Wednesday, May 7, 2008

Sex Offender Laws Need Some Work

by Stacy Dittrich

Granted, they're all a good start. Meghan's Law, Amber Alerts, Jessica's Law, and the Adam Walsh Act are headed in the right direction, but they still aren't "correcting" the problem. Here, in Ohio, Senate Bill 10, (somewhere around the range of 450 pages), aimed at sex offenders, has been revamped and corrected so many times I'm not sure what the law is!

What I do know is this: If I come upon a registered sex offender sitting in his vehicle, (watching the children and having no other reason of being there), I cannot arrest him. Furthermore, if he decides to follow the school bus from stop to stop--still no arrest.

Okay, so they can't live within 1000 feet of a school, playground, or daycare center, and all of their neighbors are told a perv is living among them. Big deal! Sexual Predators have legs, and they have cars. There is nothing that prevents them from strolling 1200 feet down to the nearest school to find a "fantasy fix" (a child's image to use while sexually gratifying himself). Or, in the worse case scenario, a future victim.

The possibility of pink license plates for sex offenders was presented before the senate. Their reaction? "Oh, the horror! A violation of civil rights!" Regardless, nothing prevented them from passing a bill that allowed judges to issue yellow license plates to DUI offenders, which is also a joke. Why? Because the judges rarely do this. There's the prospect of the poor soul that gets the judge on a bad day. Issued yellow license plates for his first offense DUI, he finds himself being passed on the roadway by a multiple DUI offender who honks, waves, and is prominently displaying "IDRINK4U" standard Ohio plates.

The main problem is the lack of separation for offenders. The state is pooling together the violent child predators with the guy who had sex with a disgruntled ex-girlfriend. Angry at the rejection of reconciliation, she files rape charges. The Romeo and Juliet cases still have yet to be addressed. The eighteen-year old senior in high school, in love and sexually active with his consenting, fourteen-year old freshman girlfriend is branded for life. Ridiculous!

When I argue the above with "people in the know," I am promptly informed that stricter laws will do nothing but drive the sex offenders underground. What?!!

Read this following story and tell me if it matters:

- A local sexual predator was recently released from prison. No parole, time served. His victims were all under the age of five and spanned from Florida to Ohio. He ultimately became a frequent visitor to local elementary schools and bus stops, and was suspected in an attempted abduction of a seven-year-old. Parents were outraged. As law enforcement, we scared him, watched him, and threatened him (within the scope of the law, of course) every way possible. The outcome of this? He merely drove to the neighboring county and promptly abducted and sexually assaulted a five-year-old girl. Yes, he's back in prison but it took the innocence and stability of a child to put him there--again.

What most people don't realize is this: There is no rehabilitation for pedophiles. Asking a pedophile to no longer be attracted to children, is like asking a homosexual to wake up tomorrow and live his life straight, or vice versa. It's not going to happen! (For chillingly accurate portrayals of child sexual predators, rent Little Children or The Woodsman.)

My solution? Put the violent sexual predators whose victims are under thirteen in a class of their own--restrict their breathing. Give law enforcement the authority to take action. It's not difficult. The law could read something like: "A state registered sexual offender who knowingly engages in a pattern of conduct that causes inconvenience, annoyance, alarm or panic to any prudent person who believes the person is conspiring or about to commit a sex offense." (Take that, Senate Bill 10!)

My "silent" solution? Torture and death to child offenders on the second offense. I've had the extremely unpleasant experience of witnessing the lifetime of damage these monsters inflict on our children. I'm pretty sure that would nip the problem in the bud. Yes, it's harsh, but I'm funny that way. . . .

Just my opinion.


Felicia Donovan said...

Stacy, you hit the nail on the head when you said that there is no "rehabilitation" for sex offenders. The prediliction towards children is horribly strong and the rate of recidivism is so high because they WILL reoffend at any cost.

I recently witnessed a known S/O who was taking pictures outside of a child care center in an industrial park. I was out of jurisdiction and called it in. No offense.

The bottom line is that these mutants have one goal in mind - to rape a child. That is not the same, as you pointed out, as the hormonal teenage boy who likes a girl in a lower grade. Sexual offenders specifically seek out the youngest, most pre-pubescent child they can for the sole purpose of getting off from raping and molesting little ones - the younger, the better.

Let anyone who thinks these creatures have rights read or witness the interviews with a 5-year old saying that "Uncle Billy put his pee-pee in my mouth."

Civil rights? They have no rights. Period.

Felicia Donovan

Anonymous said...

I am appalled at the lynch mob menatality of this blog.

You folks have only an emotional reaction to a certain percentage of sex offenders while not considering that each case is different.

I've seen first hand how these ridiculous laws result in a life time of banishment to otherwise good people who don't deserve such an unending and open ended back lash.

Just the fact that you advocate torture is a sign that you are in fact the one with a real mental disturbance that should be monitored closely.

For those readers who are still rational and capable of thoughtful discourse I highly reccommned this report from Humnan Rights Watch.

Anonymous said...

Actually, Anon, Stacy didn't lump all the sex offenders together. She actually advocated for more lenient treatment for the high school kid with the younger girlfriend and she expressed concern for the guy who's the victim of a disgruntled girlfriend.

She also didn't talk about ALL sex offenders. She pretty much limited this blog to pedophiles. So, my guess is that you're the one with the bias here. You read the post and didn't sort that out. :_)

Stacy Dittrich said...

Anon #1,

I appreciate your candor. We welcome everyone's views here which makes this blog so phenomenal! However, like anon #2 pointed out, I specifically targeted pedophiles who brutally rape and victimize young children.

I challenge you to sit across from a 5-year old girl who had been repeatedly raped by the neighbor and see for yourself. If at that point, you don't agree that the man should be put down a garbage disposal then...feel free to call me mentally disturbed.

If you've seen "first hand" what these laws do to "banish" people I can only assume that you know someone who is not a pedophile or brutal rapist and has been affected by something similar to the "Romeo and Juliet" laws..if that is the case, then you probably agree with my post. If this person is a pedophile or child molester, than I have no sympathy....

No lynch mob here, and I think you'll find most people agree with me when it comes to the topic of child rapists/offenders.

Anon #2 (thanks!)

Levi said...

Anonymous, (Are you a member of the ACLU?)

What BS, apparently you have reading problems, or you did not read ALL of Stacy’s posts before you started hurling insults, and making blanket statements about Stacy, the readers, and the contributors of this blog.

She specifically addressed the problem of lumping all sex offenders in one category:

“The main problem is the lack of separation for offenders. The state is pooling together the violent child predators with the guy who had sex with a disgruntled ex-girlfriend. Angry at the rejection of reconciliation, she files rape charges. The Romeo and Juliet cases still have yet to be addressed. The eighteen-year old senior in high school, in love and sexually active with his consenting, fourteen-year old freshman girlfriend is branded for life. Ridiculous!”

So stew on that! I’m tired of every time, when people want to get tough on child rapists, the lame argument of “Romeo and Juliet” gets thrown into the mix, to try and muck up the issue, by child rapist apologists. Please, put that lame argument to bed. When people want to get tough on sex offenders, that means the dirt bags that PREY on children, or rapists out there.

And as far as torturing: while you feel sympathy for child rapists thugs, who seek out innocent little children to rape, molest, and murder, just for the sake of having power and control over their victim… Most people with common sense, choose to feel sorry for the innocent victims of child sex abuse, and those that have been murdered by child predator VERMIN.

Don’t expect everyone with a different opinion than you, to be a child molester apologist, thug hugger, like you.

You need to get off your high horse. You are one of these criminal apologists, who screams “lynch mob”, every time someone wants to get tough on crime and criminals.

Personally, I think that child abusers of any kind are about as useful as a pogo stick in quick sand, and they need to be exterminated. We exterminate pests, rodents, and as far as I’m concerned; child rapists are in the same category, and we simply need to exterminate them, or keep them in jail FOREVER.

How's that for "thoughtful and rational discourse?"

Anonymous said...

Sex Offenders are the other form of terrorist according to the government, because you don’t know who they are or where they are. So the government says to protect us and our children they will implant V Chips, not only in us, but in our cars, passports, identification, and run surveillance on our streets, homes, friends, and conversations. 96.5% of sex offenders are family members or friends to the victim, 97% are male, and only 3.5% of convicted sex offenders reoffend... Therefore the odds are YOU are more of a threat to commit a sex offense than a "sex offender". Mull over that for a moment.
What will the next set of laws be? Will they treat us more like criminals than they currently are over statistics like these? Will we again support them for the reasons or justifications of “good intentions”?
How can we prosecute people for life knowing how easy it is to be charged and convicted of a sex offense? Do you realize how many death row inmates have been found innocent due to D.N.A.? They convict sex offenders every day with merely ones word against anothers, today, a simple lie can wreck your life! How do V Chips, satellites, surveillance, and treating us like criminals stop our children from having a sexual encounter, or save us from terrorists that our government antagonizes?
There have however been thousands of vigilante attacks that have gotten an estimated 4000 innocent people hurt and even killed by mistaken identity or wrong addresses all together. In one case a pregnant woman was burned alive for nothing she had done. Now we harass or kill his/her family and friends as well? Is this what we have become? We now allow rights to be ignored?
There are now about 600,000 registered sex offenders, that is about the same number of truly patriotic men who died for those rights that you are ignoring. Anyone who would support breaking them is NOT patriotic Americans!!! As Americans how can we allow the government to strip rights because they feel it’s (justified)?

Stacy Dittrich said...


To compare 600,000 registered sex offenders to our men and women in the military is inexcusable...

I tried to follow your post as much as I could but got lost during the implanted V chips segment.

Are you a registered sex offender?

I have never heard, nor read, nor witnessed where our government was going to implant "all of us." I do know the state of Florida has recently put similar tracking devices in "child predators."

I don't know where you pulled your stats from--"Only 3.5% of convicted sex offenders reoffend." No, 100% recidivism. Period. What you are not factoring in is whether or not they are "caught." The convicted sex offender who resorts to child porn for gratification is "reoffending" at that moment, although he may not get caught. It will only be a matter of time before he, again, moves onto a child.

As Levi said, they are about as useful as a pogo stick in quicksand. Laughs!

Leah said...

Anonymous, do you really believe all that BS you wrote??

I detest child abuse of any kind but I truly believe that there will be a special place in hell for child molesters. Frankly, I don't understand why our legislators don't have the balls to enact a "first offense" bill for child molesters so that they don't get even a second chance to harm a child. It isn't fair that our society has to worry about all these freaks that get off on fondling and raping our children. I am sick of it! said...

There is alot of ignorance in your posting. I dont know where to start. Firstly, there is no statistical supporting evidence to your claim that sex offenders cannot be rehabilitated. In fact US Department of Justice statistics demonstrate just the opposite conclusion. Fewer convicted sex offenders re-offend with a sex-related crime than non-sex offenders. The link to this document can be found at .

But to the larger point; The ignorance of those who believe a sex offender could never be in their own family is astounding. There are families of 30,000 Ohio citizens alone who never thought their loved one would be accused of a sex crime, Yet now they face reality. Yes, your loved one could be sexually violated. Yes, your loved one could be a sexual offender. Think twice before you take Constitutional rights from other citizens. It might affect YOUR family too.
A torrent of information about this unconstitutional law can be found at

Anonymous said...

Hey Constitution,

Again, this is about pedophiles not generic sex offenders. You're comparing apples and oranges. You're the one propogating the innaccuracies here!

Stacy Dittrich said...

You wrote:

Fewer convicted sex offenders re-offend with a sex-related crime than non-sex offenders.

Are you saying that non-sex offenders commit more sex crimes? Wouldn't that make them sex offenders? I'm a little confused...

I don't believe anywhere in my post did I say that family members were incapable of being sex offenders.

I'm curious, does your constitutional rights include the small victims who are physically and mentally scarred for life?

As far as statistics, you better keep researching...the department of justice stat has long been questioned. Virginia researched and followed their recently released sexual child predators over a five year period and found 100% recidivism.

Bottom line--it's all about the small victims here, if you can't see that then maybe you should focus elsewhere.

Jan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jan said...

Anyone who would empathize with a pedophile (in this instance referring to adults who sexually abuse pre-teen children) is ignorant.

Anyone who has firsthand knowledge of the damage done by these monsters wants nothing more than to permanently isolate them from any future potential victims. And if that involves curtailing some of their constitutional rights, then so be it.

The reason our children are not protected is bleeding hearts who think the rights of pedophiles are more important than the rights of our kids. Kids don't have a voice other than the one we all raise in their defense.

Before any of the anonymous posters start crying for all the pedophiles out there, stop for a moment and imagine that person stalking your child at a bus stop, or fondling her in the backseat of his car, or sodomizing her and leaving her broken in a ditch.

Then honestly tell me you think that limiting their freedom is wrong.

Andrew Peterson said...

Stacy, thank you keeping this issue in the forefront of our thoughts. Perhaps the biggest danger we face is apathy. When people like you stop caring, we’re all in trouble. Keep up the great work. Kudos!