[Sarihah]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gethane Perhaps a review of the Bill of Rights might be helpful for some folks that don't seem to grasp their full implication? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...#Transcription I actually don't have a problem with the family suing. They are working within the law. The law will have to determine if a convicted child molester is a nuisance. And I have ZERO sympathy for child molesters. But I could NOT let that statement go unchallenged.

There are two sets of conflicting interests in this situation. The child molester's right to live in his brother's house, and the children's right to play in their own backyard with some degree of security. I say, the kid's rights trump the child molester's rights. Let him go live in a retirement community; he has no business living around kids in the first place.

 

[Sarihah]

I said 'some degree of security', not to imply that by removing known sexual offenders you are guaranteed of your child's safety, but it's a start.

People who live near a sexual predator (as I do) know that when you tell your child to stay away from this particular person, you frighten them very much. It's one thing for a child to know that some people might hurt children, but that this one person DOES hurt children is something else altogether.

Children, being the weakest members of our society, need the most protection. I opt for protecting them over protecting child molesters. While we may all be diligent parents, there are a lot of parents who aren't, not to mention many immigrants who don't understand the dangers of urban life. (I have a lot of that in my neighborhood.) For a child molester to live in a neighborhood like mine is like setting a kid lose in a candy store and telling him, 'No candy.'

 

[Sarihah]

Quote:

Originally Posted by townmouse "a neighborhood like mine" But there are children everywhere. To say that an offender can't live in a neighborhood with 100 children, but may live in a neighborhood that only has 3 children, is to say that the 3 are not as precious as the 100. IMO. Not a real solution.

I didn't mean it the way you took it. In my neighborhood, there are many preschool children wandering the street and alley areas alone. Their families are from the middle east, where this is not uncommon. I've never lived anywhere else that had so many very young children wandering unsupervised and at considerable distances from their homes. The mothers of these children frequently don't know where they are, or if they are inside someone else's house playing. They often go down the street, pounding on doors, looking for their children.

 

[Sarihah]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lolov YIKES Sarihah! I would be so much more worried about this situation for many reasons OTHER than child molesters!! Can you have a "community meeting" and explain how dangerous it is to allow your small kids to roam freely without supervision in this country?? I feel terrible for those parents... I'm assuming they are simply unaware... if they are negligent, then I'd just be pissed :LOL

I really don't think it's negligence, I think it's a cultural thing. These people just don't seem to be able to understand how many risks their children face when they are wandering the neighborhood alone. They'll send a 4 year old out with a 3 year old, and it seems that they feel that they have an older child supervising the younger one, so it's okay.

I've tried talking to some of these mothers when they come to my door, but they got mad. I wasn't coming from a judgemental place, but from a place of, 'this is some important information'. One lady told me that she doesn't need me to tell her what to do. I tried to explain that I wasn't telling her what to do, but only wanted her to know that for small children to roam the neighborhood is dangerous in this country. This was before the child molester moved into the neighborhood, btw, so I didn't have that to use as explanation for my concerns.

She was still pissed, and told me to mind my own business. I told her that I was minding my own business when she knocked on my door looking for her child. Incidentally, TWICE I've had a mother try my locked door when I didn't answer the door. I had been working out both times, and was covered in sweat. I didn't want to come to the door covered in sweat and wearing skimpy workout clothes. So, I should mind my own business but it's okay to try my locked door, presumably to walk right inside if it's unlocked (and potentially get bitten by my dog)?

It's awkward, at least for me, trying to manage all of the nuances to these kinds of cultural clashes. I want to respect other's ways, but I want my ways respected too.

 

[Sarihah]

Quote:

Originally Posted by townmouse Sarihah, you're absolutely right, I misunderstood sorry! I'm with lolov. How terrifying.

No problem. You couldn't have known.

 

[Sarihah]

No, civil rights for everyone. If it's a civil right, it's a right that goes with being a human being. It's a right, not a privledge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lolov Although, I've also had dreams of a "pedophile community" perhaps somewhere in outer mongolia?? QUOTE] What about the pedophiles that have kids? Many have visitation and some have custody. I just don't think there's a simple answer.

A. There are many mistakes that can cost you your civil rights.

B. I may be wrong, but I think convicted pedophiles get only supervised visits with their children and are not allowed to reside in homes with children.