gripe of the day

On 5 Jul 2004 22:41:35 -0700, (Karen O'Mara) wrote:

"denanson" Dennis@Large .ie wrote in message ...

OK then, I'll call it paranoid.

At some point, it comes down to trusting someone, really. There's a
lot more sex offenders that aren't registered in the world.

Everyday we trust a doctor to make decisions on our health, we trust
the neighbors where our kids are playing, we trust our heart when
forming relationships, we trust the coaches, the teachers, the
caregivers, the priests and every once in a while, someone slips
through and causes harm. But, you still have to trust people at the
bottom line all the time. It's a part of life (as in living).

heck, even the people we marry could end up being the axe murderer,
and have never murdered before... you know?

Sure. But when there's a resource out there, free, and available, that
could, even remotely with the click of a mouse, provide a little bit
of help, and it's actively ignored, that's not a failure of trust.
It's a choice to ignore availabie information.

I think it's paranoid, too.

Well, your kid probably wasn't abducted on her way to school and raped
in handcuffs for four and a half hours. From experience, I see a lot
of things as caution, that I might earlier have seen as paranoid. If
that one check on the offenders' list DID show up a problem, would it
be paranoid then?

Cele

On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 15:31:18 GMT, 'Kate
wrote:

On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 06:17:32 GMT, Cele

On 5 Jul 2004 22:41:35 -0700, (Karen O'Mara) wrote:

"denanson" Dennis@Large .ie wrote in message ...

OK then, I'll call it paranoid.

At some point, it comes down to trusting someone, really. There's a
lot more sex offenders that aren't registered in the world.

Everyday we trust a doctor to make decisions on our health, we trust
the neighbors where our kids are playing, we trust our heart when
forming relationships, we trust the coaches, the teachers, the
caregivers, the priests and every once in a while, someone slips
through and causes harm. But, you still have to trust people at the
bottom line all the time. It's a part of life (as in living).

heck, even the people we marry could end up being the axe murderer,
and have never murdered before... you know?

Sure. But when there's a resource out there, free, and available, that
could, even remotely with the click of a mouse, provide a little bit
of help, and it's actively ignored, that's not a failure of trust.
It's a choice to ignore availabie information.

I think it's paranoid, too.

Well, your kid probably wasn't abducted on her way to school and raped
in handcuffs for four and a half hours. From experience, I see a lot
of things as caution, that I might earlier have seen as paranoid. If
that one check on the offenders' list DID show up a problem, would it
be paranoid then?

Cele


I think the adage, "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure"
applies. Not checking the database because they're all criminals would
be paranoid thinking. It can't be paranoid if the desire behind the
behavior is to increase trust or intimacy with another person. Paranoid
people are incapable of trust.

'Kate

Right on.

Cele

Cele wrote in message . ..
Well, your kid probably wasn't abducted on her way to school and raped
in handcuffs for four and a half hours. From experience, I see a lot
of things as caution, that I might earlier have seen as paranoid. If
that one check on the offenders' list DID show up a problem, would it
be paranoid then?

Oh my gosh, no, my kid wasn't abducted and so on... was yours? I'm so
sorry to hear this... did you have to go through this? Or, was this an
extreme example just to point this out?

My point is that when we get to the point of trusting someone, we've
probably done a lot of personal investigating in different ways. We're
introduced, or meet someone at work or church, we ask questions, we
trust our instinct... we're not going to introduce our kids to someone
who we haven't put through our own personal test first.

You can't move away from potential problem. The list of sex offenders
or criminals in general saturates every neighborhood. And, when you
let go and trust someone, no list is going to help. There's always the
first offender.

Karen

On 6 Jul 2004 10:38:05 -0700, (Karen O'Mara) wrote:

Cele wrote in message . ..
Well, your kid probably wasn't abducted on her way to school and raped
in handcuffs for four and a half hours. From experience, I see a lot
of things as caution, that I might earlier have seen as paranoid. If
that one check on the offenders' list DID show up a problem, would it
be paranoid then?

Oh my gosh, no, my kid wasn't abducted and so on... was yours? I'm so
sorry to hear this... did you have to go through this? Or, was this an
extreme example just to point this out?

Yes, my kid was abducted and so on, and yes we're still going through
it, and while it may be an extreme example, it's a real life one.

My point is that when we get to the point of trusting someone, we've
probably done a lot of personal investigating in different ways. We're
introduced, or meet someone at work or church, we ask questions, we
trust our instinct... we're not going to introduce our kids to someone
who we haven't put through our own personal test first.

Sure. But those instincts can be wrong. Since my daughter's abduction
I've spent a helluva lot of time reading and learning about these
people and they are *deliberately deceptive*. It's what they *do*.
They can be extremely skilled at convincing people who do not think as
they do, that they are trustworthy and honest and so forth. A very
great many parents of children who have been molested are *stunned* to
discover that 'such a lovely man' (it can be a woman, but
statistically it's far more likely to be a man) could even 'think of
such a thing.'

As for meeting them at church....churches, schools, scouts, and
*single parents* are their hunting grounds. That's where you find
parents trusting people. That's where you find kids expecting to
accept authority. Don't take my word for it. Read up on it. Here are
two well researched, thoroughly referenced books on the subject:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books

Bothh of these books are written by experienced people and quote
**offenders themselves** about their strategies, methods, and thought
patterns.

You can't move away from potential problem.

You can to a degree, in that, if you happen, as I did, to be living in
a place with five times the national sexual assault rate, you can
reconsider your choice of location. But whether you do that or not,
you're right, there are predators in all communities. So you take
other precautions. Checking the sex offender registry is quick, easy,
painless and costs nothing. Why would you NOT avail yourself of
helpful free information that might protect your child, however
unlikely the need? I can tell you from direct personal experience,
that when the situation occurs with YOUR child, you don't CARE any
more how unlikely it was.

The list of sex offenders
or criminals in general saturates every neighborhood. And, when you
let go and trust someone, no list is going to help.

If you check the list and the person's on it and you trust them
anyway, then you're right, you're beyond help. If you check the list
and they're not on it you then use all of the other ways we all use to
judge for yourself, and you might be right or you might be wrong. But
if you *don't* check the list and he *is* on it and you trust him
*without* that information, you've trusted someone who stands a good
chance of harming your child, and the information was there to protect
that child, and you chose not to access it.

Lucky for me, I didn't make any decisions like that that I have to
live with now. I would hate like hell to add that to the already
incredibly challenging current situation.

There's always the
first offender.

And because of that, you would choose not to access available
information to protect your child against repeat offenders?

The fact that there are *other* risks doesn't make it reasonable to
choose not to protect your child from *known* risks.

Cele

"Cele" wrote in message
...
On 6 Jul 2004 10:38:05 -0700, (Karen O'Mara) wrote:
snip

The list of sex offenders
or criminals in general saturates every neighborhood. And, when you
let go and trust someone, no list is going to help.

If you check the list and the person's on it and you trust them
anyway, then you're right, you're beyond help.

I was in agreement up to here.......unfortunately (at least in Mich) the
sex offeneders list has become so 'all inclusive" that it has become
meaningless...(I don't know if it is part of guvmint's attempt at creating
hysteria or just plain incompetecy.) Included on the list (for 25 years)
are kids that were caught having consensual sex with their girlfriends who
were under 16, people caught urinating in public (charge with indecent
exposure) etc. etc. While the "list" idea is good, it has become rather
menaingless (at least here) in terms of deciding if someone is truely
dangerous to the community.

If you check the list
and they're not on it you then use all of the other ways we all use to
judge for yourself, and you might be right or you might be wrong. But
if you *don't* check the list and he *is* on it and you trust him
*without* that information, you've trusted someone who stands a good
chance of harming your child, and the information was there to protect
that child, and you chose not to access it.

Lucky for me, I didn't make any decisions like that that I have to
live with now. I would hate like hell to add that to the already
incredibly challenging current situation.

There's always the
first offender.

And because of that, you would choose not to access available
information to protect your child against repeat offenders?

The fact that there are *other* risks doesn't make it reasonable to
choose not to protect your child from *known* risks.

Cele

Everyday we trust a doctor to make decisions on our health

And I make sure he's qualified to make those decisions...

we trust
the neighbors where our kids are playing,

And I make sure I know as much about my neighbors as possible

we trust our heart when
forming relationship

Know, I use my mind and my common sense, too many people make dangerous and
foolish decisions on emotion only.


, we trust the coaches, the teachers, the
caregivers, the priests

All of whom in many states are required to have background checks, I suppose
you think that's paranoid...

very once in a while, someone slips
through and causes harm.

That's right, you can't prevent all harm, but that doesn't mean you take what
precautions are available to you.

It's a part of life (as in living).

And taking precautions is all part of being responsible, unfortunately too many
people don't think responsiblity is an important part of life anymore.
Fortunately, I don't base my decisions on what most people think.


I think it's paranoid, too.

Well if it makes you feel better to label people who make different decisions
than you....

Joelle
The world is a book and those who do not travel read only one page - St
Augustine
Joelle

I was in agreement up to here.......unfortunately (at least in Mich) the
sex offeneders list has become so 'all inclusive"

Well that might be a problem when it comes to trying to get a job, but we were
originally talkinga bout dating. If you are on that list, I'm not going out
with you...even if it meant you got in trouble when you were 16. Sorry.
Limiting the dating list is a small price to pay for protecting your children.

Joelle
The world is a book and those who do not travel read only one page - St
Augustine
Joelle

"Joelle" wrote in message
...
I was in agreement up to here.......unfortunately (at least in Mich)
the
sex offeneders list has become so 'all inclusive"

Well that might be a problem when it comes to trying to get a job, but we
were
originally talkinga bout dating. If you are on that list, I'm not going
out
with you...even if it meant you got in trouble when you were 16. Sorry.
Limiting the dating list is a small price to pay for protecting your
children.

I think that it is incredibly silly to assume that someone, who at the age
of 16, had sex with a girl that was 15, and resulting in being on a sex
offender list for the next 25 years is protecting your kids. THAT is the
problem whne guvmint gets out of control.......the REAL offenders get to hid
in the forest of those that are not. THe hysteria created by these mythical
numbers does more harm than good.


Joelle
The world is a book and those who do not travel read only one page - St
Augustine
Joelle

"P.Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Joelle" wrote in message
...
I was in agreement up to here.......unfortunately (at least in Mich)
the
sex offeneders list has become so 'all inclusive"

Well that might be a problem when it comes to trying to get a job, but
we
were
originally talkinga bout dating. If you are on that list, I'm not going
out
with you...even if it meant you got in trouble when you were 16. Sorry.
Limiting the dating list is a small price to pay for protecting your
children.

I think that it is incredibly silly to assume that someone, who at the age
of 16, had sex with a girl that was 15, and resulting in being on a sex
offender list for the next 25 years is protecting your kids. THAT is the
problem whne guvmint gets out of control.......the REAL offenders get to
hid
in the forest of those that are not. THe hysteria created by these
mythical
numbers does more harm than good.




Well, I am sure if a dated a guy and it happen to be on the list, I probably
won't date him long enough to find out the truth. Gov. gets out of control
in countless situations, don't you think? They set their 'guideline's and go
with it and that sounds like what has happen in regards to this list.

I think this list could be helpful though. How does one find out who all
makes it on their state list?

T

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

"P.Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Joelle" wrote in message
...
I was in agreement up to here.......unfortunately (at least in Mich)
the
sex offeneders list has become so 'all inclusive"

Well that might be a problem when it comes to trying to get a job, but
we
were
originally talkinga bout dating. If you are on that list, I'm not
going
out
with you...even if it meant you got in trouble when you were 16.
Sorry.
Limiting the dating list is a small price to pay for protecting your
children.

I think that it is incredibly silly to assume that someone, who at the
age
of 16, had sex with a girl that was 15, and resulting in being on a sex
offender list for the next 25 years is protecting your kids. THAT is
the
problem whne guvmint gets out of control.......the REAL offenders get to
hid
in the forest of those that are not. THe hysteria created by these
mythical
numbers does more harm than good.




Well, I am sure if a dated a guy and it happen to be on the list, I
probably
won't date him long enough to find out the truth. Gov. gets out of control
in countless situations, don't you think? They set their 'guideline's and
go
with it and that sounds like what has happen in regards to this list.

I am just reacting to the Mich. one, there has been a lot of press recently
about how absurd it is.


I think this list could be helpful though. How does one find out who all
makes it on their state list?

T