On McNeil Island, the only residents are dangerous sex offenders
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
Louis Theroux has done two documentaries on the subject, both very interesting.
People often murder because of who the victim is, but they sexually attack because of what the person is.
There are contradictions both ways, however.
For example, a rapist attacks a man they met at a club, generally that's because they're looking for a body to use sexually. There are lots of people with those bodies. When they leave prison they can still find many bodies to use sexually; the chance of recidivism is relatively high.
A woman kills her partner after years of abuse, when she leaves prison that person no longer exists and she's unlikely to ever be in a similar situation. The chance of recidivism is relatively low.
TLDR You can't murder the same person again; you can assault another person who fits a general profile.
"A woman kills her partner after years of abuse"
Are you justifying murder? Why wouldn't the woman kill another partner?
2. The usual justification (which I can't attest to the validity of) is that the recidivism rate for sex crimes is very high.
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/24/nyregion/citys-annual-cos...
> New York State was the most expensive, with an average cost of $60,000 per prison inmate. [New York City] paid $167,731 to feed, house and guard each inmate last year, according to a study the Independent Budget Office released this week.
The governor proposed free community college for inmates, citing drastic reductions in recidivism rates - it would've paid for itself many times over - but voters flipped out.
Food, shelter, plumbing, facilities upkeep, medical/psychological care, and very high security costs? That really isn't a surprising figure. Prison are incredibly expensive. It's a great argument for minimizing prison populations to only people that pose immediate threats to others and focusing as much as possible on reducing recidivism.
The article itself claims "McNeil Island, nestled in Puget Sound, is unpopulated except for the 214 people who live at the special commitment center, a facility for former prison inmates."
So is the article completely wrong?
The cynic in me thinks this is done just because no-one wants to take the responsibility of releasing these people, since if even one goes on to commit a sensational crime, the person who made the call to release them will get pilloried by the public (and probably, by their own conscience). So the jury provides a way to pass on the responsibility for the call.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willie_Horton#Horton_in_the_19...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penile_plethysmograph
It conjures to mind one of the scenes from A Clockwork Orange.
I have to wonder if this really works, or if it has an especially high false-positive rate for people with weird medical fetishes.
i.e. a random number generator is more accurate.
An interesting tidbit if there's any real scientific value to this device.
The study: https://web.archive.org/web/20081030231209/http://www.oogach...
FWIW there's a very important distinction between physical arousal and sexual attraction - ignoring that can be a source of great shame for some men (those who are abused/assaulted for example).
I used to hate riding on the bus (because I'd get bullied), but I also commonly got erections on the bus (the vibrations); so was I really bus-sexual ...
On more than one occasion, delays in getting to definitive emergency care have resulted in liability for the State, including heart attack victims who took to long to get to the hospital.
> People may have heard of Kelly Canary because of her work Seattle grunge–era bands such as Dickless and Earth, but she now spends her days more often in front of a jury instead of a crowd of concert goers. From bartender at the Cha Cha to staff attorney for the Innocence Project here in Washington, she has led an unconventional life.