Hey Dakota!
Great to hear from ya. I don't think we've had much of a dialogue on this board before, so this should be fun :D

Anyways, I personally don't think that I've fallen into "the trap". When you generalized by saying that To the boylover, the really bad ones are those that truly force themselves on a kid I don't think you were correct. Personally, I think that anyone that touches a kid (whether they want it or not) falls into the "really bad ones" category. I know it may sound like I contradicted this in my last post about the ones that only did it once and won't do it again, but I am not: I was more saying that the law should look into rehabilitation and likelihood of re-offence. But it still doesn't make a difference in how bad the action was.

And as for taking one for the team, that's fine as long as you aren't the one being told you have to give up the rest of your life for "the team"

Well, that’s were personal selfishness comes in, doesn't it. In all idealism, I'd go to jail this very moment if I knew that it would prevent a boy from being raped, or even touched or manipulated in a way that will eventually adversely affect his life. Of course I'll be pretty PO'd that the system dropped an innocent guy in the slammer, but when "the team" is made up of people you love and would really give your life for, it makes the decision a little easier.

But as it stands now, EVERYONE who has made any kind of mistake with a kid is going to pay for it the rest of their lives. When they treat EVERY offender as if they were all the worst of the lot, they will cultivate a whole lot more pedophiles that see no way out and no incentive to change

That may be partially so (I will expand later), but generally it is only the people who make the big mistakes who get caught. Sexually touching a kid in my books is a BIG mistake. It is rare (from my limited experiences at least) that a BL who just gave his YF the occasional backrub or kiss on the forehead actually got caught or in a lot of trouble. It is the people who do sexual things or are into child porn and stuff like that that get caught. You may have evidence that suggests otherwise, but from my experiences, the 95% of the people who get caught deserve it, and the other 5% are, like I said, taking one for the team.

As for the expansion that I promised … I don't believe that the system right now "cultivates" pedophiles who don't stop, but rather the opposite - it gives incentive to stay as far away from risky behavior as possible. By assuming the worst in criminals (in this case pedophiles) and treating them as such (with crazily severe penalties), no one except the real dangerous ones are going to do things that might get them in jail. Its kind of like speeding. I regularly do 15 over the limit. Why? Because I can. So what, I get a ticket every now and then that I pay off with community service. Now, if the penalty for any form of speeding was $10 000 and 2 years in jail, u know damn well that I'm sticking to the limit! Like Malaysia (sp?) or Cuba. Some of the lowest crime rates in the world, but ridiculous punishments.

The system *is* in place to help protect the kids … I disagree … now, it's little more than some "holy crusade."

I think we differ on this point because of our definition of “the system”. I see it from a large and all-encompassing view. Indeed there have been sections of that system that have been abused and been turned into a holy crusade by certain individuals or groups, but in general, the principles behind the system are to protect the kids. I agree that the kids involved in the trials and stuff will be scared for life? But what are the alternatives? 1) The throw the accused in jail without grilling the kid (making the system worse and creating a truly anti-pedophile system) or 2) Don’t throw the guy away unless there is evidence that proves his guiltiness that excludes grilling the kid (letting A LOT of dangerous people get away). This system is FAR from perfect, but I honestly can not find an alternative that actually works. This appears to be the “happy medium”, if happy is the right word.

Do you believe they really think that by keeping an offender from living too close to a school, church, playground, etc., that will keep even a single kid from being molested?

Maybe I am naive, but my answer is a definite YES! I live in a residential neighbor hood, but my entire block is fairly kid-less, and I don’t know the few kids that are on my block. On the other hand, if I live across the street from the school, I’m pretty sure I would make it a point of my day to be outside when the kids are coming and leaving school. Its even likely that if I see the same kids over and over I would make a few friendships. Now, if I have already offended, that friendship would likely lead from one thing to the next, and bang, I’m in jail again. Its kind of like the AA approach – take away temptation. They don’t say “Never ever get drunk again”. They say “Never ever drink ANY alcohol again”. And hey, if inconveniencing some offenders by restricting where they live saves ONE kid from being molested, I think it is totally worth it. Once again going back to that self-sacrifice (and yes, if I was a registered offender, I might be mad at not being able to live in a specific area, but I would understand the reasoning, and even appreciate the safeguard).

Now, what you said about the overnight sting operation, I agree that that was stupid and excessive and much in the manner of the “holy crusade” that you mentioned earlier. THAT was an intolerable move! A warning period of SOME amount of time should’ve been given (I don’t know about in Kentucky, but where I am, I think that it is that newly made laws can’t be fully enforced for at least 2 weeks after they are made to allow for public awareness). But much like Aristotle’s “one swallow doesn’t make a summer”, we can’t judge a system off of fairly isolated incidents such as this one.

Personally, I think that the system is working, and until we can come up with a better way of doing things (I’d love to hear suggestions) I think we’ll have to stick with it. And so far I haven’t heard a whole lot of really convincing arguments saying that this system doesn’t work or is bad or that there is a better way (remember, when we bash a system or way of doing things and want it removed, we have to think of what to replace it with or how things will be without it) (this is in no way belittling Dakota’s insightful reply). Anyways, I hope to hear from Dakota and everyone else real soon, as this is an important topic!

Graces of God,
Deliverance