Nice man on a bench? What about the Mall Santa, the daycare employee, the pediatrician, the teacher's aide, the teacher or the child psychologist? It doesn't have to be a total stranger and usually it isn't. What makes you think we aren't aware of that?
Young Johnny and Suzy--despite being children--already come with a little built-in common sense. Creepy types have to build a rapport on some level to meet their sick ends and avoid capture (or so they hope). This particular repeat offender wants permission to work in a position that would give him both access and rapport all at once. Law books aside, it's a duty prescribed by a greater law--basic human decency--to stop him. Enigma13, I refer you to the Nurembourg trials if you need a precedent here.
Rideman: How old are your kids again?
-'Playa
-----------------
The CPlaya 100--6 days, 9 parks, 47 coasters, 2037 miles and a winner.....LoCoSuMo.
*** This post was edited by CoastaPlaya on 1/2/2003. ***
Dave, as always you are able to make a succint post tying up the loose ends.
Along the same line...as was said in Lord of the Rings : The Fellowship of the Ring... "It's a dangerous business going out your front door. "
Unfortunately, this quote stands for how this thread has gone...
You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence. --Charles Austin Beard, historian http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/c/q101431.html
There is danger all around us, every day. To not keep a vigilant eye open for it, expecting safe haven from it, is to invite it to happen.
-----------------
--George H
---Superman the ride...coming to a SF park near you soon...
*** This post was edited by redman822 on 1/2/2003. ***
No, I wouldn't want him to be my roomie.
I did just have a revolation about this topic. I have realized how easy it would be for this clown guy to befriend some kids and possibly their parents. I've had some younger teenage friends when I worked at CP (boys AND girls). They trusted me, which they should have because I am a very decent person. IF however, they would have befriended someone like this clown guy, they could have been asking for trouble.
I have kept in contact with a few of my young season passholder friends and young co-workers (and some of their parents as well) via e-mail. We still remain friends to this day.
So IF this scary clown guy was still seeking sex from kids, it wouldn't be very difficult for him to make young friends. BUT what my real piont is till that we don't know what he wants.
You guys who's opinions oppose my own are very persuasive. I am starting to agree somewhat with you.
-----------------
Think for yourself-Don't reley on someone else.
So why wouldn't you be his roomie? After all, he's not going to attack you--and besides, he needs that third chance to rehabilitate. Wouldn't you want to show him the way?
-'Playa
If he does need that third chance to rehabiliate, why should it be left to us, or Dexter, to provide that chance? Where does anyone think that it would be safe to put this man? Obviously away from children, right? But, that isn't as easy as I thought (providing that he isn't in jail). I don't think that he should be getting a job as a clown since he will be surrounded by kids. To me, he was already given a second chance. He was trusted and given back his rights. He violated the trust and is now back out again. Why should we give him back that trust that he already lost, twice?
I know a lot of you are saying everyone deserves many chances here. But when you think about it, they are kids. Why should we let someone work in an area that will literally be a buffet for him? Sure, we can't predict the future and we can't say what he will and will not do. But the fact remains is that he lost trust twice and that isn't something that should be given back very easily.
And that is a good question. I wouldn't want to room with him, too. I don't know why, but I think it is just because of the nature he has.
-----------------
"If two coaster trains almost hit each other, why is it called a near miss and not a near hit?"
Enigma13 stated:
"1. We can't deny him the right to work with children because he has already served the punishment for his crime and this would be an additional punishment for which there is no authority. We would be denying him the right to choose his occupation, a right we all have. "
As a student of law you know full well this is not the case. There are many punishments that result in a person not being able to work in the profession of their choice. Tell, me do you know of any convicted felons that are members of the police force? Or in the military? Do you think Michael Milken will be allowed to sell bonds again? Doctors, lawyers and accountants can all lose their licenses and not be allowed to practice again. You are just plain wrong here.
I think there is a difference being allowed access to a public place and being granted the authority to conduct business in a public place.
This guy doesn't just want to go to Playland. He wants to dress up as a clown and make money at Playland. In my City, a group like the KKK can get permission (by permit) to gather in a public park and stage a rally. That same group will not get permission to set up a booth in a public park and sell racist trinkets.
This all goes back to common sense. Unfortunately, America is losing touch with reality when it comes to common sense. IE...winning several million dollars for spilling coffee on yourself.
First I'd like to say that I am not a parent. I do not choose to have children. Second, I am talking from personal experience here. I'd rather not go into details.
Yes, he has served his punishment for his crimes and I don't think that he should necessarily be locked up forever. While he is done with his punishment, the children that he abused will be affected for the rest of their lives. Their suffering will not end. If they receive help, they might be able to find a way to live with it, but it will never go away. Future relationships will be affected. Their chances to live a normal life were taken away from them. Having said that, why should the offender be allowed to live a normal life when his victims had theirs taken away?
-----------------
106 coasters and counting.
PointMan said:
As a student of law you know full well this is not the case. There are many punishments that result in a person not being able to work in the profession of their choice. Tell, me do you know of any convicted felons that are members of the police force? Or in the military? Do you think Michael Milken will be allowed to sell bonds again? Doctors, lawyers and accountants can all lose their licenses and not be allowed to practice again. You are just plain wrong here."
You are right, there are many punishments that restrict your right to work. There was not such a punishment for the crimes this man committed. He was levyed a punishment and served it. We cannot add to his punishments ex post facto. Besides this man is asking for a permit for access to public areas, this is not a profession he needs to be licensed for or has any of its own codes of conduct. The rules regarding licensure of professionals are the rules of their licensing authorities, not law.
Well, you are going to make a great lawyer.
As for me, I will not be frequenting Playland. Cause and effect you know? You knowingly, if unwittingly, put my family in jeopardy...I don't go to your park.
One more time...there are a thousand things that guy could do to make a buck. Why do you think he wants to dress like a clown and be around children? Think hard.
*** This post was edited by wahoo skipper on 1/3/2003. ***
This is exactly why I asked the 'roomie' question. It's all too easy to bloviate, hypothesize, theorize and speculate about woulda, shoulda, coulda and what's supposedly right in situations that don't affect you personally--but the moment you're actually involved, all the rules change.
Thank you for proving my point.
-'Playa
-----------------
The CPlaya 100--6 days, 9 parks, 47 coasters, 2037 miles and a winner.....LoCoSuMo.
Enigma 13:
I think you will find that there is plenty of precedent for making past acts a criteria for employment and for public licenses to conduct business. This is not a punishment for the crime, but a restriction for doing business. For example, when a state makes casino gambling legal, they can refuse to grant a license to operate a casino to persons with criminal backgrounds even though the crimes may have been committed before the state legalized gambling. Similarly, when states first grant lisences for practicing certain professions, they are able to prohibit those who have not obtained the proper qualifications for that profession.
In essence this seems to be the case here. I state this as a legal point, not as a moral judgement on the person involved in this case.
They can't deny him a license because they don't like him. And at the moment they can't deny him a license because he's a convicted pedophile. They CAN promulgate rules which would allow them to deny licenses to convicted pedophiles, however, and THEN they can deny him a license as a convicted pedophile. Point is, they gotta have the legal basis for doing it first.
Which, from the sound of it, is probably what the county will attempt to do.
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
Here is a fine example of one of these "civil rights protected" citizens. This is close to home and it is scary. http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/newssun/city/w03glanert.htm
-----------------
2 superheroes in Gurnee next season? Oh the humanity. :)
You must be logged in to post