Sucks to be a sex offender

A new New Jersey law bars sex offenders from using the internet. NYT.

How will it look on a job application when they say they aren't allowed to use any of the computers in the office?

UPDATE

Because the mainstream media doesn’t really want the public to know anything, the news articles don’t contain links to the actual bill. Here is a link to S1979, the bill in question.

(1) Prohibit the person from accessing or using a computer or any other device with Internet capability without the prior written approval of the court except, if such person is on probation or parole, the person may use a computer or any other device with Internet capability in connection with that person’s employment or search for employment with the prior approval of the person's probation or parole officer;

So we see that a sex offender can get permission of his parole officer, or a judge if he’s no longer on parole (although certain NJ sex offenders have parole supervision for life), to use a computer for his job. Presumably he can also get a judge to approve computer use for other purposes such as education, but there are no guidelines, so if the judge is in a bad mood the sex offender is out of luck.

Given the increasing ubiquity of devices which access the internet, this makes it pretty much impossible for a released sex offender to ever live a normal life. Theoretically, the sex offender can be put back in jail for borrowing someone's cell phone to make a phone call.

Comments

How will it look on their application when they list the reasons for their arrests & convictions? I'm guessing the computer stuff will be an afterthought for any potential employer.

[TJIC]

re: "How will it look on a job application when they say they aren't allowed to use any of the computers in the office?"

Paragraph four says "it exempts work done as part of a job or search for employment."

[PA]

Just wondering, how broadly does NJ define "sex offender"? Just rapists and molesters of pre-teens? Or does this also include some guy who was arrested for indecent exposure after pissing in an alley drunk?

[Gannon]

This is just another hate law against young men. Denying a person internet access means denying a person a normal life, but probably some of the legislators don't get it because they are old and don't use the internet much. If things continue, even premarital sex will be outlawed soon.

[Tanked]

"Or does this also include some guy who was arrested for indecent exposure after pissing in an alley drunk?"

Not s far as I can tell. I got a ticket some years ago for pissing in an alley behind a dumpster. The cop was pretty creative, he wrote me up for littering. He cut me a break, it was "only" $50. The fine for public urination was something like $150 if I recall correctly, but I was drunk and it was a while ago. Worth every penny!

A story here:

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=bizarre&id=3979823

[Spungen]

Fourth paragraph of the story tells us that it's not for all sex offenders:

The bill applies to anyone who used a computer to help commit the original sex crime. It also may be applied to paroled sex offenders under lifetime supervision, but it exempts work done as part of a job or search for employment.

Still sounds overbroad to me. I wonder if this will pass Constitutional muster. A ban from contacting children on the Internet might be OK.

[old pete]

"Given the increasing ubiquity of devices which access the internet, this makes it pretty much impossible for a released sex offender to ever live a normal life.'

Actually, I'm thinking the ubiquity of these devices will make the law pretty much impossible to enforce.

[Gannon]

Question for Spungen:
Do you make the distinction between a child and a juvenile? Because most Americans don't, and a juvenile is probably closer to a young adult than to a child.

[Rob]

What probably sucks more than being a sex offender?

Being the victim of a sex offender.

Future Pundit had an interesting discussion on the topic of pedophile sex offenders.

http://www.futurepundit.com/mt/mt-altcomments.cgi?entry_id=4633

[mnuez]

I'm pretty sure that if all men were muted for a generation and women had complete run of the world we'd end up with a whole host of saner sex-laws - and, better yet, a saner view and practice of sex in our culture. We men are blessed/cursed with an obsession regarding sex that's unparalleled with any other desire of ours and it leads our various (historical and worldwide) cultures in all sorts of crazy directions. I mean, look at American culture today:

Masturbation, as much, as often and to what stimulus or fantasy is not just "normal" but practically required in order to be considered normal. Unless "you're gay", then you get to make up your own rules.

Pre-marital promiscuity is also not simply "acceptable" but considered to be the required norm.

Women who remain virginal are prudes.

Tell your daughter not to sleep around and your "controlling".

Young girls wear revealing and tight clothing from the age of three.

BUT -

Once you're married TOTAL ABSTINENCE with everybody but your wife. And if your wife "is not in the mood" you still must wait and beg for her to satisfy your needs, no other possibility is acceptable.

Hugh Hefner is a great man, practically an elder statesman because he does what all men are supposed to do: Fuck 18 year olds. Fuck 17 year olds however and your deservant of every sort of torture under the sun. Unless you're in a state where 17 is the Age of Consent. Then you're not "sick" and worthy of castration by dog-mauling.

Being seduced by a ready, willing and able 16 year old girl is called child-rape. Unless you're in a state that allows it, then it's considered awesome.

Eh, I'm tired here and probably didn't state my case quite right. My point simply is that we're all so goddamn sure of ourselves and in the nutty belief that we have some sort of "objective" morality that we're following in our cultural conceptions of what;s right and wrong about sex (as well as other subjects for that matter) and that are sexual mores are entirely in tune with biological truths - and we're so goddamn sure of it that we knowingly place or daughters in environments where they'll have a dick thrust repeatedly into their mouths while they're still 15 and we'll also completely destroy the life of the guy that did that if he's more than a few years older than her.

And it's all because we men are so amazingly obsessed with sex. I'd therefore venture to guess that if we were all forced to shut up for a generation, women would work their way around to a cultural perception of sex (and its attendant laws) that were a lot more in tune with biological realities.

But I'm tired as fuck so I'm guessing that my mostly male readership here will have needed better writing to have been persuaded by what I was trying to say.

Sweet Jesus. And I still have a day of Amazingly Important emails ahead of me.

mnuez
www.mnuez.blogspot.com

[Gannon]

"Being the victim of a sex offender."
A lot of sex crimes, like statutory rape, soliciting prostitutes, keeping a private naked picture of your girlfriend when youself were in HS have legal victims, but not real victims.

[Gannon]

@mnuez:
no, you are completely right here. US laws on statutory rape and prostitution are ridiculiously antimale, and the US is trying to impose their views on other countries through Unicef and other feminist organizations. Unicef for example wants to raise marriageable age for women to 18 in countries were 15 or 16 is allowed with a parenral consent. But I disagree with you thatwomen would make fairer laws for men. High ages of consent laws are a productof 19th century female feminists, which also tried (and partially succeded) to ban prostitution and alcohol. In fact, women try do restrict mens access to younger women through the law (statutory rape)or simply thorugh social pressure (a man who dates a ypounger woman must be a loser).
But then we have also these crazy conservative Christians who want to oulaw any kind of premarital sex. Is there any candidate (Ron Paul, Obama maybe)who would be willing to lower age of consent to 16 on a federal level?

[David Alexander]

Do you make the distinction between a child and a juvenile? Because most Americans don't, and a juvenile is probably closer to a young adult than to a child.

I'm not Spungen, a scholar of the laws, or a trained sociologist, but I'll give my two cents here.

Recently, laws have been enabled to give prosecutors the power to charge juveniles who commit certain serous crimes, the power to convict with adult sentencing instead of that used for juveniles. Otherwise, IIRC, there really isn't a big difference between young children and teenagers in the United States.

Culturally, Americans are dividing post-toddlerhood into several phases, pre-adolesence, and adolescence with tweens, teenagers, and twixterhood. Tweens occupy the 8-12 year old phase, teenagers from 13 to 16 or 18 depending on social mores, and twixters from 16/18 to 24. Tweens are a new phenomenon created by marketing drones that try and sell formerly teenage products to younger kids who are reaching puberty at younger ages. Twixters in contrast are growing in leaps and bounds due to the massive subsidization of what used to be early adulthood by boomer parents who don't want their children to "suffer like they did".

For all intents and purposes, Americans do consider their 6 and 16 year olds to be the same person, and Americans are very overprotective over their children, especially their daughters. From observation, the least protective parents are deemed to be the lower IQ groups.

Is there any candidate (Ron Paul, Obama maybe)who would be willing to lower age of consent to 16 on a federal level?

In theory, age of consent cannot be legislated at the federal level, and must be changed at the state level. In practice, stating that federal funding to the states could be reduced if age of consent laws were not lowered would probably be the means used to enact such legislation. It worked in the case of raising the driving age.

No candidate would support such legislation, primarily considering that most Americans would villify the candidate who does so. Americans simply don't want their teenage daughters dating older men. The only people who'd support such legislation are adherents of crazy Mormon polygamist cults who marry women off at young ages when they're uneducated and unaware of their rights.

have legal victims, but not real victims

Except for the naive girls who are abused by older men who prey on young women, primarily because they're so eager to please and do anything for their boyfriends at that age.

High ages of consent laws are a productof 19th century female feminists, which also tried (and partially succeded) to ban prostitution and alcohol

Mind you, one should remember that during the 19th century, alcohol abuse was particularly rampant, especially amongst the urban lower classes. Thus many reformers at the time felt that the solution to poor men wasting their wages on alcohol and beating their wives and children in a drunk wage was to restrict the supply of alcohol. It was a rather foolish policy, but nobody knew better at the time.

Prostitution's problem was that the spread of disease was rampant, and the women were being abused by pimps. In effect, the solution again was not to ban, but to regulate the provision of such services, and to ensure that fair treatment is given to the customers and sex workers involved.

[Spungen]

have legal victims, but not real victims

Except for the naive girls who are abused by older men who prey on young women, primarily because they're so eager to please and do anything for their boyfriends at that age.

Very good point. Notice that we don't have women of any age railing against age restrictions on sex. Well, except a few pedo teachers.

What probably sucks more than being a sex offender?

Being the victim of a sex offender.

Thanks for the dose of reality, Rob. Everyone I've known who suffered any sexual abuse, even underaged sex with an adult (and this includes guys!) was screwed up.

Is there any candidate (Ron Paul, Obama maybe)who would be willing to lower age of consent to 16 on a federal level?

For most of the American population, and certainly all of the candidates, this probably would not even rank in the top 1000 problems facing this country.

Unicef for example wants to raise marriageable age for women to 18 in countries were 15 or 16 is allowed with a parenral consent.

Unicef doesn't need to worry about this, it will happen naturally on its own - as a country's prosperity increases & female education levels go up, so does the typical age of first marriage for females (except among the lower & rural classes of that society, although the effects will eventually trickle down). In any prosperous country where women are expected to pursue education, teen marriage is an aberration.

[Gannon]

It's your country and you are allowed to do with whatever you want. I really don't get why Canadians for example have a much healthier outlook toward sex.
You make an excellent point DA when pointing out the hipocrisy of holding teenagers criminally responsible but denying them sexual rights: old enough to go to jail but not old enough to consent: juvenile criminal responsibilty should be set at the same age of age of consent: 14.
I don't understand how Americans let children be arrested and (9, 10, 12 year olds) face court, that's clearly abuse.
BTW, DA, both I and my gf are twixters, so we are in the same age group (you critiziced me a lot for having a 16 (now 17) gf at 24.

"Unicef doesn't need to worry about this, it will happen naturally on its own - as a country's prosperity increases & female education levels go up, so does the typical age of first marriage for females (except among the lower & rural classes of that society, although the effects will eventually trickle down). In any prosperous country where women are expected to pursue education, teen marriage is an aberration."
Even in the US in a lot of states females can marry at 16 with parental consent. Women marrying at 30 and not producing offspring is the real aberration.

"Thanks for the dose of reality, Rob. Everyone I've known who suffered any sexual abuse, even underaged sex with an adult (and this includes guys!) was screwed up."
I agree with Spungen that when abuse is involved it is really terrible. However, a mere age difference doesn't imply abuse and it's quiet common for teens to have their first experiences from a partner in his/her late teens, early twenties. Don't you worrry Spungen that your son for example when he is 17 could end up for ten years in jail for having a liason with a willing 15 year old girl?

[Spungen]

Don't you worrry Spungen that your son for example when he is 17 could end up for ten years in jail for having a liason with a willing 15 year old girl?

No, I don't worry about this at all. That's because it doesn't happen. What state are you thinking of, Alabama in 1950 with a black guy and a white girl?

[Spungen]

P.S. The guy in my post today who was convicted in Florida in 2002 was 32. He did six months.

[Gannon]

It happened recently to a black 17 year old football player, for getting felatio from a willing 15 year old girl, got ten year and was recently released because the Supreme Court considered it cruel and unusual punishment. Still he spent almost half a decade behind bars. It does happen Spungen, maybe not much to 17 year olds but a lot to 18, 19 and 20 year olds, who still tend to fancy girls in their middteens.

[Gannon]

How old was the girl?
16 or 17 seems still ok to me, but if she was 14 or 15 it's kind of strange.

[Spungen]

Gannon, again I ask: What state are you basing this on?

It's not common to prosecute where the adult is younger than 24. The sentences are usually brief for the ones that are prosecuted. Often, the convictions are pled down from a more serious offense.

And on second thought, I don't know that they guy *did* six months, I just heard that he *got* six months.

Even in the US in a lot of states females can marry at 16 with parental consent.

Like I wrote, this is an aberration & mainly occurs among the lower classes (trailer park types & poor Latin immigrants). Here, it is a sign of poverty and low class. Most Americans marry in their mid-20's-early 30's. That is our norm and as the world grows more prosperous, it will become the norm in more places outside of the West. This is simply a fact of modern history.

[Spungen]

Anyone here know a guy who wasn't a dirtbag who got prosecuted for statutory rape? If Gannon's version was correct, there'd be college guys and college-bound guys getting prosecuted all the time. I don't know of any.

[Gannon]

"That is our norm and as the world grows more prosperous, it will become the norm in more places outside of the West. This is simply a fact of modern history."
SORRY, COUNTRIES WHERE WOMEN MARRY LATER THAN 25 TEND TO HAVE NEGATIVE POPULATION GROWTH RATES. THE LATER THE WOMAN MARRIES (see Spain and Italy) THE LESS CHILDREN SHE WILL HAVE. IF COUNTRIES WANT TO SUSIST THEY MUST PRESSURE THEIR WOMEN INTO MARRIAGE AND CHILDBEARING NO LATER THAN 25 YEARS OF AGE. WOMEN IN THEIR EARLY TWENTIES SHOULD BE ENGAGED TO BE MARRIED. THAT'S WHY I ALSO ADVOCATE LOWERING AGES OF CONSENT, TO ANTICIPATE THE PARTY YEARS.

What's with the allcaps all the sudden? I don't read stuff without standard capitalization, it's irritating.

Numerous factors have contributed to lower birthrates: the introduction of reliable contraception, the wholesale entry of women into the universities & the workforce, the fact that children no longer till your fields but need your help in paying for college & putting a down payment on a massive mortgage. Also, the truth is that people in wealthy countries just don't want a lot of them - they don't want to give up the comfortable lifestyle they lead to become parents to numerous kids. Age of the mother just isn't the real issue here - a 30-yr-old college grad could easily pop out 3-4 kids if she wanted to. She probably won't want to, and neither will her 25-yr-old counterpart.

[Half Sigma]

"Numerous factors have contributed to lower birthrates"

In the old days, children would take care of you in your old age.

These days, senior citizen parents are still paying for their grow kids' expenses, such as their grandkids' private school tuition.

Why did the comments veer in this direction? This was a post about a sex offender statute.

[Spungen]

We need quality population, not quantity.

Women don't have the knowledge or experience to adequately assess a mate until at least their mid-20s, often not even then. They can't tell if a guy is a loser.

[Spungen]

Why did the comments veer in this direction? This was a post about a sex offender statute.

Because some people think it's grievously unfair that men are constrained by law from acting on all their sexual desires.

One thing I'm really tired of is the limits on where offenders can live. It sucks for people who live in the non-protected zones, because it concentrates the offenders there. I've never seen any data that suggested people were any more likely to reoffend if they lived within "x" number of feet of a school.

Because some people think it's grievously unfair that men are constrained by law from acting on all their sexual desires.

No. But it is unfair that our laws are not in tune with normal sexual biology, and not applied equally to both sexes. It's entirely possible to have a normal person punished as a "sex offender" for life while a true predator goes free. Which is part of the reason why laws like this become controversial.

If the category "sex offender" consisted entirely of rapists, then I would say this law is too lenient. Why are they ever even allowed out of prison to begin with? But when the category "sex offender" can include a 19 year old guy who has sex with his very willing 16 year old girlfriend, or a drunk guy who pisses in an alley, or even a grade school boy who pats a girl on the behind (don't laugh, it has happened), all of a sudden the law becomes severe.

We are not properly defining what it means to be a sexual predator and targeting that group specifically. We've been driven to the absurd in sexual law by both the religious extreme right (all sex outside marriage is evil) and the feminist extreme left (men are always predators, women always victims). The end result is that our efforts to protect people, male and female, from true predators, male and female, are seriously compromised. And we end up destroying lives which did not deserve to be destroyed.

Why did the comments veer in this direction?

the same reason all posts related to sex offenders veer in this direction. gannon inevitably starts his usual spiel on how unfair it is that it is illegal for adults to bang teen girls. other posters who apparently are not familiar with what is apparently his sole preocupation in life take the bait & it all goes from there.

[SFG]

It's sex. Watch. Make another post about sex or race and IQ and you will get 100 comments. Talk about the movie you just saw and you'll barely get 10.

[Gil]

Strange. I thought Conservatives tended to be harsh when it came to crime. Then again Conservatives have some surprisingly liberal view on sex and females. "Lasses love slaps and tickles", "no means yes", "if a female wears clothes that skimpy she was definitely asking for it", etc.

[SFG]

My general rule of thumb is that conservatives sympathize with the powerful and liberals sympathize with the powerless. It is advantageous to align oneself with the powerful, but people also have sympathy. The balance of the two circuits in the brain probably helps determine political views.

[Peter]

It happened recently to a black 17 year old football player, for getting felatio from a willing 15 year old girl, got ten year and was recently released because the Supreme Court considered it cruel and unusual punishment. Still he spent almost half a decade behind bars.

I read something about that case, don't recall all the details but you should be able to find them easily enough. Basically, it was a forcible rape, but the prosecutor was concerned that the girl would be a very poor witness or wouldn't testify at all. Rather than risk an acquittal, the prosecutor decided to seek an easier-to-prove charge of statutory rape.

[~trumwill]

Very good point. Notice that we don't have women of any age railing against age restrictions on sex

For the most part older men date younger women. Men are much more likely to be the target of these laws. It's easier for women to take a more casual attitude.

As it happens, though, I do know some females that object to it, but mostly insofar as it's an inconvenience to them. The worst that can happen to her is that she loses out on a cool guy. The worst that happens to a guy is much, much worse statute-wise. So it's natural that guys are much more concerned about these laws.

As for guys never getting prosecuted... do you want your fate in the complete discretion of a prosecutor? The laws are pretty steep in this regard even if rarely enforced.

Now, for the most part a guy don't have to worry about the sex police showing up at your door because these things are hard to prove and prosecutors don't have the cooperation of a witness. Once she gets pregnant, though, the prosecutor has a pretty easy win.

You know that I'm not prone to take Gannon's side very often, Spungen, and I disagree with him strongly as to how he believes that romance ought to be... but laws demanding harsh sentences (indeed, treating it little differently from real sexual abuse) for age differences in some states of two years and a day or three years and a day are really problematic.

I do think that there ought to be some laws to protect girls aged 13-to-17, but a number of the laws currently on the books need to be modified.

[PA]

My general rule of thumb is that conservatives sympathize with the powerful and liberals sympathize with the powerless.

That's a dumb comment, especially when considering that liberals are the powerful ones.

A better generalization would be to say that conservatives defend their particular historic society as an organic whole, and liberals dismantle their society in the name of a broader, generic universalism.

[David Alexander]

I really don't get why Canadians for example have a much healthier outlook toward sex.

They don't to be honest. It's not like you'd get away with dating a 15 year old girl up there either, especially in Anglophone Canada.

I don't understand how Americans let children be arrested and (9, 10, 12 year olds) face court, that's clearly abuse.

It's mostly (poor) black kids being accused for stuff like murder and arson. They still go to juvenile courts and their records are sealed, but instead they recieve adult sentences and stay in juvenile facilities until 18 and segregated units from aults until 21-24, and in most cases, they're older than 12. It's rare for kids that young to recieve adult sentences.

It was one of those measures pushed for during the peak crime period during the early 90s when it was commonplace to hear about tweens and early teenagers who were commiting crimes, and many of them knew that they'd get away with it due to leniant juvenile sentencing.

BTW, DA, both I and my gf are twixters, so we are in the same age group (you critiziced me a lot for having a 16 (now 17) gf at 24.

Yes, but you're of different generations, as far as I'm concerned. Personally, I think your relationship may be surpressing her development into an independent young woman, and you should find a girl who's much closer to your age.

BTW, you're really not a twixter since you live independently on your own outside of your home nation. Twixters tend to sponge off their parents until they become "adults".

[David Alexander]

Also, the truth is that people in wealthy countries just don't want a lot of them - they don't want to give up the comfortable lifestyle they lead to become parents to numerous kids.

I think that's what Ganon and others like him don't seem to understand. As a society, children are a burden, and in certain aspects, they get in the way of the enjoyment of the fruits of life. It's a sacrifice to have children, and most in the western world have to sacrifice too much to have children.

insert Ganon capitalized rant

It's interesting to point out that the least "feminist" parts of Europe despite immigration have the lowest birth rates.The same can be easily said for Japan. Hell, Russia's populace is poor, the men are awful towards their women, and their population is on the decline as well.

If you want to boost birthrates, you'll need cheap and large housing, low unemployment, good daycare centres, and buisnesses that are responsive to the needs of working parents.

As for the so-called party years, Ganon doesn't seem to comprehend that overprotective American (and European) parents will not allow their 15 year old daughters to go party. Secondly, that type of lifestyle requires the type of financing that requires high-paying career work.

Ganon likes the brag about his country's birth rates, but seems to neglect the fact that it's one of the reasons for the slums on the outskirts of every city in Latin America, and he's in a nation with few indigenous or black people.

[Half Sigma]

Peter: "Basically, it was a forcible rape, but the prosecutor was concerned that the girl would be a very poor witness or wouldn't testify at all. Rather than risk an acquittal, the prosecutor decided to seek an easier-to-prove charge of statutory rape."

Based on my inside knowledge of prosecutors, this describes typical prosecutor thinking.

I don't know anything about the particular case, but when I saw the perpetrator on TV, thought to myself "there's a guy who looks like he deserves to be in prison for something."

[PA]

In general, whatever the legal age of consent, it should be the same as age of emancipation. It would be too much to expect parents to house a child who fucks someone the parent don't approve of. They shoudl at least be able to kick such a son or daughter out of their house.

he's in a nation with few indigenous or black people.

This sounds interestin. Would you mind elaborating? I think you mean that in a nation with few indigenous or black people, there are no pressures on young or lower-middle class couples to live in a better neighborhood.

When I visit my native eastern European country, which is close to 100% homogeneous, I'm struck by how alien a concept such as "good neighborhood" is.

Yes, there are poorer neighborhoods, typically old commie high-rises, and while they are considered "bad," it's mostly because of the architecture, or traffic noise, or above-average incidence of alcohol abouse and hooliganism. There are no population differences as existential as race is in the West. And a "good school" is simply one that has an indoor olympic pool.

[Peter]

I think you mean that in a nation with few indigenous or black people, there are no pressures on young or lower-middle class couples to live in a better neighborhood.

And in the United States, "good" (as in "good school" or "good neighborhood") is frequently used as a euphemism for "white." Can't live in a 'hood where Those People might go robbin' and rapin'. And we certainly can't send the ankle biters to a school where not every kid is Ivy League-bound, and kids get shaken down for their lunch money, and (the worst fear of all) one's daughter might contract a case of Jungle Fever.

[David Alexander]

This sounds interestin. Would you mind elaborating? I think you mean that in a nation with few indigenous or black people, there are no pressures on young or lower-middle class couples to live in a better neighborhood.

What I meant was that despite being a country of few blacks and indigenous people, and a noticeable Jewish population, Argentina's much poorer than it should be, and I squarely place the blame on poor economic policies, and high birth rates which would be ameliorated if abortions were legal, and if women were free to develop actual careers. Ganon routinely brags about his maid, but that's because the labour supply is too high with few other opportunities. A maid for somebody like him is an economic waste for the nation as that person could be working and adding to GDP in some other way.

Prosecutors in general are not out cruising the streets for statutory rapists. In my experience, these guys get prosecuted when the parents press charges. That happened here with this girl in my neighborhood - her aunt & uncle (her legal guardians) told him to stay away or they'd call the cops. He didn't (and managed to get around the guardians watchful eyes by seeing her during school hours, which didn't help his case. nor did it help that she was perceived to be "emotionally fragile" because her mom recently died) Anyway, they pressed charges and he was prosecuted.

Which doesn't bother me quite frankly. If the minor is dependent on the parents or guardians for food, shelter & clothing, they have every right to decide who the minor can or can't date.

[Gannon]

Gannon's words of wisdom:
@HalfSigma:
You complained that the topic was changing directions. Here is my take: trying to prohibit sex offenders using the internet means imposibilitating them to live a normal life. That's obvious and everyone agrees here. If a register for sex offenders is fair or useful is a different question. In my opinion, it ostracizes people from their communities and means a punishment beyond their original sentences. It doesn't allow for rehabilitation. Also, a lot of rather harmless people are on these lists (statutory rapists, people who solicit prostitutes)
Just like it was said:
"We are not properly defining what it means to be a sexual predator and targeting that group specifically. We've been driven to the absurd in sexual law by both the religious extreme right (all sex outside marriage is evil) and the feminist extreme left (men are always predators, women always victims)."

"there's a guy who looks like he deserves to be in prison for something.""
Most young male blacks look threatening. That doesn't mean they are guilty. The girl was a little bit drunk, but that's her fault and doesn't constitute rape.

@Peter
"and (the worst fear of all) one's daughter might contract a case of Jungle Fever."
You are destroying DA's dreams man, where is your compassion?

"If the minor is dependent on the parents or guardians for food, shelter & clothing, they have every right to decide who the minor can or can't date."
Yes, they can tell the minor who to date. But they don't have to right to put a guy in prison for it, if the minor consented to it. The girl's will is the key, not the parent's will.

@Trumwill: I'm glad you are seeing the light.

@DA: Argentina's birthrate is 2.2; barely enough. Argentina is (relatively) poor because of socialism, CORRUPTION and a generaly bad neighborhood (except Chile and Uruguay, Uruguay is really just another federal province of Argentina).
I don't advocate countries to keep increasing their population. But if we want to keep the social systems alive we need to maintain our population, or the elderly will collapse the system. Even the impending retirement of the boomers will force the US to cut benefits and raise taxes (Mankew, Samuelson). Therefore it's essential for a society to push it's women into marriage no later than 25. Even at 25, a woman has already spent 50% of her fertile age, her better half by the way. Like Americans used to say, if she bleeds she is ready to bread. That's the law of nature or God if you prefer. That's why I find it for example so strange when Christians invoke high ages of consent because the bible and the Torah clearly state 13 for women as a marriageable age. That's too low for modern society, but reality is that women once they are in High School can consent, specially to young unmarried men (below 30, maybe 35, not married middleaged men).

[PA]

(the worst fear of all) one's daughter might contract a case of Jungle Fever.

Unless Peter has no objections to his own daughter dating dark-skinned non-whites, and actively sought out a minority-white neighborhood to live in (cheaper, more centrally located), his smarmy tone is out of place.

[Gannon]

@PA: the tpic might offend some people here, but it's interesting nevertheless:
Would you allow your daughter to date a black men?
My honest answer would be preferably not, but if we are talking about an intelectual DA type it would be tolerable.
So question for the people here.
If you had a 16 year old daughter, and forced to choose, would you prefer a 16 year old black or a 28 year old white as her boyfriend?

[SFG]

It would depend on the characteristics of each, obviously. See, if they're bad boys I'd go with the 28 year old--less likelihood of her being raped or beaten. If they're nerds I'd go with the 16 year old black b/c he has a chance to un-nerdify himself and move into management.

[Gannon]

"It would depend on the characteristics of each, obviously."
Let's say that each would be a fair and average representative of the race.

[Peter]

What I meant was that despite being a country of few blacks and indigenous people, and a noticeable Jewish population, Argentina's much poorer than it should be, and I squarely place the blame on poor economic policies, and high birth rates which would be ameliorated if abortions were legal, and if women were free to develop actual careers.

Argentina's birth rate is not high, just above the replacement level. It was higher in the past but never compared to most other Latin American countries. On the other hand, Argentina has long been the poster child for incompetent government and economics.

[PA]

The reason non-black people (this isn't just a white thing) don't want their daughters to date blacks is really an intractable one: the child of such a union does not resemble the non-black parent; the African traits overwhelm.

Reasons such as disease or criminality (not a problem if you avoid underclass blacks); abandonment (ubiquitous in my observation) and financial mismanagement (very common among even non-ghetto blacks, as far as I can tell) are secondary.

DA comes across a bit like the famous "tragic mulatto" of the 19th century: a black person with white sensibilities who wants to be among whites but finds his physical appearance to be a big barrier to acceptance.

He comes across as a smart and likeable guy, and I wish him well. If he ever decides he wants to marry, and continues to insist he doesn't want to be with a black woman, he may find his luck dating girls from liberal families.

[Spungen]

See, if they're bad boys I'd go with the 28 year old--less likelihood of her being raped or beaten.

I absolutely disagree. A 28-year-old dating a 16-year-old will be marginal and dysfunctional. I would call the cops on his worthless loser ass so fast he'd go back in time.

But Gannon, you are describing the choices of the poor and uneducated. So none of the commenters here can really relate. Any black guy hanging around any 16-year-old I or SFG would have would be a DA type. And there would be no 28-year-olds around them in a position to date them.

It appears that I alone here kind of know what it's like to be in that environment. The older guys interested in us were ALWAYS stupid poor losers. At least the 16-year-old has a future ahead of him.

[Gannon]

"I would call the cops on his worthless loser ass so fast he'd go back in time.
I chose 16 because in almost half of the states in the US it's legal."
"Any black guy hanging around any 16-year-old I or SFG would have would be a DA type"
Sorry, I don't understand the sentence.
"And there would be no 28-year-olds around them in a position to date them."
Actually, that would be the upper limit for a 16 year old girl in Argentina or Chile. A 16 year old girl with a guy in his early twenties is quiet common by the way. Even in Germany you see 16 and 17 year old girl with guys in their middtwenties.

"It appears that I alone here kind of know what it's like to be in that environment. The older guys interested in us were ALWAYS stupid poor losers"
I really don't know. You probably went to a second rate college. Also, I don't like the expression loser, because it's losely defined. I know a taxlawyer (an older friend) who would be socially a loser because he is uncool, but still makes lot's of money. I advocate a 10 year age difference in marriage for men and women. It's stupid to marry a woman the same age only to exchange her later for a newer model. That hurts the family and the children. Marry a younger one from the beginning.

[Spungen]

You say it, Gannon, but I don't see it. Not in the U.S. anyway. Men in their 20s and 30s who are socially interested in teens are always losers. Yes, I went to a third-rate college because we couldn't afford better -- that's my whole point. Women who went to good colleges had no interest or contact with the creeps we're talking about here.

Loser = poor, no prospects, and/or extremely socially/psychologically dysfunctional such that they cannot function adequately within their peer group. Dating younger people who are too unsophisticated to notice their dysfunctions is not an acceptable remedy.

[Gannon]

"You say it, Gannon, but I don't see it. Not in the U.S. anyway"
I'm not talking about the US anyway. The Turkish prime minister mmarried his wife when she was 15 and he was 30. A loser?

"dysfunctional such that they cannot function adequately within their peer group."

I think the concept of peer group becomes much less important after the age of 16/18/top 21. I have friends in their thirties and friends in their late and even middteens.

The problem is that a 16 year old woman is much more attractive than a 28 year old woman. So it's logical for the 28 year year old to try to get away with the younger one, not because the older sees better his deficiencies but because the younger woman is more attractive (and would be a better wifem and could pop out more babies).

[Peter]

The problem is that a 16 year old woman is much more attractive than a 28 year old woman. So it's logical for the 28 year year old to try to get away with the younger one, not because the older sees better his deficiencies but because the younger woman is more attractive (and would be a better wife and could pop out more babies).

It certainly isn't always true that the 16-y.o. will be much more attractive than the 28-y.o.
As for the popping out more babies, understand that the average man isn't going to want more than two or three children, a task for which the 28-y.o. will be perfectly well suited if she so chooses.

[David Alexander]

There are no population differences as existential as race is in the West.

One of the interesting things about being Caribbean is that one is exposed to a different background than most native born black people. Many Haitians of my parents generation regularly illustrate Haiti as a poor, yet respectful society where crime was low and in some cases, just simply uncommon, and criminals were seen as scum. In fact, the worst crime to commit was not murder, but robbery due to breaking the trust of the community. Many have expressed shock and horror at how their children can turn to crime here in the United States, and some have wondered why violence has increased, especially in the capital Port-au-Prince. A few Haitians that I know have actually said that they wished they never immigrated due to the fact that despite their riches, having one of their children in prison has soured the entire experience of living in the United States for them. I know of some who simply think there's a voodoo curse on black men born in the America. It's almost as if any attempt to raise your children and lead them to success with hard work and discipline just simply doesn't work for black children, particularly with the males. Even with middle class lifestyle in white neighbourhoods, they'll somehow get swept up in gangs, drugs, and other forms of criminality.

In Haiti's case, what has exacerbated the problem is that the immigrant children who get in trouble with the law are sent back to Haiti, which dumps rather violent children with a taste for blood in a country with no real capacity to deal with them. Eventually they form drug dealing networks, acquire weaponry, and start causing havoc in Port-au-Prince fueled by the profits of the drug trade. It's a similar condition in Jamaica as well, but considerably worse due to the larger flow of drugs into that nation.

[Gannon]

It certainly isn't always true that the 16-y.o. will be much more attractive than the 28-y.o.
A 16 year old woman has her best years before her.
A 28 year old woman, while usually still very attractive, has her best years behind her. It's downhill form here, whereas a 16, 18 and even 20 year old woman will still improve.

[David Alexander]

The girl was a little bit drunk, but that's her fault and doesn't constitute rape.

I personally have a no drunk girls policy. I wouldn't like it if some ugly girl manhandled me if I was drunk.

You are destroying DA's dreams man, where is your compassion?

Society already did that, so one can not blame Peter.

Argentina is (relatively) poor because of socialism, CORRUPTION and a generaly bad neighborhood

Argentina's located next to relatively stable neighbours that have relatively good relations with the Argentine Republic. Although, I find it relatively interesting that you consider Peronism as a socialist movement. It wasn't so much the Peronists, but the instability between the various factions in the country that hampered economic growth, along with that fun exercise against the British for the Falklands/Malvinas. Reading about Peronism is really bizzare since it seemed to be a political movement that promised something for everybody and was a nasty attempt at combining the fascists and social democrats under the same label.

Still, I think it's rather telling that a country with no real "low IQ" population to speak of has done so poorly. It's better than say, Mexico, or even certain parts of Brazil, and I'd like to visit the country one day (especially to see it's de facto museum El Subte subway system), but Argentina has nothing to show for itself, and can simply blame everybody in the country for its under performance.

[Gannon]

By the way DA, if you ever go brideshopping outside of the US, don't go to Argentina or east Europe, the women there tend to be pretty racist. Your best choice would definitively be Brazil, to find a light skinned mulata or even a light skinned mestiza or a white girl. In Brazil blacks definitively are relatively well integrated. Some German women are also open minded to black people. You are right, Peronism is essentially a soft fascism, and fascsim in the end is just a form of nationalist moderate socialim. Argentina's current GDP is around 5000 US, but that's because of the (relatively) recent crisis which devaluated strongly the peso, in reality it's absolutely comparable to 10.000 US GDP countries. An advantage of Argentina over Mexico is that social differences aren't that big. Mexico actually would do a lot worse if it weren't a neighbor of the US. Chile, Uruguay and Argentina as countries are much more solid than Brazil for example, which must have the worst income distribution of all of Latin America.

[David Alexander]

the child of such a union does not resemble the non-black parent; the African traits overwhelm

My cousin has a child of mixed race with an Australian male, and their child is one of the cutest children that I've seen ever. She has somewhat tanned skin tone by white standards, has some curly hair, but one wouldn't suspect that she's black. As long as both parents are happy, and the black person is a good, upstanding person (which should be true irregardless of the race of the partner), should it really matter what the children look like as long as everybody is happy?

Reasons such as disease or criminality (not a problem if you avoid underclass blacks); abandonment (ubiquitous in my observation) and financial mismanagement (very common among even non-ghetto blacks, as far as I can tell) are secondary.

The STD and un-wed mother problem go hand in hand. Promote sex safe practices and contraception usage, and get men to use their condoms, and you'll reduce the incidence of both cases considerably. The problem is that sexual education is usually half-assed and optional in most urban schools, and too many black men abuse their women by forcing them to have sex without condoms under the threat of leaving her for another woman. From what I've heard on NPR report, most inner-city young black women have nearly no knowledge of safe sex practices or contraception.

The abandonment problem has become worse since the 1960s, and I've yet to really figure out a way of solving it. I suspect it's because nearly three generations of black men have grown up without fathers and have no knowledge of what the task entails. For some black men, the entrance of children into non-committed relationships means that the couples aren't strong enough to endure the stress that pregnancy and raising a child that committed couples have. So while a married middle class couple has worked out most of the rough parts of a relationship before having children, these lower class couples have yet to do so, and these relationships break up severing ties between mother and father and child. Hence the term "baby mamma drama".

Plus, for some young men, impregnating a girl is a badge of honour, as if were a sport. God knows what type of incestuous relationships develop if one man is responsible for numerous children in one development.

BTW, I grew up with my dad, and I love him. :)

[David Alexander]

Actually, that would be the upper limit for a 16 year old girl in Argentina or Chile. A 16 year old girl with a guy in his early twenties is quiet common by the way. Even in Germany you see 16 and 17 year old girl with guys in their middtwenties.

Ganon, do these couples get married in the long-term?

I advocate a 10 year age difference in marriage for men and women. It's stupid to marry a woman the same age only to exchange her later for a newer model. That hurts the family and the children. Marry a younger one from the beginning.

I'd suspect that creates a generational shift between the husband and wife that could hurt long-term bonds, IMHO. Remember, in the US, marriages are based on friendship and partnership, not marrying some guy for support. Irregardless, I wonder how commonplace divorces for younger partners are outside of upper class circles?

Men in their 20s and 30s who are socially interested in teens are always losers.

Spungen has a point. In the US, the older men who hunt for teenage girls tend to be losers who weren't able to find women closer in age rage. These are girls who are unexperienced, and don't know what constitutes a bad man. Secondly, who the hell can put up with a 16 year old girl? They're not mature, and they're rather silly at that age from what I remember.

Personally, I just can't see myself with a girl that young. I would simply stifle her, and prevent her emotional growth and development, and I'd see myself as a more of a father figure than any type of boyfriend.

Stupid Question: Ganon, is your girlfriend going to attend university?

The Turkish prime minister mmarried his wife when she was 15 and he was 30. A loser?

He's the former Prime Minister and current president, and his ass should have been imprisoned after a coup once the Justice and Development Party came to power in 2002. He's a loser Islamist from a middle income state, and shouldn't be used an example to prove your theory. In fact, it only weakens your case. Now, if you find such a relationship from a white, non-poor, country, then we'll discuss its merits.

So it's logical for the 28 year year old to try to get away with the younger one, not because the older sees better his deficiencies but because the younger woman is more attractive (and would be a better wifem and could pop out more babies).

I don't think that most American males are so baby-obsessed. If they were, they would have done everything in their power to have had children before they turned 28. Besides, why a 16 year old? There's plenty of college graduates at 21 who are mature, youthful, and beautiful.

Your best choice would definitively be Brazil

I never planned on bride shopping overseas, since it seems like something that loser beta men do. As for Brazil, yes, the women are beautiful, as evidenced by a trip into a Brazilian restaurant last year, but my parents would probably not like that as a choice. Brazilian women are seen as leeches who only marry for money with a nasty habit of voodoo.

I'd still like to visit Brazil, along with Argentina and Eastern Europe one day.

[Peter]

I advocate a 10 year age difference in marriage for men and women.

I'd suspect that creates a generational shift between the husband and wife that could hurt long-term bonds, IMHO.

Another drawback of such big age gaps is the pesky habit so many men have of dying at young ages. Lots and lots of men find themselves eating dandelions by the root (as the French would say) in their 50's and 60's.

[~trumwill]

I'm glad you are seeing the light.

Well, don't be too congratulatory. I think the laws we have in place are unfortunate, but I do believe that to the extent that the age differentials you speak of are human nature, they are aspects of human nature to be resisted. I'm glad that you have found love and are happy, but like others I see it as hugely problematic on a larger scale and something that feeds into aspects of human nature that civilization should help us move beyond.

[Spungen]

I just stumbled upon this New York Magazine article about a sex offender "cluster" in Long Island. A bunch of them have a "share house," because it's so hard to find places to live.

[Peter]

I just stumbled upon this New York Magazine article about a sex offender "cluster" in Long Island. A bunch of them have a "share house," because it's so hard to find places to live.

Just a few miles away from where I live.