! twenty five years to life! no way im doing that!" whereas a 'criminal mind' person could care less of the severity of the crime and are only concerned with the chance of being caught

perhaps we should reduce the number of troops, and increase the number of cops. seriously, a ten percent cut in the 'defense' budget could probably triple the law enforcement budget, the big cesspool of Milwaukee in my area just had a scandal that the police department was raking in enough overtime they could double the number of officers hired for the money they give in overtime pay.