I was thinking about the movie rating systems that we use and think that the changes that have been made over the years have been of little use when you consider the movement of sex offender laws. It is not easy to locate usable information on movies that help in determining if you want to watch it or not. The rating system I grew up with was pretty straight forward and easy to remember. This was when Jaws (rated PG), Star Wars (rated PG), and The Poseidon Adventure (rated PG) were the ones that you had to sneak into to see. When The Poseidon Adventure came out I was 7 yo and our family had a picnic on the floor right under the big screen along with a number of other families. All the seats were full as well as much of the floor. When Jaws was out I managed to get in by calling out "Mom wait" when I got close to the ticket booth and because the line was so long it was easy for a kid to get lost. Yes I sneaked in at 10 years old. After the movie I still had much of the afternoon so I went to the beach and did some body surfing. Most of the other kids my age didn't want to go to the beach for several weeks after watching Jaws. It was like the parents took the kids to see Jaws just to spend a couple of hours with them and in return they wouldn't have to take them to the beach that summer. When I saw Star Wars it was like watching a cartoon with a few real people in it. What I liked the most was the latest visual effects. Gone was most of the Buck Rogers style effects.
Most of the PG rated movies back then were based on what was thought to cause a kid to have bad dreams. Then when you look at the toys that came out because of these movies you see that most of the PG movies where made for the kids. Every movie rating above PG was off limits to kids for one reason or other and we really didn't want to see them anyway. There where few if any toys to be had for them so as kids there was nothing to be had by having seen them. Movies like The Rocky Horror Picture Show (rated R), Saturday Night Fever (rated R), Animal House (rated R), and Halloween (rated R) were meant to be seen by teens who have let the toys go and wanted to be more grown up. Yes they had more of an adult theme to them but compare them to The Smurfs (rated PG) and you may rather let your teens watch the old movies. I actually had to tell my kids that they would not be able to watch The Smurfs until they grew up (daughter is 8 and son is 5). If you read the reviews of The Smurfs (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0472181/reviews) you would think this is a kids movie but it is not. In the old rating system it would have been an easy R rating.
Here is one point I am trying to make. As adults that lived with the old rating system we knew what PG meant but no longer do. PG means that a parent "must" review the movie as a grown up. If I let one of my kids see The Smurfs movie I would be setting myself up for accusations of trying to groom them. I have enough troubles as it is I don't need more.
The big problem with movie ratings today is that every movie is a "must review" first movie. Sex offender laws are not supportive of this however so caution is needed. What I mean here is that if you are going to watch a movie no matter what the rating is you should watch it first in private before you watch it in any other way. If you are a sex offender you can't afford to have your kids come in while reviewing "The Smurfs" a PG movie much less an R rated one. I learned the hard way when I started watching movies again (after years of not watching them. Even the rock CDs I have collect dust.) that the movie rating system is a mess. I was watching what I thought was rated PG movie called "Legendary" and the reviews I read made me think it would be a good one to watch even if the kids watch a bit of it here and there without me knowing it. Well PG and nudity were never put together when I was growing up so was I surprised when it happened and my daughter standing right beside me trying to get my attention at the same moment. Yes I got accusations thrown at me.
So when should a sex offender with kids watch an action movie? Never. I was watching the movie "Dead Tides" (Motion Picture Rating (MPAA) Rated R for sexuality, and some violence and language) listed as being an Action | Drama | Thriller on Hulu and what I get is what I would call "Porn". I am glad that at least on Hulu they have that image guide so you can try to skip over that stuff. The MPAA rating for sexuality is what I would use to describe The Smurfs movie and I would have rated Dead Tides as having multiple explicit sex scenes. Are sex offenders protected from being accused of things when stuff like this jumps out from nowhere? No.
I have 2 great unmolested kids that have been taught to tell if someone tries to touch them or whatever even if it is mommy or daddy. And who is the one teaching this? Me, A Registered Sex Offender. Where are my kids now? With there mom across town in an apartment. We are still married and intend to stay that way but what good is it to be a husband and father if you can't be with your wife and kids? The sex offender laws make the modern movie rating system unusable for parents that have the sex offender status standing over their lives. The only thing a sex offender can do is not have a TV, computer, or in any way watch a movie.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Friday, September 16, 2011
Missouri’s Sex Offender Laws
Writing the State Governments is something that many should do. Here is one such letter I have written.
These laws while having good intentions are not much good in the legal sense. Should these laws be challenged in court correctly they would fail on many counts. I have been working on this issue for some time now and have devoted a site to them. I have found only 2 solutions to this problem however, neither of them are favorable to the state. Take for example the laws in chapter 566 that deal with limitations on where certain sex offenders may live or be. In the following I don’t argue the Constitutionality of these laws as it would be more difficult to prove so I stick to existing State laws and Supreme Court rulings to provide the evidence needed. Only after these point are clear can Constitutionality be proven.
In Section 566.147 the law would only be applicable to those that are not registered and by Missouri law be required to be registered and would exclude those that are registered and those that are required to be registered beyond State law by the Federal law and are not registered. This can be demonstrated by several Supreme Court rulings. This is also due to the fact that being a “Registered Sex Offender” is civil and not criminal by convicting a registered sex offender of this crime makes the being a registered sex offender criminal. This would make the registration requirement a criminal act or more precisely by registering as a sex offender one confesses to being a criminal.
The results of this should be clear at this point. This law would apply to only those that are required to register under Missouri law as of Jan. 1, 1995, are not registered or have absconded, and are in violation to the law after the effective date. This law would then only affect a very small portion of the population and may require some research to find out if it would be justifiable to rewrite and keep this law. This is the easy one to fix the next one would be far more costly and would affect the above issue to the point of making it unjustifiable.
Also in Section 566.147 there is the matter of distance and this is where we encounter the most problems. First off there are no standards set that would ensure that measurements can be repeatable. This causes accuracy problems that can only be fixed by setting Nationwide standards through the help of NIST. In addition there are a number of differing methods that can be used and no two would produce the same results. There is also a measurable difference between part 1(2) and part 2. As this law requires that being in violation of the law is charged as a felony the point of accuracy should be determinable within a measurable amount. The wording in the law uses “within” as a determining factor and has been excluded in the courts. The distance is measured from property line to property line and does not include the property as being “within” the distance as measured. The next is the violation of using unqualified persons for measuring the distance and ignoring State law that requires the court to use the County Surveyors measurement as being recognized. This could result in law suits being filed by the Surveyor.
This is the short version of the information I make available on my website. I have gone into great detail on some of these and other issues with these laws. Right now I am only getting a few thousand hits a month but it has been growing over time. If you decide to research this further my site is myredball.com and the following links will take you to the issues I have discussed here.
http://www.myredball.com/due_process/DefiningTheSexOffender This is the contents
http://www.myredball.com/due_process/DefiningTheSexOffenderChapter3ResidencyRestrictions This goes into great detail for measurement issues. Use the link on the bottom right of the page for the next page and further info.
http://www.myredball.com/due_process/DefiningTheSexOffenderChapter2SORNAPerspective This explains the basics. Use the link on the bottom right of the page for further info.
I am not sure what you will do with this information but I hope you will write up a way to resolve these issues before a court resolves them. My recommendation is to have these laws repealed before any damage can be done. I recommend this for good reason. Should all of the issues I discuss on my site make it to a court all of the States with similar laws would be affected by the outcome. Some of these states would pay dearly for this. Georgia for one has all but forced registered sex offenders out of the state. If Missouri gets out of the issue before it comes to ruin our state can avoid most of the problems other states will have.
These laws while having good intentions are not much good in the legal sense. Should these laws be challenged in court correctly they would fail on many counts. I have been working on this issue for some time now and have devoted a site to them. I have found only 2 solutions to this problem however, neither of them are favorable to the state. Take for example the laws in chapter 566 that deal with limitations on where certain sex offenders may live or be. In the following I don’t argue the Constitutionality of these laws as it would be more difficult to prove so I stick to existing State laws and Supreme Court rulings to provide the evidence needed. Only after these point are clear can Constitutionality be proven.
In Section 566.147 the law would only be applicable to those that are not registered and by Missouri law be required to be registered and would exclude those that are registered and those that are required to be registered beyond State law by the Federal law and are not registered. This can be demonstrated by several Supreme Court rulings. This is also due to the fact that being a “Registered Sex Offender” is civil and not criminal by convicting a registered sex offender of this crime makes the being a registered sex offender criminal. This would make the registration requirement a criminal act or more precisely by registering as a sex offender one confesses to being a criminal.
The results of this should be clear at this point. This law would apply to only those that are required to register under Missouri law as of Jan. 1, 1995, are not registered or have absconded, and are in violation to the law after the effective date. This law would then only affect a very small portion of the population and may require some research to find out if it would be justifiable to rewrite and keep this law. This is the easy one to fix the next one would be far more costly and would affect the above issue to the point of making it unjustifiable.
Also in Section 566.147 there is the matter of distance and this is where we encounter the most problems. First off there are no standards set that would ensure that measurements can be repeatable. This causes accuracy problems that can only be fixed by setting Nationwide standards through the help of NIST. In addition there are a number of differing methods that can be used and no two would produce the same results. There is also a measurable difference between part 1(2) and part 2. As this law requires that being in violation of the law is charged as a felony the point of accuracy should be determinable within a measurable amount. The wording in the law uses “within” as a determining factor and has been excluded in the courts. The distance is measured from property line to property line and does not include the property as being “within” the distance as measured. The next is the violation of using unqualified persons for measuring the distance and ignoring State law that requires the court to use the County Surveyors measurement as being recognized. This could result in law suits being filed by the Surveyor.
This is the short version of the information I make available on my website. I have gone into great detail on some of these and other issues with these laws. Right now I am only getting a few thousand hits a month but it has been growing over time. If you decide to research this further my site is myredball.com and the following links will take you to the issues I have discussed here.
http://www.myredball.com/due_process/DefiningTheSexOffender This is the contents
http://www.myredball.com/due_process/DefiningTheSexOffenderChapter3ResidencyRestrictions This goes into great detail for measurement issues. Use the link on the bottom right of the page for the next page and further info.
http://www.myredball.com/due_process/DefiningTheSexOffenderChapter2SORNAPerspective This explains the basics. Use the link on the bottom right of the page for further info.
I am not sure what you will do with this information but I hope you will write up a way to resolve these issues before a court resolves them. My recommendation is to have these laws repealed before any damage can be done. I recommend this for good reason. Should all of the issues I discuss on my site make it to a court all of the States with similar laws would be affected by the outcome. Some of these states would pay dearly for this. Georgia for one has all but forced registered sex offenders out of the state. If Missouri gets out of the issue before it comes to ruin our state can avoid most of the problems other states will have.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)