• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Minn. sex offender seeks to be freed from program

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
MINNEAPOLIS – John Rydberg showed no mercy on the night in 1975 when he broke into a rural Wisconsin home and raped a young couple as their son slept upstairs — or four years later, when he raped a Minnesota woman at knifepoint in front of her children.
On Friday, he will seek mercy for himself, trying to convince a judicial panel he is a changed man who deserves release after nearly two decades in Minnesota's sex offender treatment program. If he gets the provisional discharge he's seeking, the 68-year-old Rydberg would be released to a Twin Cities halfway house with a GPS ankle bracelet and a long list of conditions to follow. If he behaves, he may become the first person permanently freed from the state's civil commitment program for sex offenders since it started in 1994.

OK, since it costs about 100k per year to keep sex offenders in the program, and since Minnesota also is going through a budget crisis, I am OK with letting them out after they are pronounced cured........

On ONE condition, and that is castration. The way I see it, if you commit the kinds of horrible crimes this guy has, then you should permanently lose your privilege of being able to have sex.

Article is here.
 
Last edited:
OK, since it costs about 100k per year to keep sex offenders in the program, and since Minnesota also is going through a budget crisis, I am OK with letting them out after they are pronounced cured........

On ONE condition, and that is castration. The way I see it, if you commit the kinds of horrible crimes this guy has, then you should permanently lose your privilege of being able to have sex.

Article is here.

I think I'd be inclined to trust the professionals on this. The guy has served 30 years in jail and received 20 years of treatment. If the people dealing with him think he's ready for release, what's the issue?

Castration? What kind of rubbish is that? People released after 30 years for gun crime offences have their trigger fingers amputated? Thieves have their hands cut off?
 
I think I'd be inclined to trust the professionals on this. The guy has served 30 years in jail and received 20 years of treatment. If the people dealing with him think he's ready for release, what's the issue?

Castration? What kind of rubbish is that? People released after 30 years for gun crime offences have their trigger fingers amputated? Thieves have their hands cut off?

Out of all the crimes that people can commit there is only ONE that cannot in any way shape or form be considered OK. And that is Rape/child molestation (they're the same in my eyes).

Kill someone? Self defense or accidental.
Stealing? Needed food/money to feed the family. (granted not as much of a valid excuse now adays but at least it would be excuseable when in this context)
Assualt? I know I would assault any adult that hit my kids or my wife.

But Rape? There is NO excuse to justify ripping the clothes off of some woman/child and raping her. None. Notta. Zip.

IMO it is the WORST offense anyone can possibly commit. As far as I am concerned the guy can rot in prison. Though I would perfer a bullet to the brain pan...about 3 times.
 
Out of all the crimes that people can commit there is only ONE that cannot in any way shape or form be considered OK. And that is Rape/child molestation (they're the same in my eyes).
I don't consider any crimes 'okay'. Rape and child molestation are not the same thing. Raping a girl while on a date, while neither more or less serious, is a very different crime from a father systematically abusing his children. Both are hideous but I don't see anything uniquely heinous about them in comparison to other crimes that garner similarly harsh sentences such as murder, armed robbery, torture and terrorist acts.
Kill someone? Self defense or accidental.
Stealing? Needed food/money to feed the family. (granted not as much of a valid excuse now adays but at least it would be excuseable when in this context)
Assualt? I know I would assault any adult that hit my kids or my wife.
Murder is murder.
No one is claiming theft or assault are of the same magnitude, that's a bit straw mannish.
But Rape? There is NO excuse to justify ripping the clothes off of some woman/child and raping her. None. Notta. Zip.
Murder (not just killing, but deliberate, pre-meditated murder), armed robbery, torture and terrorism? What excuses can justify these?
IMO it is the WORST offense anyone can possibly commit. As far as I am concerned the guy can rot in prison. Though I would perfer a bullet to the brain pan...about 3 times.
Well, those are your values. I'm sure many people agree with you, but to me there are a number of crimes that are on a similar level. If you decide that the most serious crimes merit perpetual incarceration, then fine, apply the sentence and we wouldn't be having this discussion. The judiciary imposed a sentence that was not life without the possibility of parole according to the legislation in place. If someone completes their sentence, as this guy has, then it's unjust to change your mind and impose further arbitrary punishment to make the community feel better.
 
I don't consider any crimes 'okay'. Rape and child molestation are not the same thing. Raping a girl while on a date, while neither more or less serious, is a very different crime from a father systematically abusing his children. Both are hideous but I don't see anything uniquely heinous about them in comparison to other crimes that garner similarly harsh sentences such as murder, armed robbery, torture and terrorist acts.

Perhaps "OK" was the wrong word to use. "Understandable" would be a better word I think.

Murder is murder.

Even murder can be understandable. Even if its abhorrant. A person murdering someone because they raped their wife/child? Definetly understandable in my book.

No one is claiming theft or assault are of the same magnitude, that's a bit straw mannish.

They were mainly just examples.

Murder (not just killing, but deliberate, pre-meditated murder), armed robbery, torture and terrorism? What excuses can justify these?

Took care of the murder up above. Armed Robbery could fall under my explanation of "theft". Torture: If it saves hundreds, thousands or even millions of peoples lives..yeah I don't mind it. Terrorism: This would of course be entirely subjective. But when looked at from the terrorists side its understandable. Would also mainly depend on the cause.

Well, those are your values. I'm sure many people agree with you, but to me there are a number of crimes that are on a similar level. If you decide that the most serious crimes merit perpetual incarceration, then fine, apply the sentence and we wouldn't be having this discussion. The judiciary imposed a sentence that was not life without the possibility of parole according to the legislation in place. If someone completes their sentence, as this guy has, then it's unjust to change your mind and impose further arbitrary punishment to make the community feel better.

Never said that if his sentence was up that he couldn't get out. I just stated what I would rather have happened in the first place. ;)
 
OK, since it costs about 100k per year to keep sex offenders in the program, and since Minnesota also is going through a budget crisis, I am OK with letting them out after they are pronounced cured........

On ONE condition, and that is castration. The way I see it, if you commit the kinds of horrible crimes this guy has, then you should permanently lose your privilege of being able to have sex.

Article is here.

I'm pretty sure we're not allowed to use the government like that. I don't know...something about cruel and unusual punishment. That damned Constitution getting in the way again. Listen, I know this is an emotionally charged subject, I just think we'd all be well better served if we didn't get so emotional about it. Use some logic, some nice, emotionaless, Vulkan logic. These lists are getting out of hand, and there does need to be a way to get off the list if you're put on. Recidivism rates are not that much worse than most other crimes. We've essentially set up infinite punishments and beyond life in prison without parol, that's not necessarily a good thing.

It's time we revise our system we have. There are too many automatic punishments, too much databasing, too many lists. People have to have the ability to get free from this, demonstrate in some way that they have been "cured" (bad word...but I ain't had my coffee yet) and be able to have the full of their rights restored.
 
OK, since it costs about 100k per year to keep sex offenders in the program, and since Minnesota also is going through a budget crisis, I am OK with letting them out after they are pronounced cured........

On ONE condition, and that is castration. The way I see it, if you commit the kinds of horrible crimes this guy has, then you should permanently lose your privilege of being able to have sex.

Article is here.

I don't see the point of castrating a 16-year-old boy who has sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend though.
 
I don't see the point of castrating a 16-year-old boy who has sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend though.

It's not the same. Your hypothetical 16 year old boy didn't rape a woman in front of her family at knifepoint.
 
It's not the same. Your hypothetical 16 year old boy didn't rape a woman in front of her family at knifepoint.

That is true.

However, sex offender laws apply equally to 16-year-old boys who have sex with their 15-year-old girlfriends as well as men who rape a woman in front of her family at knifepoint.

So how about we finally get some nuance in our sex offender laws before we take such draconian action?
 
I'm pretty sure we're not allowed to use the government like that. I don't know...something about cruel and unusual punishment. That damned Constitution getting in the way again. Listen, I know this is an emotionally charged subject, I just think we'd all be well better served if we didn't get so emotional about it. Use some logic, some nice, emotionaless, Vulkan logic. These lists are getting out of hand, and there does need to be a way to get off the list if you're put on. Recidivism rates are not that much worse than most other crimes. We've essentially set up infinite punishments and beyond life in prison without parol, that's not necessarily a good thing.

It's time we revise our system we have. There are too many automatic punishments, too much databasing, too many lists. People have to have the ability to get free from this, demonstrate in some way that they have been "cured" (bad word...but I ain't had my coffee yet) and be able to have the full of their rights restored.

Actually, according to the USDOJ, sex offenders have the second to lowest recidivism rate behind murderers. No, not what you're going to hear on Fox News, but they are half news half drama anyway.

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsorp94.pdf

Within 3 years following their release, 5.3% of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime (and 3.3% were reconvicted)

The reoffense rate of DUI offenders is over 75% and drug offenders over 90%. But lets go after those sex offenders. Why? Well, so we don't have to look in our own closets at our own skeletons.
 
Last edited:
That is true.

However, sex offender laws apply equally to 16-year-old boys who have sex with their 15-year-old girlfriends as well as men who rape a woman in front of her family at knifepoint.

So how about we finally get some nuance in our sex offender laws before we take such draconian action?

In which states are consensual relations between two teenages one year apart in age a criminal act, let alone comparible with a violent home invasion, forced rape with a weapon?
 
In which states are consensual relations between two teenages one year apart in age a criminal act, let alone comparible with a violent home invasion, forced rape with a weapon?

I'm not sure. So let's not talk about two teenage kids who have sex with each other.

Instead, let's use a 15-year-old girl who uses her webcam to send pics of her boobs to her 16-year-old boyfriend. Now she can be put on trial for production and distribution of child pornography. Which will put her on the sex offender list.

I'm not really sure how you're going to castrate a female, though... Or how that would prevent a woman from commiting sex offenses. Even though women are guilty of sex offenses too. Just google the number of female teachers who have had sex with their male and female students.
 
Either the person is a threat and should be kept locked up or they have served their time and can re-enter society. The idiotic system we have now makes it so impossible to function in society after being put on the sex offender list that is certainly increases the odds of future crimes.
 
I'm not sure. So let's not talk about two teenage kids who have sex with each other.

Instead, let's use a 15-year-old girl who uses her webcam to send pics of her boobs to her 16-year-old boyfriend. Now she can be put on trial for production and distribution of child pornography. Which will put her on the sex offender list.

I'm not really sure how you're going to castrate a female, though... Or how that would prevent a woman from commiting sex offenses. Even though women are guilty of sex offenses too. Just google the number of female teachers who have had sex with their male and female students.

WTF are you babbling on about? I haven't said anything about castration or female sex offenders. In fact, the only post I've made in this thread is asking you to support the inane statement that consentual sex between teenagers was the same as a home invasion and violent rape with a weapon. The only response you made, is when you answered my question with "I'm not sure."

So don't make statements of fact when you "aren't sure" the facts you are stating are even true.
 
In which states are consensual relations between two teenages one year apart in age a criminal act, let alone comparible with a violent home invasion, forced rape with a weapon?

To answer your question, Arizona. I know in the state of Arizona, an 18yo guy who has sex with his 17yo gf will be labeled a sex offender FOR LIFE. :shock:

In some states, with the age of consent below a certain number, both children would be guilty of having sex with a child under that age, not sure how they name it specifically. If one state says they are a sex offender for such a crime and they move to a state in which that is NOT a crime, they remain on the sex offender registry in that new state, registering and being shamed for committing the same act that their neighbor can commit on a nightly basis and is fine. If the age of consent in one state is 16 and another 17, and in the 17 state you have sex with a 16yo, you are a sex offender. Move to the 16 state and you REMAIN a sex offender even though your neighbor is screwing the hell out of his gf who turned 16 last week. You are on the registry for the same offense, just in a different state.

The draconian Adam Walsh Act went back 50 years and put all sex offenders into a 3 tier system without due process. It's based on "risk level" which is nothing more than the name of the crime committed. No professional evaluation was done on these offenders to determine their TRUE risk to the community. Some offenders went from 10 to 15 years on the registry, some went from 10 to 25 and some went from 10 to life. Now understand, this could have been 20 years after their crime and 10 years after they got off the registry if they had ever had to register in the first place. This is unconstitutional. If these people can't go back and plea differently, they can't be sentenced later to more time on the registry when they didn't do anything to change it.

People need to open their eyes. Today its sex offenders, tomorrow its who? Who is the next victim to get the scarlet letter?
 
Last edited:
Well, the lists are public record, that might be of great help to you then when looking for a babysitter next date night with the wife. Considering your staunch defense of these offenders.


j-mac
 
Well, the lists are public record, that might be of great help to you then when looking for a babysitter next date night with the wife. Considering your staunch defense of these offenders.

... could your baiting be any more blatant?

:doh:roll::doh

I'd say you seem to have a difficult time distinguishing between supporting the rights of sex offenders whom haven't served their time, supporting the rights of those who have served their time already, and supporting the right to due process for those not accused but merely accused.
 
Put the Bastard in the general population and let him rot with NO special treatment at all.

California now has 'Chelsea's Law' which says: Anyone convicted of certain sex offenses against a child in California will get life in prison without parole starting Thursday, after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed "Chelsea's Law."

Schwarzenegger signs California's 'Chelsea's Law' - CNN

This is my answer to this BS, and it needs to the law everywhere.

Why don't we have prisons in the Desert under ground to save on AC with only one guard tower in the middle and shoot to kill anything that moves above ground. Or in tents. It works for sheriff Joe and it's cheap.
 
You can look up sex offenders but not murders. It's an attemp to make people feel safe and to further political careers. There are almost one million registered sex offenders in the U.S. Some offenders had no contact, no attempted contact. But looked at deviant pictures of child porn on the internet. All were locked up for about 4-6 months, some for 7-10 years. Some are level 1, low risk, and are registered for 20 years and have 10 years probation. Some are registered for life. The typical offender had about 10 pictures on his hard drive. Most of these offenders had good jobs, familys and no criminal record. For this type of offender, I think its over kill. It's political. No one whats to be seen as being soft on this. What's you thoughts on this?
 
Last edited:
WTF are you babbling on about? I haven't said anything about castration or female sex offenders. In fact, the only post I've made in this thread is asking you to support the inane statement that consentual sex between teenagers was the same as a home invasion and violent rape with a weapon. The only response you made, is when you answered my question with "I'm not sure."

So don't make statements of fact when you "aren't sure" the facts you are stating are even true.

Okay. Here ya go.

Ages of consent in North America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Young Sex Offenders Might Join Registry - washingtonpost.com

Federal Sex Offender Registration Laws Too Broad, Onerous

Study: Many sex offenders are kids themselves - USATODAY.com

Juvenile sex offenders marked for life

'Sexting' lands teen on sex offender list - CNN

Juveniles crowd Mich. sex offender registry | Michigan Messenger

Breakdown of Michigan juvenile sex offender cases by age | Michigan Messenger

Youth Today

Sex registry called too harsh for juveniles | Houston & Texas News | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

Should Child Sex Offenders Be Treated Like Dangerous Criminals All Their Lives? | Sex & Relationships | AlterNet

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/22/magazine/22juvenile-t.html

http://www.bet.com/News/YouthSexOffenders.htm

Federal Lifetime Juvie Sex Offender Registry Contradicts State Law; Justice Grants Held at Bay - Southern Maryland Headline News

No Easy Answers | Human Rights Watch

Debunking Juvenile Sex Offender Myths - TalkLeft: The Politics Of Crime
 
Put the Bastard in the general population and let him rot with NO special treatment at all.

California now has 'Chelsea's Law' which says: Anyone convicted of certain sex offenses against a child in California will get life in prison without parole starting Thursday, after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed "Chelsea's Law."

Schwarzenegger signs California's 'Chelsea's Law' - CNN

This is my answer to this BS, and it needs to the law everywhere.

Why don't we have prisons in the Desert under ground to save on AC with only one guard tower in the middle and shoot to kill anything that moves above ground. Or in tents. It works for sheriff Joe and it's cheap.

Nobody is saying that violent sex offenders shouldn't get the worst this world has to offer.

However, children and teens and even some adults who commit non-violent sex offenses should not be treated in the same way that violent sex offenders should be treated.

Many child and teen sex offenders commit crimes because, I think, they're just too young and inexperienced to know better. They don't deserved to have that stigma for life. And what they need is psychological evaluations and therapy in order to train and teach them socially accepted sexual behavior. Rather than the incarceration we give them.

It's absolutely absurd to expect the same behavior from a child or teen that we expect from an adult. So we shouldn't give them adult criminal sentences. Especially if the crime is non-violent in nature.
 
Nobody is saying that violent sex offenders shouldn't get the worst this world has to offer.

However, children and teens and even some adults who commit non-violent sex offenses should not be treated in the same way that violent sex offenders should be treated.

Many child and teen sex offenders commit crimes because, I think, they're just too young and inexperienced to know better. They don't deserved to have that stigma for life. And what they need is psychological evaluations and therapy in order to train and teach them socially accepted sexual behavior. Rather than the incarceration we give them.

It's absolutely absurd to expect the same behavior from a child or teen that we expect from an adult. So we shouldn't give them adult criminal sentences. Especially if the crime is non-violent in nature.

You're right about that.

What most sensationalist people scream is "think before you defend these sex offenders." Ok, I'm not defending anyone. I'm actually trying to think about this stuff in a rational manner. Something you might want to try out sometime. Lets analyze this.

With drug offenders, we don't just sentence based on them being a drug offender, do we? Why not? Because there are HUGE differences between the guy caught with one joint and the guy caught with a meth lab. While technically both of these guys are "drug offenders" their vast differences between their offenses should garner them vastly different sentences and parole requirements. And guess what? This holds true with these types of offenders. But.....

This doesn't hold true for sex offenders. We label the two romeo juliet teens as sex offenders just like we label the serial rapist. While both of these are sex offenses, they are vastly different in intent and SHOULD not even be under the same label. However, being a sex offender, both will have the same restrictions when getting out of prison and in some states, both would be on GPS monitors, some for life. Both would have to notify neighbors, neither could go to their child's school functions. Is that fair to the child of the teens who later marry and want to have kids? Think about that before you spout of your "soft on sex offender" bull****.

Then you have the guy who was looking for porn one night and found a website unlabeled that had underage teen girls in some of the pics. The FBI monitors that site's hit's, gets your IP address, gets a warrant and confiscates your computer and arrests you. You are now labeled a sex offender for life, but not only a sex offender, a Tier 2 sex offender according the Adam Walsh Act, meaning a sex offender who must register for 25 years. And that's right now, 5 years ago it would have been 10 years. Who knows if he'll ever get off the registry with idiots in office and bigger idiots who vote for them who "don't want to be soft on sex offenders." Yea, well, you obviously don't want to be smart, either.

I bet you didn't know that "indecent behavior with a juvenile" is a lower tier than "possession of child porn." The child molester is on the registry for 15 years, the downloader for 25. So someone who touched a child is a lower risk than someone who clicked a mouse? Wow, really? I guess common sense is so far gone you couldn't find it with a telescope.

If the crazy whackos in this country can't see the difference between those two offenders, they are a lost cause anyway.
 
Last edited:
... could your baiting be any more blatant?

:doh:roll::doh

I'd say you seem to have a difficult time distinguishing between supporting the rights of sex offenders whom haven't served their time, supporting the rights of those who have served their time already, and supporting the right to due process for those not accused but merely accused.

No, I support the rights of the innocent child that didn't deserve what this guy put them through. As far as I am concerned he gave up his rights card the minute he laid hands on a child.


j-mac
 
No, I support the rights of the innocent child that didn't deserve what this guy put them through. As far as I am concerned he gave up his rights card the minute he laid hands on a child.


j-mac

At what point do you finally say "he's been punished enough?" Even a murderer doesn't have to register and send out notifications for life.

What if he didn't lay hands on anyone? A child porn downloader? A pee-behind-the-tree guy? You ever took a piss off the side of your boat? If so, you are a sex offender. Turn yourself in, and get yourself on that list.

What if he was falsely accused and convicted by the coerced testimony of a child by a pissed off ex-wife? What if his preteen daughter, whos mad because he wouldn't let her go to the mall with her friends, says he touched her? Who you think anyone will believe, a crying little girl on the stand, or big evil mean bad dad?

Things aren't as cut and dry as they first seem, Jmac. Open your eyes a bit, buddy.
 
Last edited:
At what point do you finally say "he's been punished enough?" Even a murderer doesn't have to register and send out notifications for life.

What if he didn't lay hands on anyone? A child porn downloader? A pee-behind-the-tree guy? You ever took a piss off the side of your boat? If so, you are a sex offender. Turn yourself in, and get yourself on that list.

What if he was falsely accused and convicted by the coerced testimony of a child by a pissed off ex-wife? What if his preteen daughter, whos mad because he wouldn't let her go to the mall with her friends, says he touched her? Who you think anyone will believe, a crying little girl on the stand, or big evil mean bad dad?

Things aren't as cut and dry as they first seem, Jmac. Open your eyes a bit, buddy.


Yep, you're right because this....

MINNEAPOLIS – John Rydberg showed no mercy on the night in 1975 when he broke into a rural Wisconsin home and raped a young couple as their son slept upstairs — or four years later, when he raped a Minnesota woman at knifepoint in front of her children.


sounds exactly like your descriptions of what he wasn't convicted of....


j-mac
 
Back
Top Bottom