Branded

There might be some kind of preservative intension towards potential child abusers implied in that “programme”, though I seriously doubt it works that way.

Anyway, an abused child`s (and woman`s and man`s) further life is irreversibly influenced by the experienced violence, why should the abuser`s life be less?

I agree with Orange. It’s pretty well known that convicted, incarcerated sex offenders are likely to do it again. If you consider what they go through in prison (rape of sex offenders is quite common), you probably don’t want to be around when they get out and start thinking about taking it out on somebody. Generally speaking, they’re like a bomb waiting to go off. I agree that labeling is damaging. But third-grade name-calling is one thing, and knowing who the sex-offenders are is something else, especially if the statistics indicate they are likely to do it again.

That’s not half the trouble. Just wait until the system is more developed. Then you can enter keywords and the system will show your last 10 purchases at WalMart, or your taste in albums, or which girl you were with last night, or your political stance…

“Statistics show”? What happened to the whole idea of innocent until proven guilty? I don’t see how past guilt should mean that you are then marked as guilty for life - especially after serving your sentence. Just think how use of statistics could affect the whole criminal justice system. For instance, we could identify people likely to commit crimes before they committed them and then mark them as “potential” offenders!

Like I said, I can understand why parents would want this information - I’m just not sure I understand how this fits with the legal philosophy that governs our criminal justice system.

And, as the ACLU has pointed out - it should be fairly trivial to hack a site like this. If you don’t like someone you could add their name to the database and it would likely be some time before anyone could undo the damage - if that would be even possible.

“I agree with Orange. It’s pretty well known that convicted, incarcerated sex offenders are likely to do it again.”

Perhaps you agree, but not with me.

I had not said anything on “informative advantage” for potential victims, but that often such programs are justified by their assumed preservative impact on potential abusers, the way ´look what happens to you when you do this; your life is irreversibly messed`.

And I said I don`t pay a penny on that strategy.

“I’m just not sure I understand how this fits with the legal philosophy that governs our criminal justice system.”

It does not fit, that`s all. It`s undemocratic even,

if certain basics of our western legal systems are tied with a broader concept of democracy.

my daghter was abducted from her home and then assulted by a person known to the family. if we had known that the animal who did this was a convicted peado then he wouldnt of got passed the garden gate never mind let into the house. people who serve a long prison sentance do not pay the price that fits the crime, because its the family of the victim who have to live with it for the rest of there lives like we have to .and theres a 3 year old girl who will have the comstant reminders of what happened when people see scares on her and ask how did that happen. so im my opinion any peado that is convicted should have a tattoo of the letter p put on there face so people can ask them what did they do. let them all have what should be done with them and let the public give them a living knightmare like my family have.

jason

cardiff

south wales

wales

u.k