I think there are good and bad aspects of neighborhood notification laws for wherever sex offenders live.
Discussion 1:
Post 1 Miranda:
I think there are good and bad aspects of neighborhood notification laws for wherever sex offenders live. It may help families with kids feel safer by at least knowing where they are so they can make their kids avoid that area, etc. It also decreases paranoia for people moving into a new area by telling them exactly how many sex offenders are near them so someone isnt worried about being completely surrounded by them without knowing. This awareness probably increases public safety a little bit, but there are so many sex offenders in the world who have never been convicted that who’s to say exactly how much safer these neighborhood notifications make things.
The bad thing about neighborhood notification laws for sex offenders is that it definitely makes it harder for these people to succeed. Not only is it much harder to get a job with that on your record, but the neighborhood notifications must make these offenders feel very isolated from their community. It is harder for someone to live a happy life away from crime when they are alienated and feel like their reputation is ruined forever.
I think many occupations are closed to people with felonies because companies do not want any unnecessary risks. Someone with a felony has already shown their ability to break the law in a severe way, and businesses would rather hire someone with a clean record than someone who is statistically more likely to break the law and hurt their business. Also, if a company hired a felon and the felon ended up doing something illegal in the company, the hiring managers would get partially blamed for the mistake because they made the decision to hire a felon.
Post 2 Oscar:
Communities should be aware of what people are residing in them. If a person who was convicted of sex crimes is released from prison, then I think the community should have the right to know about it. This would increase the safety of everyone in the area, especially children. People residing in the community would be better prepared to keep their loved ones safe. Unfortunately, these laws do make it harder for these people to succeed. There is a label placed on them as being dangerous or unworthy of pursuing or finishing an education or career. There is a strong likelihood that they will not be able to contribute to society like they were before committing a crime. Moreover, they are judged by the conviction and this makes it hard for them to try to achieve their goals. Even those who are completely willing to rehabilitate and better themselves will struggle.
Many companies are not open to the idea of hiring people convicted of felonies because they are trying to retain trust and safety. There is an uncertainty that comes into mind when you think of a person convicted with a felony. One would not know if they are capable of committing another crime or if they are safe to be around. Companies do not want to risk the chance of endangering their workers and they do not want to be held reliable for any danger that my occur.
Discussion 2
Post 1 Lizbeth:
Yes I believe there should be a separate juvenile justice system. I’m actually quite shocked that there is not already one. There should be a separate juvenile justice system because juveniles should definitely be handled differently than adults. Juveniles and adults are nowhere close to being the same in age,looks or behavior. The only situation that a child should be tried as an adult is if they are the age of seventeen because that is kind of a bortline age. The cases would need to be serious of course and well thought out considering this may affect the rest of their life.
I believe the idea that a child’s parents could be punished for their son/daughter’s delinquent or status offending behavior is reasonable. For example if a child is a repeating offender of the same actions then I do think it would make sense to punish the parents. As parents they are res[obsilve for their children and therefore the actions of the child. Especially if the child is continuously getting into trouble with the law because if the parent can’t control them then who is expected to do so? This would actually give the parents a chance to correct their child before they find themselves in trouble as well. The child also needs to see that they nor their parents are above the law and just because they go introule it does not mean their parents can get them out. By having both parties in some sort of “trouble” I think it would make the parents think twice about getting their child under control.
Post 2 Freedom:
Yes, there should be a separate juvenile justice system and in most states there is a separate dedicated system. Juvenile justice matters require a different set of resources and should always maintain confidentiality separate from from all adult matters and cases. Per our book “Philosophy, Procedures and Programmatic” emphasis needs to be priority for the juvenile system (p.438). Juvenile justice systems function and advocate should advocate for what is in the best interest of the juvenile and their future development as adults. There should be a more restorative justice approach. Young people represent out future, let’s not forget that.
Murder, armed robbery or rape are the only situations I believe a child should be tried as an adult due to the extreme seriousness of the crime. These three situations should always be considered with does the juvenile have a lengthy juvenile record, have past rehabilitation efforts been successful in any way and what age is the minor? The only two set-backs I see is juries in a juvenile case may be more sympathetic to a minor and if the courts are overwhelmed, as they usually are, they may dispose of the case more quickly and not give the necessary attention to the juvenile as needed.
Overall, I do not believe a parent should be punished for their minors delinquent behavior. However, I do believe they should be held responsible. What I mean by that is, whatever the punishment and restitution given to the minor is, the parent should be held responsible for making sure the minor takes care of his or her debt. To hold the parent solely responsible for the minors delinquent offense says that the parent has failed to exercise proper control or oversight over the minor. Punishing the parent for something they didn’t do does not help the situation. But, anyone charged with violating a parental responsibility law should take the matter seriously because it is a criminal charge that may result in jail time, a fine or an order to under parent training.
Answer preview to i think there are good and bad aspects of neighborhood notification laws for wherever sex offenders live.
APA
671 words