Civil Commitment?????

**gssixgun** · 08-18-2009, 04:52 PM

So this has been bugging me for awhile now, and I wanted to see where others stand on this...
Honestly I live in a very, very, very, conservative state so most peoples opinions up here that I talk to, are pretty much the same as mine are...Soooooo you guys are my only other points of view LOL

The stories go something like this, A Child Molester is convicted on a crime he is sentenced for 12 years in prison, he does not ever ask for parole he serves his time and comes up for release, which means he is a free man, no PO to check in with, he is out of the system.... Now the states are stopping these inmates release, and trying to have them civilly committed because they are sure these people will be repeat offenders and rape or molest again....

So yes I know my stand here is the death penalty for a repeat offender, period no other penalty can be handed down by a judge or jury....
In my eyes any violent crime that you repeat should earn you the death penalty no if ands or buts... You get a free pass the first time with prison but if you do it again you get the needle... I know I am pretty harsh but hey I warned ya I am pretty conservative that way...

So the question here to ponder is not what punishment should be handed out but is it right that if the Courts screw up the first time and they are getting out to repeat their crime, to me it doesn't sound fair that a man serves his full sentence but the Court wants to still put a leash on him.... See a true conservative here, rights are rights in my eyes... If a man serves his sentence, then he is a free man when he gets out, the courts should not get a do over....

So what do you think on this????

Civil Commitment: another tool to keep them on a leash..??
Civil Commitment: and unfair practice...??
Civil Commitment: the proof that we need a death penalty...??
or something else..???

**icedog** · 08-18-2009, 05:08 PM

I feel that a conviction is paid for by whaever the court sentences. Once served, the contract should be satisfied. So a man commits a crime. Hoepefully he made some bad decision and has paid for it by serving time in prison. When he is released, in my opinion, he should be free to begin reconstruction of his life. If he repeats his crime, well that is another story but I believe time served for a first offense should equal a clean slate.

I have a hard time with the sex offender thing. It seems that someone either has paid their debt to society or they have not. There are places where sex offenders, regardless of the actual crime are all lumped together and are being forced to live in group homes and essentailly branded for life as a sex offender. I believe there are serious crimes like sodomizing a five year old. And there are the poor saps who the song was about when they sang, "The law says she's fourteen but she looked 23".

**ENUF2** · 08-18-2009, 05:27 PM

To start with I feel our court system takes too long and does not have enough teeth to "help" people keep from making the same mistakes or to keep others out of the same type crimes. If someone has done their time it should be "paid in full". I do not have a problem with offenders having to register with local law enforcement and having to stay X amount of distance from schools and such but I must say when that information is accessible to anyone via the internet there is less of a chance for that person to become a productive citizen. The thing is those who are not accountable to anyone have no checks or balances to help them stay on course. I like the 2 strike rule but there needs to be less time behind bars before the end. Maybe it would help deter others if judgment was swift.

**hoglahoo** · 08-18-2009, 06:00 PM

This is why I agree with JMS:

YouTube - Pedophile goes nuts at reporter on Australian News

**gssixgun** · 08-18-2009, 06:09 PM

I maybe should not have used a pedophile as the example, this is happing right across the border in WA state with a Rapist/Murderer also.... So guys don't get too hung up on the Child Molester thing as that is an emotional knee jerker for many of us... Statistically I guess it does have the highest repeat offender rate though....

**oldfat1** · 08-18-2009, 06:16 PM

I think it should be taken on a case by case basis. There is a man who lives a few houses away from me who has to register as a sex offender because when he was 17, he had sex with a 15 year old girl.

He now lives with his wife, who is two years younger than him (yes the same girl) and their two kids. Since he is a sex offender when he goes to the school for his kids programs or whatever he has to sign in at the desk and someone escorts him.

**sparq** · 08-18-2009, 07:06 PM

Originally Posted by oldfat1

I think it should be taken on a case by case basis. There is a man who lives a few houses away from me who has to register as a sex offender because when he was 17, he had sex with a 15 year old girl.

He now lives with his wife, who is two years younger than him (yes the same girl) and their two kids. Since he is a sex offender when he goes to the school for his kids programs or whatever he has to sign in at the desk and someone escorts him.

The Economist recently published an interesting article about the subject.

Sex laws: Unjust and ineffective | The Economist

It is quite scary.

**singlewedge** · 08-18-2009, 07:11 PM

Old fat1's example is the "doughnut hole".

Registering as a Sex Offender for that is asinine. Same could be said for an 18 yo and a 16 yo.

Registration should be reserved for those that prey upon the helpless, children.

**icedog** · 08-18-2009, 07:53 PM

Glennifice,

For those who don't know, here is a good explanation of Civil Commitment:Civil Commitment

I just want to help clarify what I think is your very valid point. There are two aspects of antisocial crimes:

The violation of laws which makes the perpetrator a criminal subject to punishment in accordance with the law.
The reason the person broke the law. If the perpetrator has a treatable mental illness that caused his/her behavior it may behoove society to enter the person into a treatment program to rehabilitate the person into a contributing member of society. This is very important when discussing recidivism. Is it society's reponsibility to try to heal what has been determined to be a diseased mind?

I don't know how I feel about taking a serial rapist or pedophile or an arsonist under the wing of society in an attempt to heal them, to exorcise the demons that have siezed control of the mind of an otherwise valuable member of the community. I was burned out of the second floor apartmeent I was renting when Gary, the guy on the third floor lit the house on fire because his girlfriend refused to move out with him. The arson detective told me that Gary was the culprit but there wasn't enough evidence to arrest him. It seems that Gary set his mother's car on fire when she refused to give it to him. Gary also lit the building in which he used to work when his boss refused to raise his pay. While I can understand that Gary may have been the victim of some mental illness, I understood only that my 8 year old and 6 year old stepdaughters were asleep in their beds in the back bedroom of our apartment when Gary set fire to two bags of trash outside the back door of his third floor apartment, about ten feet away from my kids. When I was awakened by a stranger who kicked my door in after he saw the blaze from the highway two miles away, I grabbed my wife and stepdaughters and got them safely to the street. I wasn't at all concerned about Gary's possible rehabilitation as I threw him off the third floor porch.

In most instances I oppose vehemently the death penalty. However, in some instances a person has proven himself to be less than a person. In some instances a person turns out to be nothing more than a tumor living in and on the body of society. In some instances it seems the best way to treat a sort of cancer is to surgically remove the malignant tumor before it can metastasize.

Brad

**singlewedge** · 08-18-2009, 05:12 PM

The states already keep child molesters on a short leash by requiring them to register. Not registering is a Felony.

Murders/Rapists are usually Class A or B Felony which means you go away for a long time or go away for ever.

If released I am not opposed to RFID or ankle band tracking. Removal of which results in permanent incarceration. If you reoffend and are found guilty in a subsequent trial. You get fast tracked to the needle, firing line, gallows, whatever.

Thread: Civil Commitment?????

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

Hybrid View

Civil Commitment?????

Posting Permissions