Sarah's Law

Welcome to UKHIppy2764@2x.png

UKHippy is a long running online community and of likeminded people exploring all interpretations on what it means to be living an alternative lifestyle -- we welcome discussions on everything related to sustainability, the environment, alternative spirituality, music, festivals, politics and more -- membership of this website is free but supported by the community.

  • This thread was brought about by something mentioned in another part of the forum. I did not want to take that thread off topic so I have started another thread to discuss the issue.


    Sarah's law. If it is brought about how effective would it be?


    Personally I think Sarah's law would cause more problems than it would solve. It was a media knee jerk reaction to a really horrible murder. Children being kidnaped and sexually abused has been around for a very long time. Just that it has not been reported like it has in recent years.


    How many of you know the origin of the phrase "Sweet Fanny Adams". This phrase originates from a girl who was kidnapped and horribly murdered and most probably sexually abused aswell. This happened well over a hundered years ago. The killer responisble was caught and then sent to the gallows.


    The problems that Sarah's law would bring would be that it would only name convicted child sex offenders. There are many more people out there who have this sexual deviancy and have not been caught. This means there are more peadophiles out there than the authoritys know about. If you have a sexual deviancy like this you are not going to share it with just anybody.


    Most have probably been abused themselves as a child. Quite a few would probably be loners and not get much in the way of social contact, however and I must stress a big however my experience has been that there are a lot of people out there with this deviancy who are respectable members of the community and have families of their own.


    Sarah's law is a knee jerk reaction from the media. It will encourage vigilantism. It would also cause these people to be alienated from the community. Some of you may think that is a good idea, however it is the worst posible scenario. It will make it difficult for the police and security services to keep tabs on these people and it would encourage them to possibly take their sexual fantisies to new extremes.


    So Sarah's law good idea or bad? Discuss.


    Matt

  • I'm with you on this one - child abuse in all its forms must be tackled but this is certainly not the way to go about it.

  • A friend of mine was named n shamed in the local , papaer and he was innocent, the boy (15) admitted to lying eventually. but how many people know that now? who still see my friend (who is also gay) as a sex offender.

    I dont agree with Sarah's law, it has good intentio but i dont think it would solve anything.

  • i find it odd..you can post up pics of ASBO louts...but not of the evil slimeballs who pose a real threat to our kids...
    As much as i'd like to know where they are...i do think total chaos would ensue..the sad thing is, folks would attack the families of the sex offenders...and they are also innocent victims.
    something has to be done though...

  • I also agree, that while I would want to know those in my community, that have been proved to be known risk to children - it simply isn't a workable idea.


    As it has been said, if they know they are going to be under constant attack, then it increases the risk of them "disappearing" where they cannot be monitored by anyone. I think another worry could be that if everyone was focusing their attention towards known previous offenders (even if they are just hyper-aware of their movents, without any vigilantism being involved), then it may allow other, seemingly upstanding members of the community, to abuse or groom, without being noticed.


    The current system is far from perfect, as we often hear about re-offending of those already on the register. I don't know what the answer is (appart from a lifetime of imprionment or 24hr survaillance), but I don't think Sarahs Law provides a solution.


    Les x

  • Tricky isnt it.


    If their identity was known the local parents would harras them out (kinda understandably) or the local brains trust would torch them and their families :rolleyes: but that just breeds excuses for yet more state control and "we know best little serf" attitudes.....:rolleyes:



    Tis a sad fact that the foolish have been given space and support to breed (by a progressively supportive society) and as a result it now finds itself overrun by stupid folks who only serve as an excuse for greater govt control....


    So as a result of (compassionate) society being so damned affective at enabling the less intellectually enowed to breed and survive in general....effectively countering much of the way natural selection used to work.....it means such society then has a large proportion of such folks now making a big excuse for govt intervention....and so leaving sensible parents defenceless (except under the auspices of the state :rolleyes: )...

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • a new thing they are adding, or trying to is that a single parent who is having a relationship can have the guy checked to see if he is on the register.
    its a bit dammed if you do and dammed if you don't. in my job i speak to single and divorced mothers all the time and i think i probably get into double figures per year the mothers who are concerned that the step dad may find thier addy as they are moved away due to abuse. a small number when i maybe speak to 50 a day, but perhaps a preventable small number.

    i think aspects of megans law in the states where, for instance alerts go out on motorways signs if a child is missing, presumed snatched is excellent as acting quicker in these cases can only have positive results.

    i agree in principle with parts of sarahs law, but equally agree large parts are unworkable on a day to day level mostly due not to the offender but to the reaction of the public at large.
    i wish i had an answer.

  • Quote from scarlettdee


    As much as i'd like to know where they are...i do think total chaos would ensue..the sad thing is, folks would attack the families of the sex offenders...and they are also innocent victims.
    something has to be done though...



    the press manages to find these things out..

    a guy down the road from me, from a respectable family, 4 children who i'd gone to school with, the mother was a local teacher and they were all regular church-goers - suddenly, it was all over local papers how the guy had been grooming young boys over the internet and youth groups and had gone too far in some cses......
    So many people refused to believe it, despite the evidence from chatlogs and from victims... but he ended up in prison anyway.
    Anyway, my point was that no one attacked his family - the opposite in fact, everyone was really nice to them because obviously that's a lot for his kids to feel as well, and people started making accusations about whether he'd done anything to his son or not... so they were being nice, or at least had good-intentions... but for the family's sake, i agree it would be best to keep a closed door as they don't need everyone to know - but i don't see why anyone would attack them, they're suffering too :\

    we reenact Noah's ancient drama, but in reverse, like a film running backwards, the animals exiting

  • Supposedly there is a sex offender known or unknown 100 yards from where you sit at any given time. So knowing where a few are, is not going to solve anything. Look after your kids, know where they are and don't let them go to areas that are far flung and not supervised.

    Quote


    So as a result of (compassionate) society being so damned affective at enabling the less intellectually enowed to breed and survive in general....effectively countering much of the way natural selection used to work.....it means such society then has a large proportion of such folks now making a big excuse for govt intervention....and so leaving sensible parents defenceless (except under the auspices of the state :rolleyes: )...



    You my friend are crazy...

  • Or we could start giving children a decent sexual education from an earlier age... it works in Scotland. Teach our children about 'grooming' and suspect adult behaviour in a way they can understand. The saddest thing about sexual assalt against children is that they usualy know and trust their abusers. Random attacks are rare, so keeping your child close by and supervised may not help. I also think that its fooking disgusting that our children cannot enjoy the freedoms that we did as children...but hey thats the death of community for you!

  • Quote from tekno slave

    Or we could start giving children a decent sexual education from an earlier age... it works in Scotland. Teach our children about 'grooming' and suspect adult behaviour in a way they can understand. The saddest thing about sexual assalt against children is that they usualy know and trust their abusers. Random attacks are rare, so keeping your child close by and supervised may not help. I also think that its fooking disgusting that our children cannot enjoy the freedoms that we did as children...but hey thats the death of community for you!




    I agree it's important to make children aware of the dangers... but I dunno, it strikes me as slightly cynical, telling young children that people are out to get them! (even if it's true :mad: )

    we reenact Noah's ancient drama, but in reverse, like a film running backwards, the animals exiting

  • Quote from elfqueenofrohan

    I agree it's important to make children aware of the dangers... but I dunno, it strikes me as slightly cynical, telling young children that people are out to get them! (even if it's true :mad: )


    Can see how you'd feel that way, but it can be handeled in an appropriate way, not so much 'there are evil fuckers out there', more 'this is your body'. Explaining basic sexual education from a much earlier age would help as well, then connections between the childs personal space and sexual behaviour can be made from a point of view centered on the childs perspective.... knoweledge is power!

  • Quote from tekno slave

    Can see how you'd feel that way, but it can be handeled in an appropriate way, not so much 'there are evil fuckers out there', more 'this is your body'. Explaining basic sexual education from a much earlier age would help as well, then connections between the childs personal space and sexual behaviour can be made from a point of view centered on the childs perspective.... knoweledge is power!


    Might stop so many chavs from getting knocked up at 12 as well...

  • Quote from Barefoot_Surfer

    Most have probably been abused themselves as a child.



    No offence, but im getting sick and tired of that excuse being bandied about!!! Not every {edited for decency} has been abused, lots of them are just sick and twisted!!!

    As for this law, i agree, lots of hot air. If you have a weed in your garden, you pull it out!!

    Sorted!!

  • Quote from Exedous

    No offence, but im getting sick and tired of that excuse being bandied about!!! Not every {edited for decency} has been abused, lots of them are just sick and twisted!!!

    Researched it, have you? Care to explain how you arrived at that conclusion?

    Quote

    As for this law, i agree, lots of hot air. If you have a weed in your garden, you pull it out!!

    Sorted!!

    Another thought-provoking opinion there. I can see you've really looked at that one from all angles. :rolleyes:

  • Quote from elfqueenofrohan

    I agree it's important to make children aware of the dangers... but I dunno, it strikes me as slightly cynical, telling young children that people are out to get them! (even if it's true :mad: )


    It's only really adding to the awareness campaigns that have been around for years.........we were all taught the dangers of getting into cars with strangers, being warned not to except sweets and not go off to see some puppies or kittens.......I know at the time I didn't question exactly what could happen if I did any of these things - just that someone would be taking me away from my parents.


    I think I imgined that they wanted to take me to live with them, rather than they would do bad things with me (thinking primary school age here). The thought that I wouldn't see my mam and dad again was enough for me to realise it was important. I think we can give kids more information on how to protect themselves, without having to rob them of their innocence at the same time.


    Les x

  • Well said! How can a law such as 'Sarahs law' actually help parents to protect their children. Laws like that do nothing more than fuel anger and hatred, which at the end of the day, is not helping the situation.

  • Quote from Atomik

    Researched it, have you? Care to explain how you arrived at that conclusion?



    I read him as saying 'not every'.. i don't think any deep research needs to be done into that conclusion.

  • Quote from Atomik

    Yeah. "Sick and twisted" is a commonly used [strikethrough]Daily Mail[/strikethrough] scientific term. :rolleyes:


    To be fair its a commonly used colloquialism regardless of which media take it up.

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Quote from Coyote

    To be fair its a commonly used colloquialism regardless of which media take it up.

    "Commonly used colloquialisms" are more often used by the right-wing media because they're frequently gross simplifications that arise from popular prejudice, thus making them ideally suited for pandering to the base instincts of the masses.

  • Quote from Atomik

    "Commonly used colloquialisms" are more often used by the right-wing media because they're frequently gross simplifications that arise from popular prejudice, thus making them ideally suited for pandering to the base instincts of the masses.


    "Researched it, have you? Care to explain how you arrived at that conclusion?" :whistle:


    I really dont like this superiority battle through language that we find today; as if everything should be answered by some scientist and regular experience is somehow not allowed - its heading for a form of totalitarianism when only the official methodology is sanctioned....

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Quote from Atomik

    Do you have anything resembling an actual point, or are you just being argumentative to pass the time again?


    My point is that calling people up on "not having official research" rarely gets us anywhere on a discussion board; its not a social science peer-review journal, its an informal discussion board. Express an opinion, but dont call folks up if they dont have a bibliography of data beyond a few years simple experience and personal impressions. :)

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Quote from Coyote

    My point is that calling people up on "not having official research" rarely gets us anywhere on a discussion board

    I agree. But nor does posting ignorant rants without even so much as a rational argument to back up that position.


    Quote

    but dont call folks up if they dont have a bibliography of data beyond a few years simple experience and personal impressions. :)

    If they actually argue their point rather than just posting ignorant rants, I won't pull 'em up. ;)

  • Quote from Atomik

    I agree. But nor does posting ignorant rants without even so much as a rational argument to back up that position.


    If they actually argue their point rather than just posting ignorant rants, I won't pull 'em up. ;)


    Perhaps they are posting an opinion rather than an "ignornant rant". Stating their position and view; which they dont owe anyone a justification of unless it strays into "skinning niggers is fun" or similar.


    Perchance lighten up a little dude ;) :D



    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."

  • Quote from Atomik

    Yeah. "Sick and twisted" is a commonly used [strikethrough]Daily Mail[/strikethrough] scientific term. :rolleyes:



    I was talking about ''not every'' . His choice of words after that can be questioned [if you like] . I just thought you were talking about that ''not every'' person was abused. ''Sick and twisted'' is what they are , what would YOU call people that like to sexually abuse kids ?. Ok i'll call people like that ''deeply disturbed''. Is that any better ?.

  • What next? Fuckwit ex's become "relationship casualties" because they never learned to not be fuckwits? :rolleyes:

    "The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do."