Sarah's Law

[gruntygiggles]

Originally Posted by Bibio

i like your mums way of thinking. but your first sexual encounter must have been a bit weird for you... 'my mum said your not allowed to touch me there'

We learned how that kind of touching could be good in school......mum had no say from there on in...lol

Originally Posted by gruntygiggles

It doesn't matter what we do to monitor sex offenders, if they are going to reoffend, there is precious little anyone can do to stop it. We can't keep them locked up for life because they "may" reoffend. Whether we want to do that or not is totally irrelevant. We can only act with what we have, not what we want to have and at the moment, offenders serve their time and are released. That's the law, it won't change easily and it probably shouldn't either. It can be greatly improved of course, but we can't have a minority report world. EDIT: I do agree that we should be able to keep remorseless offenders or those deemed unsafe locked up indefinately.....but we are not dealing with what we want here.....so I am basing my reply on the situation as it is.

So....we are left with the knowledge that sex offenders are living in our society and so what to do? Release their information, hell no. Not to anyone. Joe Public cannot be trusted not to engage in vigilante justice and that would cause so many more problems. I don't think that there should be a case for releasing the information of only the more serious sex offenders as it is all the same when it comes to the reaction of the public. Communities should pull together to protect children and the vulnerable by looking out for one another, not by uniting in hatred and breaking the law themselves.

So again.....what to do? Look after your children and teach them what is right and wrong!!!
In the case of the Soham Murders (not necessarily sexually motivated, but a good example) Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman were on the way home from going to buy sweets. They walked past the house of Ian Huntley and he invited them in, saying that Maxine Carr was also home. Now.......My mum told me and my sister that we were never allowed to talk to strangers, never allowed to get in a car with anyone, even if we knew them, without asking her or dad first and never allowed to go into anyones house...even a friends house without asking her or dad first. My mums best friends lived in the same street and we weren't even allowed in their house unless we asked mum or dad first!

She made it perfectly clear that these were the rules and she also told us the parts of the body that some people like to touch, but that they were not allowed to. She called these people silly people and told my sister and I that if anyone touched us in those places, we would have done nothing wrong at all and should tell her or dad so that they could tell those people not to be silly anymore. She made it clear that it would never ever be our fault and that we could always tell her or dad.

So....when my sister was asked outside school to go and feed treats to a litter of puppies, she shouted at the man so loud that the teachers made a citizens arrest. When I was flashed at once, I ran home and told mum straight away. When my best friend wasn't home, I'd just wait outside for her and draw pictures on the kerb with a stone and some spit rather than wait in the house because mum said I wasn't allowed to do that!

Simples.......the most effective way to protect your children is to arm them with the knowledge of what is right and wrong and the confidence to say no to people and tell parents/teachers if someone does something they shouldn't. I don't think school is the best place for these things to be taught as in school, it is done later, when children also have the ability to abuse the imformation, take a dislike to someone and make a false accusation which can literally ruin lives.
It should be taught by parents at home and as soon as child understands. It's as simple as, "Don't talk to strangers"

I'm not saying it's the parents fault when children become victims of crimes like these, but we can't rely on anyone else to protect our children for us. I think parents have to do what they can to ensure the safety of their children and not let them grow up too soon.

There are plenty of parents on this forum that have found the right balance and given ther children the confidence, knowledge, love and support to see them grow up into wonderful people. They'd know better than me how to do it because I haven't had children yet....but I'm so so glad I had the parents that I did, because it is what they taught me and my sister that kept us out of trouble!

Excellent post, I'll use some of those with my children when they get old enough.

RE the minority report thing though. That's punishing people who have not yet committed an offence. I used minority report on the forum recently to refer to drunk people sitting in a car, IMO until they put the key in the ignition and turn it they haven't done anything wrong.

When I said about spending life in a secure unit, I'm talking about convicted child rapists, who clearly show no remorse, still appear to fancy kids, and present a significant danger to children in society.

Originally Posted by Quedos

Personally if there had to be a public register it should only have those who have repeated or if they are threat/serious

+1, one time sex offenders are usually those young uns who fall victim to their own lust and are tricked into thinking they're doing right. The fact that one's life can be so easily ruined by one foolish mistake is sad, and the example MBK used about the 15 year old girl who tattled to her mum proves just how ill brought up she was, not realising the impact her actions would have.

Originally Posted by gruntygiggles

It should be taught by parents at home and as soon as child understands. It's as simple as, "Don't talk to strangers"

Although I agree wholeheartedly with this statement, it must be pointed out that no amount of manners and rules will stop a brute of a man grabbing/outrunning a child. The accompanying advice should also include "if walking on your own, always check no one is following you at regular intervals", "don't walk down dark alleys, car parks, wooded areas no matter how much time it cuts off your walk home" and so on. Unfortunately you can't drill into kids common sense, that is something they need to work out for themselves, but the least you can do is help them on their way and hope their ignorance does not lead them into danger...

[gruntygiggles]

Originally Posted by -Ralph-

Excellent post, I'll use some of those with my children when they get old enough.

RE the minority report thing though. That's punishing people who have not yet committed an offence. I used minority report on the forum recently to refer to drunk people sitting in a car, IMO until they put the key in the ignition and turn it they haven't done anything wrong.

When I said about spending life in a secure unit, I'm talking about convicted child rapists, who clearly show no remorse, still appear to fancy kids, and present a significant danger to children in society.

Yep...like I said, in agreement with you and I like the reference to the drunk people sitting in a car.

Regarding sentencing and remorse, yes, I think there are offenders who at the moment are let back into society that should be detained permanently in a secure unit, not necessarily a life of punishment (much as I'd like that) but a secure unit where the public is protected from them permanently.

Now some food for thought a it just crossed my mind...some people talk about chemical castration, but is there any proof yet that this actually works? For instance, having a dog castrated after it has reaches sexual maturity does help with the hormones and can reduce or stop the instances of humping, running off for bi!ches in heat etc, but it does not affect the learned behaviours of that dog. Our 4 year old Collie has just been castrated and we've noticed a difference already in his hormone based behaviour, but he has been a grumpy so and so with the puppies for 18 months now and has been nervous of people for 4 years.....those have become learned behaviours and need to be trained out of him through rehabilitation or he will still always get the same urges to tell the puppies off or be fearful of strangers.

Could the same apply to people? You chemically castrate and take away the hormones or ability to become sexually charged, but because they have learned that they enjoy such interraction with children it becomes more than a sexually motivated desire and so they would carry on anyway???

[gruntygiggles]

Originally Posted by missyorkie_chris

Although I agree wholeheartedly with this statement, it must be pointed out that no amount of manners and rules will stop a brute of a man grabbing/outrunning a child. The accompanying advice should also include "if walking on your own, always check no one is following you at regular intervals", "don't walk down dark alleys, car parks, wooded areas no matter how much time it cuts off your walk home" and so on. Unfortunately you can't drill into kids common sense, that is something they need to work out for themselves, but the least you can do is help them on their way and hope their ignorance does not lead them into danger...

Yes, I was taught all of those things as well and could take up three pages with all the other stuff, but again, it is down to the parents.

If I had two children, I taught them both the same things and child A was able to understand, had common sense and was sensible, I could trust that child to walk to a friends house alone, knowing which doors were safe to knock on if they needed help or to cross the road or run away if they needed to. Now, if child B knew all the same things, but had no common sense, didn't stay aware and couldn't be trusted not to go for help, cross the road or run away, I would juts not let that child walk to a friends house alone. It would be my responsibility to judge how capable my children were of doing the right thing and if they were not, I would not allow them to go into situations where they could be taken advantage of. When I do have children and the subject of going out alone comes up....it will depend much more heavily on their ability to be sensible and look after themselves than their age.

Does that make sense???

[Bibio]

another thought. i wonder what the paedophile statistics are in countrys with relaxed laws of prostitution.

[gruntygiggles]

Originally Posted by Bibio

another thought. i wonder what the paedophile statistics are in countrys with relaxed laws of prostitution.

In the places Gary Glitter liked to vacation....possible fairly low.....like the ages of the kids that are drawn into it!

[SoulKiss]

Originally Posted by gruntygiggles

Yes, I was taught all of those things as well and could take up three pages with all the other stuff, but again, it is down to the parents.

If I had two children, I taught them both the same things and child A was able to understand, had common sense and was sensible, I could trust that child to walk to a friends house alone, knowing which doors were safe to knock on if they needed help or to cross the road or run away if they needed to. Now, if child B knew all the same things, but had no common sense, didn't stay aware and couldn't be trusted not to go for help, cross the road or run away, I would juts not let that child walk to a friends house alone. It would be my responsibility to judge how capable my children were of doing the right thing and if they were not, I would not allow them to go into situations where they could be taken advantage of. When I do have children and the subject of going out alone comes up....it will depend much more heavily on their ability to be sensible and look after themselves than their age.

Does that make sense???

When you talk about child B its really Stretchie - right?

[gruntygiggles]

Originally Posted by SoulKiss

When you talk about child B its really Stretchie - right?

Subtelty is a wonderful thing

Originally Posted by gruntygiggles

Yes, I was taught all of those things as well and could take up three pages with all the other stuff, but again, it is down to the parents.

If I had two children, I taught them both the same things and child A was able to understand, had common sense and was sensible, I could trust that child to walk to a friends house alone, knowing which doors were safe to knock on if they needed help or to cross the road or run away if they needed to. Now, if child B knew all the same things, but had no common sense, didn't stay aware and couldn't be trusted not to go for help, cross the road or run away, I would juts not let that child walk to a friends house alone. It would be my responsibility to judge how capable my children were of doing the right thing and if they were not, I would not allow them to go into situations where they could be taken advantage of. When I do have children and the subject of going out alone comes up....it will depend much more heavily on their ability to be sensible and look after themselves than their age.

Does that make sense???

Whilst in essence I agree with the above statement, it is not always so black and white. In the majority of cases with sexual abuse on children it is a trusted family friend or a family memeber. Very rarely "stranger rape" for want of a better expression