Julia Tuttle Causeway sex offender colony

[pacmansays]

Beneath the titled highway in Miami lives a colony of people; all convicted sex offenders.

These people all live there because of laws where sex offenders can live doesn't allow them any other place to go. This colony has existed since 2006 where it is nothing more than a shanty town constructed out of disused wood, cardboard boxes and tents.

The local government doesn't seem to object to this colony: prisoners released are having their address registered as this causeway, the department of corrections checks every day to see if everyone is there and it has been found released offenders are told to go to the colony or face more jail time.

Now, when talking to my friends I seemed to be the only person who actually had an issue with this. They all thought 'good, they deserve it', but I was shocked by this and their responses. Despite the actions these men have committed they are still people are deserve the rights to running water, shelter and food. They may have caused suffering but the treatment of them will not undo what has occurred, it will only cause more suffering.

Anyway, would like to know whether people think that they have the right to a home or should they be forced to live there?

 

[Crimson King]

Now, when talking to my friends I seemed to be the only person who actually had an issue with this. They all thought 'good, they deserve it', but I was shocked by this and their responses. Despite the actions these men have committed they are still people are deserve the rights to running water, shelter and food. They may have caused suffering but the treatment of them will not undo what has occurred, it will only cause more suffering.

Anyway, would like to know whether people think that they have the right to a home or should they be forced to live there?

Why should they deserve any of that? They either ***** a woman or man, assaulted/***** a child, or something much, much worse. They deprived their victims of the right to not get ***** or killed, so they deserve nothing.

 

[SuSa]

Almost certain in my state you can become a registered sex offender for urinating in public.

So we should be denying them the same things we are denying pedophiles/rapists? Honestly, I've had those moments where I just can't hold it in, and the only bathroom nearby is a liquor store that I had to buy something from, or something.

 

[CRASHiC]

This does not simply retain to England, and can be found in the States as well.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104150499

The bigger issue here is the formation of the criminal cast.

Imagine this situation. You are a sex offender, you go to jail, you serve your time. You finally make it out on parole. During your time in prison, your debts have stacked up, while your income has not. All ready we see you at in finance trouble, but wait, there is more. There is a sex offender registration fee that cost 250 dollars. You also must pay parole, and the chances of you finding a job are rare, much less a job, or even jobs, that can pay to meet your now staggering cost. Jobs require you fill out an address and put a phone number. Without a phone number or proper adress, you will not be able to find a job. Two things happen from here. Either you steal to pay your debts, or you fail to pay parole and end up back in prison.

Why would our government allow such a system to happen where it is nearly impossible for someone who has committed a crime to regain a proper place in society?

http://albionmonitor.com/9702a/prisonboom.html

The orange collar collar is the new slave class of the united states.

Of course, there is the argument that once a criminal has committed a crime, he has chosen to give up his rights by infringing upon the rights of others.
I don't really have a true reply to this. Perhaps someone else can provide a reason to why sex offenders should not be forced slave labor, other than most sexual disorders are generally beyond control, and steam from deep rooted sexual problems in childhood.

 

[Crimson King]

Almost certain in my state you can become a registered sex offender for urinating in public.

So we should be denying them the same things we are denying pedophiles/rapists? Honestly, I've had those moments where I just can't hold it in, and the only bathroom nearby is a liquor store that I had to buy something from, or something.

That is certainly not the case in every state because I know people who have been fined for public urination. Here, for sure, it's just a small fine. Several other states are like that.

 

[Aesir]

Why should they deserve any of that? They either ***** a woman or man, assaulted/***** a child, or something much, much worse. They deprived their victims of the right to not get ***** or killed, so they deserve nothing.

Here's somethings I found wrong in your post, I'm sure there are more but this is at first glance.

Living in less then 3rd world country conditions is a violation of their rights that every American has criminal or not. Even as a criminal you have rights, not as many as citizen but you still have them. These types of conditions violates the 8th of amendment of excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.

Secondly your post assumes we let sex offenders who have killed their victims out on the streets. Unless the law has became excessively relaxed since I last checked if you kill a person you're not getting out. So saying "They deprived their victims the right of not getting ***** or killed, so they deserve nothing." Is really an argument out of emotion, you're to have us believe these people ***** and killed men, woman, and even children and were then set free? That's not how our legal system works. If you kill someone you're more then likely never getting out of prison.

Furthermore once you pay your debt to society the act of punishment should be over, so extending their punishment to living conditions which resemble something you'd see out of world war 2 movie doesn't constitute as justice.

 

[Firus]

I agree with Aesir. While I don't think many of the crimes that make one a sex offender are small, and I do not condone them in any way, not every crime that makes you a sex offender makes you a horrible person. Statutory **** also falls into that category, and while it isn't always a forgivable crime, theoretically two people could have a sexual relationship before age 18 and one of them turns 18 before the other -- then if they have sex that makes them a sex offender. It's no less of a crime, but I wouldn't say that doing something like that means you should have to live in horrible conditions for the remainder of your life.

Also, killing may be committed along with a crime that qualifies one as a sex offender, but killing itself is not a sexual offense, so it shouldn't be counted in a punishment explicitly for sex offenders, it can just stack up on the punishment.

As Aesir explained, the jail time, etc. one pays that is sentenced by the court is the punishment. If the person is to be punished for life, then sex offenders should be given a life sentence instead of being given a smaller sentence and then given a larger one in reality with their horrible living conditions.

In all likelihood, a regular sex offender would not receive life from their trial. If the criminal justice system isn't giving a life sentence, I'm not really sure why it's to be decided that they should be given one anyways.

 

[illinialex24]

Its interesting though, some children who are so called "sexting" are charged with aiding child pornography, even though they are sending pictures of themselves, and as a result they can become sex offenders. Even though they did absolutely nothing to others.

So if it is a conviction for ****, yeah, they don't deserve anything, but if its something like sending pictures of you and your 15, even though its dumb, you shouldnt have to live in a colony for it.

 

[Riddle]

We don't have the right to force people into conditions like this. However, as much as I'm opposed to this on principle, I must consider this and you should too: If you owned an apartment building/trailer park/whatever, would you allow a conviced sexual offender live alongside other innocent people and yourself? Unless you can truly answer this as a yes, then you can't expect others to. People out of jail after having been in jail for a long time can't afford houses or anything like that, and noone would let them in to their apartment building/whatever, and this just transfers to what Crash said.

Therefore, I think the thing we need to fix is what qualifies you as a sex offeneder(no s.o. in this post). Sexting should not make you a s.o. Minor crimes should not force someone to give up their lives and be reduced to homlessness and stealing.

 

[pacmansays]

See here's the thing

They have done the time for their crime and they are prohibited from being a certain distance from children, so why should we then want these people to live in these conditions unless its an emotional response? And any good law system cannot be judge by people's emotional responses.

They are now citizens and deserve the basic rights any citizen has, I will never condone what they did but I believe that every human being deserves the same basic rights. They are people suffering and they may be people who have commited a terrible act but they are still people; anyone suffering is a bad thing

 

[FearTheMateria]

My opinion is this:

People who are registered sex offenders aren't always guilty. There were some cases in which the man/woman accused were entirely innocent, but the court system ruled against them from a funky emotional appeal. Also, like SuSa was trying to point out, there are some ridiculous ways to be arrested for a sex offence. Some states DO arrest and register for public urination. Maybe not in your state, Crimson, but in most states, it can be counted for indecent exposure, then you are all-of-the-sudden locked away with a scar on your permanent criminal record.

Now, for the people that were innocent/put away on a ridiculous charge, a punishment like that is a bit harsh, don't you think?

For the people that are guilty:
Sure, they did the crime, they got locked up for it, served prison food, potentially *****, wore a specific sex offender color so people know what they did, and come out of prison for the jobs to refuse them and living life just a tad out of their price range. What do you do with that?

I ask this question:
Should this sex-offender colony be further punishment to those who are repeat offenders, or should the first time be enough to take them away forever. (please consider those innocent or put away for a charge that was over-exaggerated.)

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

I agree with CK.

They don't deserve anything more. You may think me cold-hearted, etc. but did they give their victims a chance? Most likely not.

So why should we give them a chance?
You don't want them in jail, they can **** people there.

It may be harsh, but it was also harsh for them to sexually assault unwilling victims. **** can ruin people's lives.

 

[illinialex24]

I whole heartedly agree with FearTheMateria, because we need better standards before you we can have completely decripit conditions for those.

A rapist is scum, and because he gave no chance, and he showed no self restraint, he should not have really an equal life but there is the whole issue of what should make you a sex offender.

 

[pacmansays]

LOL guess I'm the only one who thinks they deserve better than that

 

[Aesir]

I agree with CK.

They don't deserve anything more. You may think me cold-hearted, etc. but did they give their victims a chance? Most likely not.

No but our justice system doesn't care about emotional appeals, They already served their debt to society. Are you to seriously tell me that after someone serves time for a crime it's completely reasonable for them to be placed in 3rd world living conditions?

So why should we give them a chance?
You don't want them in jail, they can **** people there.

Chances are they were probably ***** in jail, especially if they were child rapists.

It may be harsh, but it was also harsh for them to sexually assault unwilling victims. **** can ruin people's lives.

Their life has already been ruined by being labeled a sex offender; It's harder to get a job, you're restricted on where you can live, in some states you can't even drive a car. Now you think they should be locked away after serving their time in living conditions you wouldn't even let your dog live in? What the hell is this Russia?

What everyone seems to be forgetting is these people have paid their debt to society, but apparently that isn't enough.

 

[CRASHiC]

I have to leave right now, but two things I'll touch on later.

My lover was molested by her grandfather, even she didn't want him to rot in jail.
Pedofillia is a uncontrollable mental disorder, and many pedofillias have asked for castration.

 

[FearTheMateria]

Their life has already been ruined by being labeled a sex offender; It's harder to get a job, you're restricted on where you can live, in some states you can't even drive a car. Now you think they should be locked away after serving their time in living conditions you wouldn't even let your dog live in? What the hell is this Russia?

What everyone seems to be forgetting is these people have paid their debt to society, but apparently that isn't enough.

Yes, this is a good point. I say that the penalties given to these people after they are registered is what causes them to repeat the offence; sure they have more-than-likely done something extremely terrible, but we should be rehabilitating those who do this, not further dragging them into the mud.

 

[illinialex24]

As if to emphasize the point, the ads for this page for me recently became:

Do sex offenders live in YOUR neighborhood?

And its got a picture of someone likely about to prey on a blond woman.

Kinda sketchy huh.

 

[pacmansays]

Yes, this is a good point. I say that the penalties given to these people after they are registered is what causes them to repeat the offence; sure they have more-than-likely done something extremely terrible, but we should be rehabilitating those who do this, not further dragging them into the mud.

Yes I agree, we should house them in a place where they can stay and hopefully be treated until they become a safe member of society (for some cases).

They still deserve the same basic human rights as everyone else and deserve the chance to earn their place back in society

 

[Riddle]

I think before this can be debated and we can come up with a good answer, our nation needs to narrow the identification of sex offenders. I understand with people who don't give registered sex offenders food/lodging. Most sex offenders have committed a crime against society, and, very likely, destroyed somebody's life or even the lives of many. However, the inherent problem with allowing this is that you can be registered as a sex offender for way too many things. Sexting and public urination should not be punished as harshly as a ****, and while it isn't in prison, often in society they are treated exactly the same. Would you have a public urinator be treated the same as a rapist in society (unable to find a place to live/can't get jobs) just because they are a registered sex offender?

This is why our countries need to start differentiating. If we were to make only ***** and other equally awful things qualify as a sex offense then we could be more able to argue this. With this arrangement I still wouldn't support forcing these people to be homeless, but I would rahter do that than force apartment owners/whatever to give sex offenders a place to live or companies a place to work around other employees.

 

[SkylerOcon]

I think before this can be debated and we can come up with a good answer, our nation needs to narrow the identification of sex offenders. I understand with people who don't give registered sex offenders food/lodging. Most sex offenders have committed a crime against society, and, very likely, destroyed somebody's life or even the lives of many. However, the inherent problem with allowing this is that you can be registered as a sex offender for way too many things. Sexting and public urination should not be punished as harshly as a ****, and while it isn't in prison, often in society they are treated exactly the same. Would you have a public urinator be treated the same as a rapist in society (unable to find a place to live/can't get jobs) just because they are a registered sex offender?

I agree a lot with what you said here, particularly with sexting. I don't do it, but I know a few of my friends do, and if they get caught, I know they'll be charged with child pornography (and hence become a sex offender). That's completely bull**** - a 16 year old sending naked pictures to another 16 year old isn't CP. It's being a ******* teen.

This is why our countries need to start differentiating. If we were to make only ***** and other equally awful things qualify as a sex offense then we could be more able to argue this. With this arrangement I still wouldn't support forcing these people to be homeless, but I would rahter do that than force apartment owners/whatever to give sex offenders a place to live or companies a place to work around other employees.

Thought I hate the idea of the government forcing people to do things, this really is the only way to help sex offenders recover. After they've been dragged into the dirt and branded for life, having a hard time finding a place to live and a place to work just will not work out well for them. I suppose that the government forcing people to do things is bad, but they most definitely need to try and help sex offenders get back on their feet.

 

[Riddle]

Once we have narrowed down the category of sex offenders to people who have done something truly bad then we need to find some way to get them jobs and find them places to live. Sex offenders are going to have a very hard time getting these by themselves, so thats where the government comes in. First, we need to find some sort of psychiatric help for registered sex offenders, and there should also be a way to at leasst temporarilty give them housing, probably all together in a certain area. Then, They should be given some kind of job away from any sort of person they could ****/whatever. Jobs that are mostly done in solitude (truck driver or something) are ideal. Once the sex offenders are up on their feet they should continue to be monitored (electronic tags?) and allowed to go free.

This could be a part of their sentencing for all you people who say that they have paid their debt to society.

 

[GoldShadow]

What about sex offender rehabilitation rates? I think it is important to look at data on whether, once reintegrated into society, most sex offenders become productive members versus how many will repeat their crimes. I don't have the numbers off hand, but I think they are important to consider.

Is their reintegration into society worth the risk that they may commit crimes again (whatever that risk may be)? Can the risk be minimized with psychiatric intervention? How many sex offenders respond well to psychiatric measures, and how many stay on the wagon in terms of taking meds and doing therapy?

 

[Riddle]

What about sex offender rehabilitation rates? I think it is important to look at data on whether, once reintegrated into society, most sex offenders become productive members versus how many will repeat their crimes. I don't have the numbers off hand, but I think they are important to consider.

Here you go. In 2002 a study involving rehabilitation of sex offenders showed a recidivism rate of 17.3 percent for untreated offenders, compared with 9.9 percent for rehabilitated offenders.

Is their reintegration into society worth the risk that they may commit crimes again (whatever that risk may be)? Can the risk be minimized with psychiatric intervention? How many sex offenders respond well to psychiatric measures, and how many stay on the wagon in terms of taking meds and doing therapy?

While of course there are risks of reintegrating sex offenders into society, I don't see any other solution. Once sex offenders have done their time in prison and we've done all that we can to rehabilitate them we really have no other option but to let them go, they've paid their debts to society and the chances of recidivism is relatively low.