April 21, 2014 8:02 AM

Next on the 11 o'clock news: Scarlet Letters make a comeback

Captain Brad Smith: Florida statutes say that we must notify the public of any sex offenders in our jurisdiction. We already do that with Facebook and by going out into the area to notify people when the person first moves in, but we realized there was a possible issue with continued notification. For instance, if somebody moves in after we’ve gone around notifying people, then they’re not aware that there’s a predator there. We’re just trying to do everything we can to make the public aware. And, in a certain sense, it protects the predator from having people, especially children, approaching their residence without being duly notified.

You don’t have to convince me that those who commit sexually-related crimes deserve our opprobrium. They steal something precious from their victims, in some cases scarring them for life. There may be more heinous crimes, but none that impact our collective sense of what’s right than sexual predation.

What I’m having trouble wrapping my head around is the question of what sort of punishment is appropriate. What sentence strikes the proper balance between protecting the public and rehabilitating the criminal? I’m not going to pretend to have an answer, but I am concerned by the growing trend of branding a convicted sexual predator, in some cases for long after they’re served their time. In most states, sexual predators are proscribed from living near schools, day care centers, playgrounds, and other places where children congregate. They’re also listed on a state’s sexual offender registry, in some cases permanently, for any sort of sex crime, whether committed on children or adults.

The latest step in this movement is what Bradford County, Florida is doing by posting signs outside the residences of convicted sexual predators, which raises a few questions. When is enough too much? When does punishment cross the line to become demonization? Whatever happened to rehabilitation and the opportunity for a second chace?

I understand sex crimes are considered especially heinous, particularly when children are the victims. Society is certainly within its rights to want to protect itself from a sex offender’s recidivism. Like any crime, though, a sex crime brings a punishment of finite duration. Do the crime, do the time, try to put your life back together. That’s the theory behind incarceration- punishment and rehabilitation. Except there’s a school of thought that would turn sex offenders into pariahs and cast them aside as if their crime makes them worthless to society. The only way to deal with sex offenders, the thinking goes, is to make them so visible that no one could possibly mistake them for a “normal” human being.

That strategy might make sense for those driven to offend and reoffend regardless of any punishment and/or treatment. The habitual sexual offender is someone society needs to be protected from, and at some point it would be sensible to identify them to protect public safety. Do we really need to treat each and every sex offender like this? Is any sex offense to be considered so vile and beyond the pale that the offender is worthy only of being discarded by society?

How does putting up a sign at a sex offender’s residence protect public safety? I’ve yet to hear an explanation of how a sign will do anything except shame the person or persons who live behind the sign. In most states, anyone who’s been convicted of a sex crime is required to register with the state. That information is usually available online to anyone who cares to look. Why is a sign considered to be necessary…except by politicians who want to feel they’re doing something to protect voters and their families? Is it about keeping people safe…or making people FEEL safe?

Why are signs mandated only for sex offenders? If a murderer is paroled and released back into society, are they not to be considered a risk to murder again? What about petty thieves? Sex offenders aren’t the only threats to public safety; yet they’re treated as if they’re the worst (and only) danger to the general public.

What’s next? Scarlet letters? Do we hire people to follow sex offenders with bull horns to announce their presence wherever they go? Where does the demonization end? I’m not about to defend sex offenders or their crimes, but if they’ve done their time and they’re listed on their states sex offender registry, shouldn’t they be freed from public shaming? Once an offender’s sentence is finished, they’ve paid their debt to society. They should be allowed the opportunity to prove they’ve been rehabilitated and are capable of once again being a productive member of society.

Or are we really OK with the idea of treating human beings like scum worthy only of scorn and derision, forever to be considered unworthy of membership in society because of their crime(s)?

blog comments powered by Disqus

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Jack Cluth published on April 21, 2014 8:02 AM.

The best Republican appeal to women you'll see all day was the previous entry in this blog.

If you hate government so much, why do you cling so tightly to the things it protects? is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Contact Me

Powered by Movable Type 6.0.2