should criminal records be on line?

[mileshawk56]

No. Chris.S.

[Best_of_British]

Nonces should be named and shamed and people should know if a predator is living next door.

Sent from my Redmi 4A using Tapatalk

[rustymotor]

Originally Posted by andymc

It would be no more reasonable to create a public register of individuals with HIV than it would be to create a public register of "people who drive a van" in the aftermath of last year's Finsbury Park attack. Doing either would be grossly excessive, paranoid and malignant.

That was my point where do you stop and draw a line..we always take the soft option and offer offenders a high level of protection. Like feeling sorry for a kid who killed the parents because now he/she is an orphan..

Just on that point of name and shame noticed the police cars have huge neon signs in the back windows stating " Car seized for no insurance".

[Gate Keeper]

Originally Posted by Best_of_British

Nonces should be named and shamed and people should know if a predator is living next door.

Sent from my Redmi 4A using Tapatalk

It has happened on this forum. A former member last year was convicted and sent to prison for raping a 13 year old child and other sex offences against children. He was named in the “B.S.M examples of bad driving” thread, Aurora MG - Andrew Stevens. I expect he is still rotting away in prison. He was banned from the club by Reebs and the moderators. At least when Stevens gets out, he won’t be allowed back into this club or go to any of the meets.

In my former work in Forensic Psychiatry, I had to carry out mental state assessments on sex offenders against children, paedophiles and a common theme was that it was society that was wrong and they were normal. With nonces, that is one of the things you are up against and reoffending can be high. I would want to know if I was a parent of young children, if there was a convicted paedophile living next door or not. Having said that, I am against vigilantism.

[MSS]

Originally Posted by Gate Keeper

...........

In my former work in Forensic Psychiatry, I had to carry out mental state assessments on sex offenders against children, paedophiles and a common theme was that it was society that was wrong and they were normal. With nonces, that is one of the things you are up against and reoffending can be high. I would want to know if I was a parent of young children, if there was a convicted paedophile living next door or not. Having said that, I am against vigilantism.

I find it difficult to believe that a paedophile or a sex offender in general can or would change his/her ways on the balance of probabilities. Perhaps there is an argument to be made that there is only one solution for dealing with people convicted of such crimes in the interest of protecting society.

Much more civilized than naming and shaming.

[Gate Keeper]

Originally Posted by mss

I find it difficult to believe that a paedophile or a sex offender in general can or would change his/her ways on the balance of probabilities. Perhaps there is an argument to be made that there is only one solution for dealing with people convicted of such crimes in the interest of protecting society.

Much more civilized than naming and shaming.

In the early 1990’s, we had a Home Office licence to experiment on convicted sex offenders using aversion techniques and brain washing. It was not a great success. There is the use of hormones to reduce sex drive and counseling but that takes cooperation and the offender would have to stay on medication/injections for rest of life, or agree to the chop. They all go on the register.

[mileshawk56]

I will explain my "No" Mr Anyname living at No. 34 High Street, Anytown shows as a convicted kiddy fiddler. We go round and to No.34 and without any other justification give him a bit of whatfore-in front of his wife and children. But Oh dear what a shame its the wrong Mr Anyname,it was his brother. No identifying photo, no fingerprints. And if you think that's a bit far fetched ask a Policeman and he will tell you of the problems they have with identification. I'm not sure what Maninders is meaning by "only one solution" but if its final/final maybe thats only way. Chris.S.

[macafee2]

Originally Posted by mileshawk56

I will explain my "No" Mr Anyname living at No. 34 High Street, Anytown shows as a convicted kiddy fiddler. We go round and to No.34 and without any other justification give him a bit of whatfore-in front of his wife and children. But Oh dear what a shame its the wrong Mr Anyname,it was his brother. No identifying photo, no fingerprints. And if you think that's a bit far fetched ask a Policeman and he will tell you of the problems they have with identification. I'm not sure what Maninders is meaning by "only one solution" but if its final/final maybe thats only way. Chris.S.

in my op I gave a no choice and a reason which was wrong people being targeted.

The little old lady down the road has a new best friend.
What do we say to her as we are concerned there is something amiss.

we look on line, new best friend has a history of befriending old women and taking their life savings.


is the risk of innocents being attacked by vigilantes worth the risk to defend the innocent from "attack" from criminals ?

macafee2

[MSS]

Originally Posted by Gate Keeper

In the early 1990’s, we had a Home Office licence to experiment on convicted sex offenders using aversion techniques and brain washing. It was not a great success. There is the use of hormones to reduce sex drive and counseling but that takes cooperation and the offender would have to stay on medication/injections for rest of life, or agree to the chop. They all go on the register.

Phil - the solution of which I was thinking would be far less sophisticated, lower cost and terminal.

Originally Posted by mileshawk56

...........I'm not sure what Maninders is meaning by "only one solution" but if its final/final maybe thats only way. Chris.S.

As above.

Originally Posted by macafee2

.............is the risk of innocents being attacked by vigilantes worth the risk to defend the innocent from "attack" from criminals ?

macafee2

I would say no.

Deal firmly with the criminals, once the legal process has determined that they are criminals, so that it is a real deterrent to those who have the capacity to make a valued judgement in relation to their actions.