[thefreeman]

Sorry but 25% of offenders committing another sex crime in the next 15 years more then enough for me to agree with the fact that they need to be identified and tracked.

[kamarg]

Do you support tracking non-sex crime criminals that have been released given they have a higher rate of reconviction than sex offenders?

"Recidivism rates for sex offenders are lower than for the general criminal population. For example, a Bureau of Justice Statistics study of 108,580 non-sex criminals released from prisons in 11 states in 1983 found that nearly 63 percent were rearrested for a non-sexual felony or serious misdemeanor within three years of their release from incarceration; 47 percent were reconvicted; and 41 percent were ultimately returned to prison or jail."[1]

[1] - https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=90200&page=1

[matt4077]

It's far below the rate overall, which is 60%: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism#Recidivism_rates

There's also the problem that stigmatisation helps more or less no one, because it's unlikely that parents can (or should) effectively supervise their children 24/7. And even if they did, it may protect their children at the cost of others, leaving the overall rate of these crimes unchanged.

To use an example with less emotional baggage: "Watch out for terrorists!" is a similarly useless warning.

[Forbo]

And 75% of them learning their lesson should be treated the same as those that don't? Identification and tracking of them is doing nothing to prevent them from re-offending.

[BeetleB]

>Sorry but treating the system as transactional in the sense that you break the balance by committing a crime then pay it back through slave work in jail is perhaps one of the few ways to make the system even more dysfunctional than it already is.

Sorry, but it isn't enough for me.