"We had a health insurance meeting today to finally discuss the changes they're making. My montly payments should be going down slightly. However, my deductible is going up to $5,000. That's right, $5,000! So if I get hurt and have to take and ambulance to the emergency room and rack up a bill for $7,000 I'll have to pay $5,000 of it before insurance kicks in. At least they'll take care of the final $2,000. Oh, wait, they won't. Once I meet my deductible they start kicking in for 50% of the cost. So they'll end up paying a whole $1,000 of that $7,000 bill.
They do have an out of pocket maximum per year to protect the little guy like me though. The most I'll ever have to pay in a year is $15,000. That's just a little over half of my annual pre-tax salary! Yay health insurance! We have the best system EVAR!
WTB Obamacare."
I got this in an email from my boyfriend this morning and feel that it needs to be shared.
(WTB is world of warcraft lingo for "Want to Buy" for those that don't play.) #billnelson
Aw, I love seeing egrets. I see them all the time, standing very elegantly on top of cars and hedges.
And the Everglades is a truly amazing place, guys. I think yearly field trips and Girl Scout stuff sort of numbed me to how unique it really is, but there is no place on Earth like it.
Yeah but did you see the one that had an entire bird on it? That was much worse.
I love this series. It was so interesting it took me away from House. I went to Yellowstone and Grand Teton this year, and it was so beautiful in both parks words could not do it justice.
I love Ken Burns and totally watched this last night.
I understand the beautiful wild birds causing a hat frenzy and whatnot, but what's nature's explanation for the current FL trend of mulleted Nascar caps? And how can we use Congress to reduce this horrific fashion-ethics violation??
Perverts gotta live somewhere. I read the article in the Economist how they're all forced to live under a bridge like trolls. They're still human beings and American citizens.
As opposed to what Law and Order: SVU likes to report, the fact is that sex offenders have lower rates of re-arrest than other criminals. [ac360.blogs.cnn.com]
Recidivism rates are 43% for sex offenders. 68% for non-sex-offenders. Keep in mind these are for all reoffenses including sex offenders who were later arrested for drugs or writing bad checks. Only 5.3% of sex offenders were arrested for another sex crime. That's a terrible thing when it happens and people get angry in cases like Jaycee Dugard or Polly Klass. But instead of trying to target the 6% who are likely to reoffend we have just gone after all of them.
Painting all sex offenders with the same brush only makes it hard for us to identify the truly dangerous ones. It also causes people to have a false sense of security. A parent thinks their child is "safe" because they don't live near sex offenders when, statistically, the people most likely to harm that child are family members and friends. It's almost as if people want to create this "other" group to deny the reality that sex abuse happens in many families.
@Melissa Becker: Honestly, 43% is pretty high. Even so, maybe it isn't about how likely it is, but how bad it is if the person commits another sex crime.
My boyfriend of 4 years is a "sex offender". He has to see a probation officer every other week to take a drug test, cannot leave his home on Halloween, cannot live within 1000 feet of a school, bus stop etc... cannot leave the county overnight. He is in his late twenties and will be on lifetime probation.
He was arrested at age 13 for touching another kid's privates, for a split second, nonviolently. A kid his own age. He was sexually confused, and felt horrible for it, and confessed immediately. He had been molested at a young age himself. He was tried as an adult and sent to jail for 6 months.
He thought I would leave him when he finally told me his secret- the reason he couldn't stay over my house (neighbors have kids), the reason he tried to kill himself at 17 and cut himself for years.
So yeah, I think people need to consider that not all sex offenders are malicious predators, but are victims themselves, whose lives are severely screwed by the ridiculous laws this country has enacted.
@MadgeCypselus: That's a very strange story. I was under the impression that a non-violent sex crime committed by a juvenile would be expunged at 18. He's your boyfriend of 4 years so clearly you have faith in his version of events. Perhaps you have grounds for a legal appeal or challenge if he is still on probation for a crime he committed as a 13 year old. Can any lawyer jezzies weigh in on this?
Wow! I did a little more research and I am stunned that this sort of thing can happen pretty regularly. I'm so sorry for what has happened to your boyfriend. [www.upi.com]
@MadgeCypselus: Thank you for sharing your story. I wish more people would realize how common this situation is when they consign people on sex offender registries to live under bridges.
Why do they *have* to evict the families who already live there? I mean sure there might be other places to live, but there might not be. I feel like in making one group not homeless, they're risking another group with children, becoming homeless.
Thought: I know they have to live *somewhere* so why can't they just use a vacant apt. building? When the economy collapsed, a lot of already finished apt. buildings were abandoned or foreclosed (I'm probably using the wrong term, forgive me) on. I know where I live there's more than a few, and I'm positive there's some down in Florida. I mean, they used one in NY to house actual homeless people (and on the governments dollar!) why can't they do that here?
While it's unfair for the sex offenders, and I feel bad for them (slightly), it's unfair for the families, too.
@Jessica Haas: No, I understand. I agree -- I mean, the word "evict" makes me feel that they were trying to force these people out. Could this have been handled in a better way, such as making sure they arranged for suitable places for the families to move to? I just feel, as I believe you do, that there had to be a way to do this that was fair to everybody.
@Jessica Haas: yeah, it does suck that people had to be evicted, and it may even be illegal in that jurisdiction to have "adults only" housing. It's unfortunate. And that is the grounds on which he is being sued. However it does seem to be motivated by safety concerns. This apt building was chosen for its remoteness, so it sounds like it was the best option locally. I don't know too many completely abandoned buildings where we live, although obviously that would be ideal.
@J.D.Regent: Maybe I'm blind, but I didn't see anything in the article referring to how long they had before they were evicted. I'm hoping they had enough time where each family that was evicted has a roof over their head instead of OH HI WE'RE GONNA EVICT YOU AND YOUR CHILDREN NEXT WEEK.
I say this over and over and over again, but this is my area of study. This is my desired area of work. This is my life, and it frustrates me to no end to see people freak out about sex offenders without being properly informed about the actual facts of the situation.
@wooden_shoes: The "facts" of the situation are clear. There is NO cure for sex offenders — and they are the most likely to repeat offend of any criminal class. Until you've been stalked, befriended, and raped all before your 10th birthday — you have no idea what you're "studying". Sex offenders should be locked away for life. No parole. There's an end to it.
@meechybee: the problem is that the label "sex offender" is used to describe a rather vast and disparate group of criminals.
upthread @MadgeCypselus describes the innocent act that got her boyfriend smacked with the "sex offender" label at the tender age of 13. i don't think that the sex offender label is fair for the "crimes" that some of these people commit. i wish that there could be at least two levels of sex offenders -- divided perhaps between those types of crimes that are more likely to be repeated than those that aren't.
the way we treat sex offenders is so contrary to the general idea that our judiciary system allows you to serve time for your crime, and then be allowed to try again at a normal life.
@meechybee: But isn't that factually incorrect? a poster upthread linked to a study claiming exactly the opposite, that sex offenders have lower reoffending rates than other groups. Do you have facts to support your assertion that the opposite is true?
I think one of the biggest issues for sex offenders is that they aren't always rapists and child molesters. In some states, peeing in public is considered a sex crime. You could get really drunk one night and have to register as a sex offender for the rest of your life. And states can and sometimes do require sex offenders to introduce themselves to all of their neighbors and a lot of times aren't allowed to reveal their crime for "their own safety." Obviously, these seem to be men who have served time so the offenses are probably more if not the most serious of sex crimes. It is good to note though that "sex offender" is really far too general a term and often leads to witch hunts and mob mentality.
10/15/09
They do have an out of pocket maximum per year to protect the little guy like me though. The most I'll ever have to pay in a year is $15,000. That's just a little over half of my annual pre-tax salary! Yay health insurance! We have the best system EVAR!
WTB Obamacare."
I got this in an email from my boyfriend this morning and feel that it needs to be shared.
(WTB is world of warcraft lingo for "Want to Buy" for those that don't play.) #billnelson
10/15/09
10/15/09
09/29/09
09/29/09
09/29/09
And the Everglades is a truly amazing place, guys. I think yearly field trips and Girl Scout stuff sort of numbed me to how unique it really is, but there is no place on Earth like it.
09/29/09
I love this series. It was so interesting it took me away from House. I went to Yellowstone and Grand Teton this year, and it was so beautiful in both parks words could not do it justice.
09/29/09
09/29/09
09/29/09
I understand the beautiful wild birds causing a hat frenzy and whatnot, but what's nature's explanation for the current FL trend of mulleted Nascar caps? And how can we use Congress to reduce this horrific fashion-ethics violation??
09/29/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
Recidivism rates are 43% for sex offenders. 68% for non-sex-offenders. Keep in mind these are for all reoffenses including sex offenders who were later arrested for drugs or writing bad checks. Only 5.3% of sex offenders were arrested for another sex crime. That's a terrible thing when it happens and people get angry in cases like Jaycee Dugard or Polly Klass. But instead of trying to target the 6% who are likely to reoffend we have just gone after all of them.
Painting all sex offenders with the same brush only makes it hard for us to identify the truly dangerous ones. It also causes people to have a false sense of security. A parent thinks their child is "safe" because they don't live near sex offenders when, statistically, the people most likely to harm that child are family members and friends. It's almost as if people want to create this "other" group to deny the reality that sex abuse happens in many families.
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
He was arrested at age 13 for touching another kid's privates, for a split second, nonviolently. A kid his own age. He was sexually confused, and felt horrible for it, and confessed immediately. He had been molested at a young age himself. He was tried as an adult and sent to jail for 6 months.
He thought I would leave him when he finally told me his secret- the reason he couldn't stay over my house (neighbors have kids), the reason he tried to kill himself at 17 and cut himself for years.
So yeah, I think people need to consider that not all sex offenders are malicious predators, but are victims themselves, whose lives are severely screwed by the ridiculous laws this country has enacted.
09/25/09
Wow! I did a little more research and I am stunned that this sort of thing can happen pretty regularly. I'm so sorry for what has happened to your boyfriend.
[www.upi.com]
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
Why do they *have* to evict the families who already live there? I mean sure there might be other places to live, but there might not be. I feel like in making one group not homeless, they're risking another group with children, becoming homeless.
Thought: I know they have to live *somewhere* so why can't they just use a vacant apt. building? When the economy collapsed, a lot of already finished apt. buildings were abandoned or foreclosed (I'm probably using the wrong term, forgive me) on. I know where I live there's more than a few, and I'm positive there's some down in Florida. I mean, they used one in NY to house actual homeless people (and on the governments dollar!) why can't they do that here?
While it's unfair for the sex offenders, and I feel bad for them (slightly), it's unfair for the families, too.
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
I was actually referring to something like this, which I referenced in my OP: [consumerist.com]
No need to be snarky.
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09
upthread @MadgeCypselus describes the innocent act that got her boyfriend smacked with the "sex offender" label at the tender age of 13. i don't think that the sex offender label is fair for the "crimes" that some of these people commit. i wish that there could be at least two levels of sex offenders -- divided perhaps between those types of crimes that are more likely to be repeated than those that aren't.
the way we treat sex offenders is so contrary to the general idea that our judiciary system allows you to serve time for your crime, and then be allowed to try again at a normal life.
/rant. sorry.
09/25/09
09/25/09
However, I have to say that your opinion is not shared by all survivors of child sex abuse. Like, say, me.
09/25/09
09/25/09
09/25/09