Kiddie Diddlers - Bad for the FSP!

[dalebert]

There have already been some FSPers, and they weren't radical out-of-the-system types, fighting new over the top sex offender laws in Manchester. Just bares repeating that while there are horrendous child rapists out there, they don't make up the bulk of who gets labeled "sex offender". When someone tries to twist the truth to further their own political ends, we should be trying to untwist it; not tucking our tails and hiding like cowards. If someone wants to join the enemy rather than confront the lies for the sake of their image, let them, but I'll have no part of it. Speaking out against this hysteria is not radical. There is a growing group of people, far beyond libertarian types that understands how ridiculous this has gotten. I saw a pretty prominent news program about it recently. I can't recall who it was but it was on network television. May have been John Stossel or maybe I saw one by him and by someone else. This hysteria is actually a somewhat recent phenomenon that started within the last 20 years or so. I'll see if I can find clips.

[rowland]

let he who is without sin cast the first stone. . .

Well I never molested a child. Is that good enough?

2)  MOVE AWAY. 

How about THEY move away? Wouldn't that be less hassle all around?

must we slap the scarlet letter on so many different people for so many different crimes?  Child sex was pretty normal in ancient Greece wasn't it? 

If child molestation doesn't qualify for a scarlet letter then nothing does.

Ancient Athens started out with a crude and limited but mostly working democracy and then fell to Macedonia. Ancient Greece as a whole went into an unpleasant decline. If we follow their example too closely we may suffer a similar fate.

Lots of things are pretty normal in cultures that are headed for disaster. That doesn't mean these things are a good idea. It's pretty normal for an infection to fester.

Ancient Athens had: slavery, ostracism of the successful and misogyny. They had pederasty and sodomy too as part of the package. All these things were pretty normal there.in that time.

Cultural relativism never really worked for me. Maybe it's because I read too much history. Maybe it's because I read the history of a culture all the way to the end.

By the way I'm not completely without sympathy. I recently found out a guy I know once committed a crime along these lines. I don't go out of my way to give him a hard time about it but I'm not going to treat him quite the same as I would anyone else. I have some sympathy for the problems he has but there are limits to that sympathy. After all it IS his fault.

[dalebert]

If child molestation doesn't qualify for a scarlet letter then nothing does.

That's usually not what gets someone the label of "sex offender" though. And when it is, the measures they take to protect children aren't really what's effective. The vast majority of child molesters are molesting someone they know, their own child or a close relative's that has been put in their custody for a while. The cinematic images of strangers hanging out in playgrounds or coaxing kids to their homes with candy don't match the reality, so the measures they take to protect kids just provide false security to ignorant parents who don't want to take the real measures necessary to protect their kids, i.e. take on some responsibility for better parenting. They prefer to project their fears out onto strangers rather than watch for signs of abuse within their own family and close friends where the highest risk is. They may end up having to face some very uncomfortable truths.

Like others, you're just appealing to emotionalism to make the case for these draconian measures. We have to use some common sense if we actually aim to protect children.

[doobie]

Is a 15 year old who has consensual sex with his 15 year old girl friend a sex offender?  In some states he is, but she isn't!

In other states a 15 year girl who takes nude pictures of herself and mails them to friends is now a sex offender! 

[mackler]

Child sex was pretty normal in ancient Greece wasn't it? 

Yes.  So was slavery.

[DigitalWarrior]

I have changed my mind, and would like to say that I was wrong for suggesting that we not assist people convicted or accused of certain criminal acts.  I have two reasons

First, as was pointed out to me, it is a slippery slope and how long until they in all seriousness declare the lot of us "Terrorists".  While assisting some people might be turned around on us, it would be morally wrong to avoid the right action because it could be misinterpreted.  To paraphrase Brother Kipling "If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools, yours is the Earth and everything that's in it and - which is more - you'll be a Man".  I appreciate everyone that took the time to correct me.

Second, kind of like the legal principal of safe harbor for computer networks, we do not concern ourselves with filtering content, because if we did it in one case, we would have to do it in all.  The FSP is a transportation medium, which hopefully carries far more good than bad...

Digital "belly full of humble pie" Warrior

[SpeedPhreak]

DW - Thanks for starting another topic.

Hate to say it, but this post makes me feel "INCREDIBLY HOSTILE" to you.
If libertarians can't help out the victims of a government gone mad with the intoxication of its own power, who can?  What other compromises and outright hypocrisies are you willing to stoop to as a result of your "delicate sensibilities"?  Possessed of such (I calls 'em as I sees 'em . . .) cowardice, how effective do you think you could be in public office?

I would hope to be more effective than Goldwater's presidency.  Oh that's right, he didn't get to be president. 

I hope that I will not be the most principled man in the coffee house.  I want to be one of the more principled men in the State House.  Our freedom will either be advanced or lost there, not in a discussion about anarchy vs minarchy over a double espresso.   In my mind the best way I can actually achieve positive change and a reduction in government is to act incrementally.  I would vote for medical marijuana with a prescription, rather than vote against it, because it moves in the right direction.  My goal would be that I don't want the government to care about adults freebasing clorox, but I will take what I can get.  I would not go into the House and immediately try to pass a law that requires all state monetary transactions be done in silver or gold because it is Constitutionally required.  I would, at the right time, propose a law to allow people who are owed money by the state to elect to be paid in silver or gold or FRNs.

I do not intend to ever vote for Unconstitutional actions.  I do not intend to vote for anything increasing the scope of government.  I do intend to try to make your life a little better, by getting The State to leave you to live your life a little more. 

We will never succeed in doing anything of substance if the FSP becomes synonymous with kiddie diddlers, regardless of how right you might be.

I would argue that by saying something I believe in a place full of people who I respect and I knew would disagree with me, I would have shown my dedication to saying what I believe is correct.  As far as cowardice is concerned, I am a former Marine.  I might shit myself in fear, but I will still do my damnedest to do what I think is right for my Country and my Cause.

I am assuming from this post that you are running for offices?  I would happen to agree w/your baby steps approach because I happen to think that will work better than an all or nothing approach - after all it is "Liberty in our life time" not "Liberty next week or I give up".  If felons are allowed to vote in NH I would consider supporting you (obviously I would need to do more research - but that is another topic).  Your incrementalism is, in my opinion, how we got where we are today just in reverse - a lot like the incremntalism quote you refered to as needing to ponder further.  The coffe house/state house comment I would partially disagree with - most if not all revolutions started in bars & other places where "common" folk congregated.  I would argue your principled man status by saying your principles may or may not reflect other peoples principles &, as free men, you can't force your principles on others.

I respect you sticking by your beliefs & your service as a Marine.  I also respect the people on here who are opposing you & have the "in your face" approach.

I (as apparently many others) agree that child molesting is wrong, sick, dispicable.  Where it looks to me we differ is that it appears to me that you are like the majority of the population that thinks every SO is some one who molests pre-pubescent children.  I am in a unique postition to have actual experience with several SOs & I have seen almost the entire range - from the guy who forces his piece into an infants mouth - to the guy who was living w/his girlfriend he thought was 21 because she had a fake ID & her mother helped them move in together.  The fact is their are a lot more of the 2nd guy than the 1st.  The laws as they are hurt way more kids than they protect - what do you think of all the kids who don't have a father in their lives because of hysterical laws?  Again I will point out my case - mine was not a familly member, was a teenager, was consenual (regardless of the legal definition), & I have passed BOTH state required benchmarks when only 1 is required.  How is this law benifiting/protecting my daughter?  She is the real victim here.  She is 2 1/2yrs old & really only knows me threw a video I made her last christmas.  She will watch it 4 or 5 times a day sometimes & talk to me like I can respond.

I agree that the condition of a child trumps the feelings of an offender - again our definition seems to differ.  When a child (or any one for that mater) is truly sexually abused the victims trauma should be #1.

I can see your point about my (& other SOs) moving for the FSP because of our label (justified or not), as the general public generally does not share our majority view that, as many others have stated, you can't pick & choose who gets liberty.  As sovereign human beings everyone is entitled.  People who make wrong decisions will be ostricized, shunned, ignored, etc... into leaving or what ever.  Proof is the guy who tried to get me fired... everyone thought he was an asshole & ignored, shunned, & treated him like the bad guy - he couldn't deal with it & left.

Ultimately I am sticking by my beliefs - people are physically ready for sex at puberty.  That is what puberty was designed for.  It is only societies notions that makes it wrong.  If people don't want their teens having sex then they need to raise them to be prepared to make these decisions, get it off regular tv & out of popular culture or simply don't let your child participate in regular tv & popular culture.  America idolizes sex & youth.  Many models & actors/actresses are teens (young adults).  Children are pre-pubescent.  Over 50 countries around the world have ages of consent of 14 or less - including many 1st world countries... raise the number to 15 & its at least 50% (I did the math at one point but dont remember exact numbers).

As I said in the other thread - it needs to be judged on a case by case basis.  Some 13yos are mentaly capable & some 20yos are not... again mentaly capable is a product of society & parenting.

What I did was in fact wrong.  Not because she was a teen but because I hurt my girlfriend & as a result my daughter.  If she would have been my wife - I would not have been arrested.  A similar case in Denver was just like that - a 20 something had a 14 or 15 yo wife & nothing could be done.

[SpeedPhreak]

I also respect your ability to take new information, analyze it, & change your postition if you choose too.

[DigitalWarrior]

I ran and lost my Primary.  I will try again in two years.  I do think that bad law exists in most things. 

I think a legislator should be like a physician: First do no harm.  If the law is bad and I can make it 5% better, I will take it and try for more.  It is especially important to consider unintended consequences.  For instance, if the legislature thought it was a good idea to stop men with a history of beating their wives from owning guns, they might prevent men convicted of such crimes from legally owning guns.  However, before that law was enacted, there were men who pled out to misdemeanor wife beating rather than risk a jury finding them guilty of felonious ass-whooping.  That plea had certain terms known to him, but now a law was passed which currently adds to the punishment he faces.  It appears to me that this is violation of ex-post-facto, though I am assured it is not, because it is simply additional punishment for an act that was already criminal.  This is unjust.

Some men are required to pay child support for children that are not theirs because of some very badly written laws.

I also think that the coffee house (or Murphy's Taproom, or here) is very important because it is there that the philosophy and guidance is developed.  However I think it is critical to get philosophy out of the coffee house too.

I apparently differ with you about the Age of Consent, not the illusion that all registrants are demonic hell-spawn.  In fact a registry might not be a great idea at all.  However as a legislator, I would likely support different punishments for different sex crimes.  Like the boy who snaps a pic of himself on a cell phone and sends it to a girl he likes should almost certainly have to see a counselor, who would determine if he suffered sex abuse (inappropriate acting out may be a sign) and to treat him if he cannot determine a correct and age-appropriate way to act on sexual impulses.  He certainly shouldn't be forced to be a registered sex offender, nor would jail be the best place for him.  I might support bashing a baby raper's skull in with a rock (not really, since I oppose the death penalty, but it is a close call).

So that I am not misunderstood, It sounds like you were an adult, she was under 16, and if that is the case, I would support Jail and a Felony conviction for you.  Not sure about the registry, because if there is a significant danger of recommission, It should be handled psychiatrically.  Punishment, then rehab is a good model in my mind.  There is a delicate balance of interests as far as the registry, and I would have to spend a lot of time finding a good course of law for that.

Digital "Good thing I ain't Emperor" Warrior

[SpeedPhreak]

I ran and lost my Primary.  I will try again in two years.  I do think that bad law exists in most things. 

I think a legislator should be like a physician: First do no harm.  If the law is bad and I can make it 5% better, I will take it and try for more.  It is especially important to consider unintended consequences.  For instance, if the legislature thought it was a good idea to stop men with a history of beating their wives from owning guns, they might prevent men convicted of such crimes from legally owning guns.  However, before that law was enacted, there were men who pled out to misdemeanor wife beating rather than risk a jury finding them guilty of felonious ass-whooping.  That plea had certain terms known to him, but now a law was passed which currently adds to the punishment he faces.  It appears to me that this is violation of ex-post-facto, though I am assured it is not, because it is simply additional punishment for an act that was already criminal.  This is unjust.

Some men are required to pay child support for children that are not theirs because of some very badly written laws.

I also think that the coffee house (or Murphy's Taproom, or here) is very important because it is there that the philosophy and guidance is developed.  However I think it is critical to get philosophy out of the coffee house too.

I apparently differ with you about the Age of Consent, not the illusion that all registrants are demonic hell-spawn.  In fact a registry might not be a great idea at all.  However as a legislator, I would likely support different punishments for different sex crimes.  Like the boy who snaps a pic of himself on a cell phone and sends it to a girl he likes should almost certainly have to see a counselor, who would determine if he suffered sex abuse (inappropriate acting out may be a sign) and to treat him if he cannot determine a correct and age-appropriate way to act on sexual impulses.  He certainly shouldn't be forced to be a registered sex offender, nor would jail be the best place for him.  I might support bashing a baby raper's skull in with a rock (not really, since I oppose the death penalty, but it is a close call).

So that I am not misunderstood, It sounds like you were an adult, she was under 16, and if that is the case, I would support Jail and a Felony conviction for you.  Not sure about the registry, because if there is a significant danger of recommission, It should be handled psychiatrically.  Punishment, then rehab is a good model in my mind.  There is a delicate balance of interests as far as the registry, and I would have to spend a lot of time finding a good course of law for that.

Digital "Good thing I ain't Emperor" Warrior

You are understood w/your assumptions of my case.

I agree w/you on most everything you have written thus far.  Obviously,as you stated, we differ on the AOC & your supported punishment of my case.  In my case in particular - did you speak w/the young woman?  did you take my previous community standing, civic duty, & character statements into account?  what factors allow you to support a felony & jail time?

The particular therapy I am in focuses on victims & their potential trauma.  I have learned a great deal about different traumas & possible outcomes & it is very sad.  However, their "Bible" & their "messiah" regarding my circumstances conclude there is little to no chance for trauma - that her age & our circumstances have no history of causing trauma.  Again - some people are ready & others are not - it needs to be case by case.

[Josh]

You can be a registered sex offender for opening an email with kiddie porn in it. Even if you didn't request said email. Even if it was spam.

This is not an exaggeration.

Each case should be handled individually, for any accusation. There is no 'one size fits all' crime, or punishment.

DW, kudos for rethinking your position.

[K. Darien Freeheart]

I'm actually pleasantly surprised, there was a level of maturity and rationality I wasn't expecting. Thanks for thinking critically and being open to change, Digital Warrior.

I think it's crucial to respect the rights of those we disagree with. There wouldn't be anything important about protecting liberty if there were no threats to it. Every tyrrant in history has had " a really good cause".

Another thing to think about in terms of the sex offender issue is "mission creep". It began as a registry from really, really "bad people". Now that America has had ten years to acclimate to putting a portion of the population on a list and tracking their movements, demanding they check in with the government, it's expanded to other areas. In specific, New York City and Baltimore both have Gun Offender Registries and they're intentionally modeled after Megan's Law. Registered Gun Owners must update their address with the police when it changed, and 4 times a year even if it doesn't.

In Maryland, open carry without a permit it a gun crime. Just something to think about.

[dalebert]

I have changed my mind, and would like to say that I was wrong for suggesting that we not assist people convicted or accused of certain criminal acts...

Digital "belly full of humble pie" Warrior

Whaaaat?  
I don't even know how to react to that. There's no place on Internet forums for that kind of mature and open-minded attitude. We must ban you!  

[Fluff and Stuff]

Please do not come here.  I say again, Please do not come here.  Especially if you love the cause of the FSP and Limited Government.

Quite frankly, I do not want the FSP to help sex offenders move here.  I cannot imagine a better way to get the people here to be INCREDIBLY HOSTILE to us.

Tomorrow's Newspaper Article:

Free State Project arranging Sex Offender Moves to NH

In order to reach their stated goal of moving 20,000 government hating, law-detesting people to New Hampshire, they are reaching out to sex offenders.  On one Free-State Project related website, a man who was convicted of committing sexual assault on a minor was organizing help to move to New Hampshire.  ___________, a mother of a young child who lives in Manchester, near Porcupine row on elm street says, "I don't know why they want to bring baby rapists to attack children!  They should be marginalized politically!".  The police chief has said that there is nothing that he can do legally to prevent the Free State Project from organizing an effort to move sex offenders to New Hampshire, but that when the 80% of offenders who recommit their crimes on children here, they will be caught and arrested.

In fact, there is an organized effort by members of the FSP to start a chapter of an organization called "Reform Sex Offender Laws Now!", which opposes "vindictive" punishment of child rapists and is concerned with the shame the rapists feel.  _____________ of Protect our babies from kiddy diddlers, says "They do not have the right to talk about shame, they should imagine the shame that young victims feel after the vicious attacks of these predators.  These attacks haunt children for the rest of their lives, and the predator DARES to be concerned about vindictiveness.  These predators are evil and I cannot believe the Free State Project is supporting them".

____________ of the FSP denies having an official program to assist Child Predators moving to New Hampshire.  He did not mention "unofficial programs".

A. Hack
Newspaper Reporter and Sensationalist

See also:
http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080203/NEWS/80203007

This post does almost nothing to explain what this thread is about.  I honestly have no clue what you are talking about.  Please try to be more clear in the future.

[Sam A. Robrin]

In some states . . . a 15 year girl who takes nude pictures of herself and mails them to friends is now a sex offender! 

In at least one instance mentioned on FTL, the recipients were sex offenders!