TOKYO (Kyodo) – Japan plans to require day nurseries, kindergartens and schools to use a government system to confirm that those applying to work the

  • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    On one hand, that sounds obviously good, on the other hand, how easy is it to end up on the Sex Offender list? In America, hooking up in your car will land you on it for life

      • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s always a question of where you draw the line. Two consenting adults hooking up (whatever you interpret that to mean, I’ll assume that the adults are unclothed for simplicity), fine. Being in a car, fine. Hooking up in the private confines of your house, fine. Hooking up in public, not fine. Is a car considered a private location? I guess if someone sees you then no it is not. Hooking up in a camper would be fine. If you put up blinds on the windows of your car does that make it fine? What if you’re parked on your own property? What if you’re in your garage? What if you are able to find somewhere to park where someone would have to deliberately be trying to see in to see you? There is some case law already pertaining to being naked in your own home. Local laws may be different but are probably similar.

        • Hank@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’d say fucking outdoors is ok if the fuckers put in effort not to be seen or intervening with the daily lives of others. Anything beyond that is the responsibility of the potential onlookers.
          Imagine living in a world where it’s illegal to fulfill the most basic human needs outdoors.

        • utopianfiat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Legislatures are encouraged to make sure the line is as broad as possible, because there’s frequently stories of actual rapists and child abusers pleading out of sex offender registration. When the evidence is muddy and the prosecution doesn’t want to chance it at trial, but has enough to nail them for something, frequently sex offender registration is a big bargaining chip.

          Thus in many states, public urination is a sex offense.

          • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            My defense would be “you may find urine sexual your honour, but I’m not a freak like you, so this isn’t a sexual crime”.

            • utopianfiat@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s often not the judge’s discretion, is the thing. Any person duly convicted of crimes under xyz statutes (i.e.: public indecency/public urination) shall be listed, so the court/prosecutors can massage it to disorderly conduct for a cooperative defendant or whatever.

    • crow@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve heard people from america getting on the registry just because of they are HIV positive.

  • lowleveldata@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It brings questions like how do you clear your name if you’re once a sex offender? Why do we release those people back to the wild if we do not believe that they can change?

    • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      In the UK the sex offenders register is used to prevent such people working with particularly vulnerable groups. Otherwise, they are ‘back in the wild’ once they have done their sentence

      • essell@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It has some unintended and bizarre implications.

        Take the scenario of some guy who goes out dancing, having a great time with their preferred sexual partner on the dance floor. On the way home stops in the park for a wank because they’re single, young, drunk, horny and stupid.

        They get caught, they’re on the sex offenders register and they’re banned from working with children or vulnerable people. And yet they’re not more of a threat than the average person, certainly not a paedophile.

        (If that looks suspiciously specific, it’s not my story 😁)

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I mean, they could still work at non-childcare jobs, or at least can here in Canada.

      In general it’s a good point, though. Westerners in particular seem to want their cake and to eat it too. Execution and indefinite incarceration are both inhumane, but they also don’t want a guy who’s openly a rapist anywhere near them in any context. Locally, reformable people are most of the prison population, but I do wonder what I’d do in the shoes of somewhere like El Salvador.

  • HellAwaits@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    The article makes it sound like they’re trying to better enforce the laws that already exist, which is great. The headline is misleading AF.

  • stopthatgirl7@kbin.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, negl, it’s kind of infuriating to see people worried about the poor people who just made a mistake and somehow end up on a sex offender registry, and not the fact that the reason this is happening is because children were SA’d by people who had been able to sign up with a baby sitting service.