3 ms·

You would trust the state to decide if a sexual predators is safe to teach your children?

by Chris2048 6y ago

bdamm 6y ago
The thing is... who else would decide? Isn't it the function of the state to make decisions based on information that is not available to the general public?
- Chris2048 6y ago
  No-one. No-one would decide. It's not a decision that needs to be made. Any history of sexual abuse -> be put on a register that prohibits ever working with children again.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
    We currently have a registry for that sort of thing, and public urination can get you put on it. So your answer appears to be that the state decides, since they decide what constitutes sexual abuse.
    - Chris2048 6y ago
      I said you should be put on a registry for sexual abuse, the registry the US has is for "that sort of thing", which apparently includes things I wouldn't consider to be sexual abuse. Just because I promote the idea of a sex offenders registry doesn't mean I automatically agree with any possible implementation. > the state decides, since they decide what constitutes sexual abuse. True. But its a decision that can be made pretty formulaically from a persons known actions/behaviour, as opposed to predicting their future actions/behaviour.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
aaomidi 6y ago
> You would trust the state to decide if a sexual predators is safe to teach your children? I trust the state to test the medicine I buy from a pharmacy. The state isn't some __other__ machine. It's made up of people like you and me, trying to make society operate and people to generally get along with eachother. If I saw that we as a society are moving towards rehabilitation, and better social services for criminals, then yes. I would trust them. Just like I trust them with roads, with hospitals, with medicine, with food.
- Chris2048 6y ago
  > I trust the state to test the medicine How does the process of testing medicine compare to that of sex offenders? I don't think the two are at all comparable. > It's made up of people like you and me I'm not qualified to test medicine, or run medical trials, so I hope whoever does it on behalf of the government is not like me. > I trust them with roads, with hospitals, with medicine, with food All of which have proven physical-science process to verify them. I don't trust criminology/Phycology as a science capable of making the calls you are implying.

You would trust the state to decide if a sexual predators is safe to teach your children?

The thing is... who else would decide? Isn't it the function of the state to make decisions based on information that is not available to the general public?

Chris2048 6y ago
No-one. No-one would decide. It's not a decision that needs to be made. Any history of sexual abuse -> be put on a register that prohibits ever working with children again.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
  We currently have a registry for that sort of thing, and public urination can get you put on it. So your answer appears to be that the state decides, since they decide what constitutes sexual abuse.
  - Chris2048 6y ago
    I said you should be put on a registry for sexual abuse, the registry the US has is for "that sort of thing", which apparently includes things I wouldn't consider to be sexual abuse. Just because I promote the idea of a sex offenders registry doesn't mean I automatically agree with any possible implementation. > the state decides, since they decide what constitutes sexual abuse. True. But its a decision that can be made pretty formulaically from a persons known actions/behaviour, as opposed to predicting their future actions/behaviour.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

aaomidi 6y ago

> You would trust the state to decide if a sexual predators is safe to teach your children? I trust the state to test the medicine I buy from a pharmacy. The state isn't some __other__ machine. It's made up of people like you and me, trying to make society operate and people to generally get along with eachother. If I saw that we as a society are moving towards rehabilitation, and better social services for criminals, then yes. I would trust them. Just like I trust them with roads, with hospitals, with medicine, with food.

Chris2048 6y ago
> I trust the state to test the medicine How does the process of testing medicine compare to that of sex offenders? I don't think the two are at all comparable. > It's made up of people like you and me I'm not qualified to test medicine, or run medical trials, so I hope whoever does it on behalf of the government is not like me. > I trust them with roads, with hospitals, with medicine, with food All of which have proven physical-science process to verify them. I don't trust criminology/Phycology as a science capable of making the calls you are implying.