Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
jipc,
Thanks for posting this article, but I must admit I didn't read all of the pages ... just can't seem to muster up enough sympathy for the child molesters to continue reading. It seemed like it was written to try to garner sympathy for them (as far as I read anyway).
The article mentioned, very briefly, a few that left the bridge 'home'. That is honestly the only thing that bothers me about the whole thing. Some can just slip away? What about sex regestry addresses? Personally, I want to know where every sex offender is located at any given time. (Unless it {article} states it on one of the later pages, as I said, couldn't finish reading it-no sympathy here)
jipc,
Thanks for posting this article, but I must admit I didn't read all of the pages ... just can't seem to muster up enough sympathy for the child molesters to continue reading. It seemed like it was written to try to garner sympathy for them (as far as I read anyway).
The article mentioned, very briefly, a few that left the bridge 'home'. That is honestly the only thing that bothers me about the whole thing. Some can just slip away? What about sex regestry addresses? Personally, I want to know where every sex offender is located at any given time. (Unless it {article} states it on one of the later pages, as I said, couldn't finish reading it-no sympathy here)
It's well-documented that residency restrictions don't lead to a descrease in sexual offenses. This is a bad law which has led to a ridiculous outcome. I'm sure the law will be overturned within the next few years.
I'm all about trying new things to protect our children from being molested. Unfortunately, politicians too often put on dog and pony shows like this - they pass silly laws that appear to be tough on crime but are really just a way to pander to scared voters.
Seriously...I'd like to see the links to the "well documented" statistics that you refere to. I doubt that you can put a freaking molestor in front of a group of children without him getting arroused, so I don't agree with that statement at all.
The article stated that the probation officers are the ones sending these scum bags to live under the bridge.
I agree it was disgusting to read about the "poor" sex offenders and of course several claimed to simply have had sex with a consenting GF at a young age.... Even the man charged with molesting his own daughter was defended by the daughter.
I don't think hell wants them either!Oh thats to bad my oh my they live under a bridge.
I personally think these dirt bags should camp in He!!:banghead: :banghead: :furious: :furious: :furious: :furious: :furious: :sick: :sick: :sick: :bang: :bang:
I don't think hell wants them either!
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Living by a school isn't either though, SCM. Allowing them access to children in any capacity is not a good start.But if we release them back into society, we need to give them a start towards not re-offending - living under a bridge is not that start.
Thanks for posting, Amraann.
When reporters and authors try to sway readers with their sympathy for the offenders- I throw the article/book away. It just sickens me! And there are people out there in this world that can't seem to tell when they are being 'duped'.
My pain remains with the victims of crime. It was the offenders choice to commit the crime. They aren't zombies, they have brains, they make choices!!! I have read and heard way too many stories about sex offenders being released and repeating their selfish twisted crimes!!
Sounds sort of like their camping out, to me. People spend quite a bit of money doing that on vacation every year. Depends on your perspective?
Thanks again, Amraann.