Posted by: Timothy Ellis (The Tim)

Tim Ellis is the founder of Seattle Bubble. His background in engineering and computer / internet technology, a fondness of data-based analysis of problems, and an addiction to spreadsheets all influence his perspective on the Seattle-area real estate market.

243 responses to “The Sex Offender Bogeyman”

These comments are paged! This is page 3. Navigate the pages here:
1 2 3
  1. masaba

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 193:

    By masaba @ 191:
    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 190 -I just don’t see how knowing that the offenders are near you makes it better to live near them. Like I said, the registery is only the ones you know about. .

    I’m not saying it’s better to live near them. I’m saying that if thinking you’re safer makes you let your guard down, you’re more likely to have a problem. The key is prevention through ongoing behavior, not looking at some data source and thinking you’re safe.

    If you don’t think it’s better to live near them, then why do you keep saying that people are silly for not wanting to live near them?

    Why can’t you just concede that people are not silly for wanting to live in neighborhoods with a smaller known criminal element?

    Finally, in an effort for a little quid pro quo, I will concede, you are right. If people move to a safer neighborhood and immediately become completely oblivious to their child’s safety, that is stupid. No one is really arguing for that, but in any case, it is correct.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  2. MichaelB

    Tim’s neighborhood in Everett has 47 assaults, 3 of them sexual assaults, 23 burglaries, 68 narcotics busts, 115 vehicle prowls, 37 vehicle thefts, 1 arson, and 2 robberies in a 4-month period. On top of that, a bunch of kitten kickers. And he has the nerve to call me “obtuse”.

    Crime Bubble?

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  3. Kary L. Krismer

    By masaba @ 201:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 193:
    By masaba @ 191:
    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 190 -I just don’t see how knowing that the offenders are near you makes it better to live near them. Like I said, the registery is only the ones you know about. .

    I’m not saying it’s better to live near them. I’m saying that if thinking you’re safer makes you let your guard down, you’re more likely to have a problem. The key is prevention through ongoing behavior, not looking at some data source and thinking you’re safe.

    If you don’t think it’s better to live near them, then why do you keep saying that people are silly for not wanting to live near them?

    There’s a difference between not wanting to live near them and letting that affect their decision as to where to live. I doubt there are few people that would prefer to not live near them, if given a choice. But the issue is, should that affect where you choose to live or make you feel safer or unsafer?

    As noted above, Ardell’s link indicates there’s only one within a mile of me. Pegasus’ link shows a few more, but not many. Neither makes me feel good, and I wouldn’t be particularly worried (if I had kids) and it got worse in six months.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  4. whatsmyname

    Is there a way to find out where convicted arsonists live? My friend wants to live near lots of convicted arsonists so that he can stop living in a fools paradise, and gain the awareness to start concentrating on meaningful things to prevent his house from being burnt by an un-convicted arsonist.

    If one is comfortable with the risk, then that is fine for them. They are the ones to live with the choice. But to poo poo another’s discomfort on the theory that obvious risk makes one less negligent is silly. It’s a bug, not a feature. I personally compromised on the long commute. How many of you will buy the argument that you’ve shortchanged yourself on alone time?

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  5. masaba

    By whatsmyname @ 204:

    Is there a way to find out where convicted arsonists live? My friend wants to live near lots of convicted arsonists so that he can stop living in a fools paradise, and gain the awareness to start concentrating on meaningful things to prevent his house from being burnt by an un-convicted arsonist.
    -

    This post should be highlighted. It’s funny and insightful.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  6. MichaelB

    Tim, “…But really when it comes down to it, this whole registered kitten kicker thing is a misdirection anyway. People worry about it because the information is out there and easy to find. But how many registered drunk drivers, registered drug dealers, registered car thieves, registered assaulters, or registered burglars do you have in your neighborhood? Oh right, none, because most of the crimes that home owners should be worried about don’t require offenders to register their location for life…”

    Tim, please see above. A crime report is basically a register of crimes committed in your neighborhood. I’ve never seen a more obvious case of someone getting all twisted up like a contortionist to try and justify a poor decision. Just keep digging Tim…

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  7. Kary L. Krismer

    By Pegasus @ 100:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 95:
    By Kary L. Krismer @ 85:
    RE: Pegasus @ 182RE: Pegasus @ 183 – You do realize that just repeating the same things over again doesn’t make it more likely to be true, right? Sources please.

    Pegasus, you really like to wast my time.

    Where at Crimereports.com does it mention that these people have admitted to other crimes that they have not been charged with?

    Again, just because you say something doesn’t make it true. Support what you say with a source.

    I happen to speak the truth. You should try it. If you click on the offender list by crimereports there is a box that is below the offender’s picture labeled “State kitten kicker Registry”. Click on that to see reports about convictions, history and statements about unprosecuted violent love crimes that the perp has admitted to. Also if they molest a child or children repeatly for four years they are a repeat offender in everyone’s mind except yours. Try reading my source this time instead of repeating your bogus answer that me saying something doesn’t make it true.

    Why do you make this so difficult? You claimed these admissions exist for multiple people living within 1000 feet of Tim’s address. Name them!

    We’ve posted back and forth about 5 times and you still don’t understand what providing a source means. It doesn’t mean point to a link and make someone else look through a lot of information to verify what you said. If you have the information, post the specifics.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  8. whatsmyname

    By The Tim @ 207:

    One last comment on this subject, and then I’m done.

    I think the core issue here is risk assessment. How does one quantify risk, which risks does one consider, and how does one best mediate those risks.

    I haven’t run the specific numbers, but I’d be willing to bet that you expose your family to a statistically significantly larger amount of risk by driving an hour or two a day in your car/minivan than you by living nearby some registered kitten kickers, which would make moving out to the suburbs to escape registered kitten kickers a worse than zero sum game.

    Some of the commenters here seem to base their risk assessment on the gut emotional reaction they have to the disgusting nature of the crimes committed in the past by people who happen to live a few blocks away. I prefer to take a more analytical approach.

    Obviously nobody with a strong emotional reaction to an issue like this is going to be convinced by a blog post or its subsequent comments, so this is the last I’ll say on the matter.

    My kids don’t commute. So the equation is not purely how much risk, but also to who. I don’t know why this is emotional (bad) versus analytical (good) You can not have any decision rule without values.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  9. masaba

    By The Tim @ 207:

    Obviously nobody with a strong emotional reaction to an issue like this is going to be convinced by a blog post or its subsequent comments, so this is the last I’ll say on the matter.

    I have no strong emotional attachment to the issue. I don’t have kids, I like neighborhoods like Cap hill which probably also has a high number of convicted violent love criminals, and I think that our society has a little too much paranoia about these types of crimes in general.

    However, I think that your calling people ‘silly’ for considering the number of known felons who live in a neighborhood is a little strange. Their risk assessment is different than yours, and it is not ‘silly’ to consider known felons as part of the risk in moving to a neighborhood.

    We all choose which risks we want to accept. It would be really hard to ‘run the specific numbers’ anyway, as it probably varies from person to person based on (in your comparing the risks of driving, for instance) how much they drive, how old their kids are, how safe of a driver they are in the first place, etc.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  10. Kary L. Krismer

    By masaba @ 210:

    By The Tim @ 207:
    Obviously nobody with a strong emotional reaction to an issue like this is going to be convinced by a blog post or its subsequent comments, so this is the last I’ll say on the matter.

    I have no strong emotional attachment to the issue. I don’t have kids, I like neighborhoods like Cap hill which probably also has a high number of convicted violent love criminals, and I think that our society has a little too much paranoia about these types of crimes in general.

    Part of my views are probably based on living on Seattle’s First Hill for many years. Back in the day it was a very spotty neighborhood, and probably still is. There was an alcohol treatment center a block away. You had ultra-rich high security buildings, but I had a friend of a friend who lived nearby in an apartment building where one person put a note on the outside of their door indicating that they did not deal drugs, etc..

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  11. Rudy101

    See, it is very easy to deflate this futile exercise of determining property values based upon some real or imagined threat that the State has put out there, and done so, without even any regard to any individual. How to deflate it? Those that have to register, now no longer have to register. They can do this for public safety reasons. A person on a public registry puts the community at panic, destabilizes the registrant’s life and ultimately makes the community more dangerous in many ways (even by vigilante justice).

    See, the registry isn’t about monitoring at all. Knowing where a person lives and works is not monitoring, it is harassing. The reason they don’t monitor, because as much hot air that people blow in this thread about how dangerous a registrant is, is because the State can’t show them dangerous under a legal standard of proof which would allow monitoring (like they do when a person is committed because they present a threat to themselves or others).

    Get it? Your registry has no meaning until you decide to actually have a hearing and determine someone dangerous under some accepted standard of proof. Without that hearing, your registry is nothing, this debate is nothing and nobody has to follow your stupid laws.

    You people are idiots. There is no RIGHT to know who is in your neighborhood. But I tell you this, there IS a right to live in peace within the community. Take THAT and put it on your registry.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  12. patient

    By masaba @ 205:

    By whatsmyname @ 204:
    Is there a way to find out where convicted arsonists live? My friend wants to live near lots of convicted arsonists so that he can stop living in a fools paradise, and gain the awareness to start concentrating on meaningful things to prevent his house from being burnt by an un-convicted arsonist.
    -

    This post should be highlighted. It’s funny and insightful.

    This is a truly unusual thread at the bubble. Who would think I would ever find a funny and insightful comment from whatsmyname here, ever. Love it.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  13. LocalYokel

    By whatsmyname @ 204:

    Is there a way to find out where convicted arsonists live? My friend wants to live near lots of convicted arsonists so that he can stop living in a fools paradise, and gain the awareness to start concentrating on meaningful things to prevent his house from being burnt by an un-convicted arsonist.

    +1. Talk about bursting a bubble… :)

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  14. LA Relo

    RE: The Tim @ 38 – Assume for the question you did know (after all, knowing is half the battle). It wouldn’t be hard to figure out someone was an ex-con.

    I think most people would say no to a convicted killer, while someone convicted of downloading free music (again, assuming you knew) is a non-issue. Each person views the risk differently. Knowing doesn’t make you safer; your perception of that risk determines whether you feel safe or not.

    It’s different for everyone. If you ‘re a bachelor trained in Jujitsu and cage fighting, you’re probably not too worried about the perv down the street. If you have a wife and young daughters at home alone while you work each day, you’d probably think differently.

    If I were the latter, I would let a national registry affect my buying decision.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  15. ARDELL

    The lesson in this is don’t “paint yourself into a corner”. Pick the where before the what. The best what in the wrong where usually equals rent vs buy.

    Don’t make hard and fast likes and financial choices that paint you into a corner where you are choosing between 59 kitten kickers and 59 kitten kickers within a mile.

    From the history of the blog…don’t like split entry homes, don’t like using two incomes to buy a house, don’t like Adjustable Rate Mortgages (exotic financing), don’t like busy roads, don’t like bad mls photos, don’t like spending even more than 20% of ONE income on housing…the list goes on and on.

    The reality is segregating this issue to its own post distracts you from the fact that once you line up all your other wants and desires…you are led to a where that you may not like, and feel like your choice is only in that where. When in fact the chain of events that led to this where started on day one when you chose to hate townhomes and split entry homes and spending 28% of your gross income on housing.

    Before you start painting the floor…look for the end point you are painting TOWARD.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  16. Pegasus

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 207:

    By Pegasus @ 100:
    By Kary L. Krismer @ 95:
    By Kary L. Krismer @ 85:
    RE: Pegasus @ 182RE: Pegasus @ 183 – You do realize that just repeating the same things over again doesn’t make it more likely to be true, right? Sources please.

    Pegasus, you really like to wast my time.

    Where at Crimereports.com does it mention that these people have admitted to other crimes that they have not been charged with?

    Again, just because you say something doesn’t make it true. Support what you say with a source.

    I happen to speak the truth. You should try it. If you click on the offender list by crimereports there is a box that is below the offender’s picture labeled “State kitten kicker Registry”. Click on that to see reports about convictions, history and statements about unprosecuted violent love crimes that the perp has admitted to. Also if they molest a child or children repeatly for four years they are a repeat offender in everyone’s mind except yours. Try reading my source this time instead of repeating your bogus answer that me saying something doesn’t make it true.

    Why do you make this so difficult? You claimed these admissions exist for multiple people living within 1000 feet of Tim’s address. Name them!

    We’ve posted back and forth about 5 times and you still don’t understand what providing a source means. It doesn’t mean point to a link and make someone else look through a lot of information to verify what you said. If you have the information, post the specifics.

    I won’t name them here. The state already did. Besides I don’t want you accusing me again of plagiarizing web material by posting more than a link and a short statement which I have done. It is all there for anyone to see. Incidentally I double checked the eight offenders that are closest to Tim’s new residence and it appears that all eight are repeat offenders. Kary if you are once again too lazy to do your homework I am not surprised. It would take you all of five minutes to review the perps’ files. It is your MO to pop off without any facts. I am done with your silliness.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  17. D. in Ballard

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 98:

    By D. in Ballard @ 97:
    By Kary L. Krismer @ 94:
    By ray pepper @ 92:
    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 190

    sorry Kary…………….stupid post…AT BEST…

    No, what is stupid is thinking these guys only strike close to where they live.

    What is stupid is thinking that the registered kitten kickers are the only ones out there.

    That is stupid. But no one is actually saying that.

    If you think you’re safe because none live near you, that’s exactly what you’re saying. If you think that the data sources show all the kitten kickers living near you, that’s exactly what you’re saying.

    Kary, you really are a piece of work. In addition to lawyer and re agent apparently you are now a mindreader. I’m through here.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  18. patient

    RE: D. in Ballard @ 218

    Arguing with Kary is like analyzing the reason for existence, it only leads to more questions with a risk for resulting insanity. Clever to put the breaks on while you still have the wits.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  19. Matt the Engineer

    By whatsmyname @ 209:
    My kids don’t commute.

    Sure they do. Even if you have a stay-at-home parent or nanny, surely they come with you to the store, or to friends’ homes, or to the movies, etc. City life means walking to most of these things, or if you drive then driving at slow speeds. Speed kills, and speed is the rule in the suburbs – they were designed for it.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  20. hoary

    Wow, I’ve somehow always miss the SB barnburner threads until they are days old…

    Let me just say that while I understand the “logic” and “engineers mindset” and the “known risks” of living next to a bunch of child rapists and sexual predators…I disagree with this post.

    First question I asked the sellers when we looked at their home “how are the neighbors?”. They told us about the whole neighborhood, who had kids, dogs etc. Does that mean child-rapist lightning can’t strike here? Of course not, but having other vigilant families with children nearby and no reported incidents in our neighborhood is preferable to us than the opposite. Not sure how that sentiment can be viewed as illogical…

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  21. LeftOverpricedSeattle

    Tim,

    I wasn’t going to bring this up, but after reading some of the replies from some of the regulars, I wanted to clarify a few things for your readers. As someone who has two adopted children and has been through more FBI, USCIS and Washington State (and other states) fingerprinting appointments than I care to remember, as well as multiple home study and home study updates, I know that being an owner or renter plays no role in whether you are approved for an adoption or not (unless the agency you are using is requiring home ownership somehow, in which case I would urge you to seek another agency!). Further, as someone whose first child was brought home to a home we owned and whose second child was brought home to a home we rented, it really makes no difference, other than painting and decorating the child’s room in anticipation (and with child #1 that was definitely a way to help pass the time waiting for the arrival, with #2, we were so busy with #1 we didn’t have that “waiting” factor as much). Of course, a landlord may give you the option to redecorate as long as you leave it like you found it when you leave, but that’s dependent upon the landlord.

    Additionally, as you may know now, the site visit part of the home study is usually not as invasive as some people think it is. They will check out the home and write about it in their report. Here is what mine looked like from 6 years ago:

    XXXXXX live in a fairly new two-story home in rural XXXXXXX, Washington. The upper level has four bedrooms and two bathrooms. The main floor has one bath, spacious kitchen, living and dinning area, library and laundry facility. The garage holds four cars. The home sits on nearly one third of an acre with a large fenced back yard. XXXXXXX is within an hours drive of two large metropolitan areas, Seattle and Tacoma Washington with diverse populations. Their home is with a few miles of schools, parks and excellent medical care.

    As everyone can see, whether you rent or own is not a determining factor at all in whether you are approved for an adoption in Washington State. It won’t even be mentioned in the home study report unless you have a mortgage to list under your debts in the Financial part of the home study. Having said all of that, I can see where the “right” home may play a part in whether a birth mother “selects” you for her child in a private adoption scenario, but renting does not disqualify you from adoption at all in the State of Washington and I am not sure of any countries where it does. The state and your agency may not have approved the rental you were in at the time, but that doesn’t mean a different rental would not have been approved any more than a home that you own with invalid bedrooms would not pass site visit approval.

    Judging from what I am seeing on your blog though, it sounds like your adoption process is already well underway so presumably you know all of this already. As such, please keep in mind that I am not suggesting that you are misleading people about owning vs. renting regarding adoption, only that some posters are under an incorrect assumption regarding adoption requirements in Washington State.

    Buying a home because you want to paint the child’s room pink or blue (or whatever) and put a swing set in the back yard is a perfectly valid reason to buy, whether the upcoming family member is biological or adopted, but it’s not required to be a home owner in order to adopt so I thought I would help clarify a misconception I am seeing from readers who aren’t knowledgeable on this subject. It’s misinformation about adoption that doesn’t need to be out there because, as you know, since there are already a lot of hurdles when it comes to adoption we don’t need imaginary ones out there as well.

    Congrats on both the house and upcoming child!

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  22. Sam Ferris

    “The people that surround my children apparently are far different then living close to Tim. I will “roll the dice” and take my chances on my non registered kitten kicker friends and family then those who have already committed crimes. Call me a GAMBLER for doing this.”

    As I supported with facts and links the probability that if your child is a victim of a new violent love crime the perv is as follows:

    Stranger and Registered kitten kicker: 1 in 200
    Stranger and Not Register kitten kicker: 19 in 200
    Known to victim and Registered kitten kicker: 9 in 200
    Known to victim and Not Registered kitten kicker: 171 in 200

    “The people that surround your children” are 171/200th likely to be the perv whereas the stranger RSO is 1/200th likely to be the perv. GoGo Mr. Gambler, thats odds of 171 against you and 1 for you. Very smart risk analysis there.

    Gee I’ll worry about the 1 violent love crime threat and ignore the other 171 times more likely violent love crime threats against my child!

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  23. Sam Ferris

    “The matter at issue here is family security and whether demographics concerning registered kitten kickers is an accurate statistical predictor for the risk of victimization”.

    What is unclear, there is an INVERSE relationship being near registered kitten kickers vs. being the victim of a new violent love crime as if a RSO is stupid enough to commit a crime near where he lives then he is so stupid that has probably already been caught. How could you assume that an RSO is to stupid or lazy to get in a car and drive to another location to commit a crime? Only if you make that assumption does it matter where you live vs. where the pervs live.

    Obviously the police will investigate RSO’s near where the crime was committed, but they don’t have sufficient resources to extend their investigation out to infinity. Thus if you are an RSO you are MUCH more likely to be apprehended if you commit a violent love crime near where you live instead of far away. How much brains does it take to figure that out? Again you assume RSO’s are as dumb as rocks to make your point.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  24. HappyRenter

    By The Tim @ 8:

    I haven’t run the specific numbers, but I’d be willing to bet that you expose your family to a statistically significantly larger amount of risk by driving an hour or two a day in your car/minivan than you by living nearby some registered kitten kickers, which would make moving out to the suburbs to escape registered kitten kickers a worse than zero sum game.

    I know people who live in the suburbs and have to deal with real problems. One person lives in a neighborhood with a lot of dogs and people have been attacked by dogs, which escaped from private yard fences. They are so scared to be attacked that they never leave their home on foot, always by car. Another person lives north of Seattle on a road with no side walks. One child and an old woman have been killed by reckless drivers in the past years while walking near their homes.

    But Tim is right, you would have to run a statistical analysis to find out which neighborhood is safe and has less crime than others.

    But hey, it’s your life. If you think that you need to look up kitten kickers before you buy, go ahead, if it makes you feel better. Nobody, including Tim, will blame you for that. After all, it’s a free country :)

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  25. Kary L. Krismer

    By patient @ 20:

    Arguing with Kary is like analyzing the reason for existence, it only leads to more questions with a risk for resulting insanity. Clever to put the breaks on while you still have the wits.

    Does that make you feel better?

    Next time maybe try to contribute a halfway intelligent thought, if that is possible.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  26. whatsmyname

    By Matt the Engineer @ 221:

    By whatsmyname @ 209:
    My kids don’t commute.

    Sure they do. Even if you have a stay-at-home parent or nanny, surely they come with you to the store, or to friends’ homes, or to the movies, etc. City life means walking to most of these things, or if you drive then driving at slow speeds. Speed kills, and speed is the rule in the suburbs – they were designed for it.

    1. The context of Tim’s comment is one to two hours per day.
    2. You only go to stores, friends, and movies you can walk to?
    3. There are no fast arterials in the city?
    I grew up in the city. I have friends with kids in the city. There may be marginally more family driving here, but not by much. The “commute” thing is cute, but it’s bs.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  27. whatsmyname

    By Sam Ferris @ 26:

    What is unclear, there is an INVERSE relationship being near registered kitten kickers vs. being the victim of a new violent love crime as if a RSO is stupid enough to commit a crime near where he lives then he is so stupid that has probably already been caught. .

    Isn’t “already been caught” the reason he is an RSO in the first place?

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  28. One Eyed Man

    RE: Sam Ferris @ 226

    Sam, I never said living near registered kitten kickers was either more or less risky. I merely observed that there were no statistics presented by anyone as to the number of molestation incidents when registered kitten kickers were located in the area and whether that differed from environments where they weren’t living in the area. You present a logical argument based upon the premise (assumption) that registered offenders are not stupid and therefore wouldn’t commit a crime in their own neighborhood. That may be true, but there hasn’t been any statistical evidence presented on either side of the argument to show based upon some form of quantitative analysis whether it is or is not.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  29. LeftOverpricedSeattle

    By The Tim @ 24:

    By LeftOverpricedSeattle @ 223:
    …being an owner or renter plays no role in whether you are approved for an adoption or not.

    That’s correct. I never said that our decision to own was because we need to for adoption. Some other commenters have misunderstood what I said if that’s what they thin.

    What I said was that our previous home (a below-market rental) was not up to the necessary standards, so we were going to have to move. Since we were moving anyway, the decision to buy was based on the simple buy-vs-rent financial comparison. In the neighborhoods and home types we were interested in, it was cheaper to buy than to keep renting, so the decision was fairly easy.

    As I hope I made clear, I wasn’t implying that you were making statements that were untrue (because I didn’t see where you had ever said that adoption was for “owners only”), only that some posters had made that assumption and I felt it needed to be clarified “for the record”, as it were. As you point out, the rent vs. buy comparison made owning a better option for the area(s) you had on your list of “wanting to live” areas. I am back in the Seattle area again, but am most definitely in an area where renting is still a lot cheaper than buying (much to my landlord’s chagrin no doubt!). I have my own reasons for living where I am at right now and for now, it still makes the most financial sense for me to rent.

    Again, congrats on the impending fatherhood (which is more exciting for me, as a long time SB reader, to read about than the house purchase, lol!).

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  30. Sam Ferris

    By One Eyed Man @ 31:

    RE: Sam Ferris @ 226

    Sam, I never said living near registered kitten kickers was either more or less risky. I merely observed that there were no statistics presented by anyone as to the number of molestation incidents when registered kitten kickers were located in the area and whether that differed from environments where they weren’t living in the area. You present a logical argument based upon the premise (assumption) that registered offenders are not stupid and therefore wouldn’t commit a crime in their own neighborhood. That may be true, but there hasn’t been any statistical evidence presented on either side of the argument to show based upon some form of quantitative analysis whether it is or is not.

    Two statistics are in fact known:

    1) Only 5 percent of new violent love crimes will be committed by RSO’s
    2) Only 10 percent of new violent love crimes will be committed by someone unknown to the victim.

    Even if ALL RSO’s were eliminated, you would only have 1 in 20 less violent love crimes. Because in any given area you will have a ratio of something like 700,000 RSOs vs. 260 million population (I think) so lets say 1 in 300 people are RSO’s you have 299 that commit 19 violent love offenses and 1 that will commit 1 new violent love offense. Is your risk increased by living near the 1 or the 299? Your risk cannot possibly be greater then 5 percent more even is you assume that the RSO will not travel. Lets say 90 percent will travel and 10 percent of RSO will not (a very high figure for the non traveling imho) then you have .5 percent chance of living near a non traveling RSO. At best your risk is 1 out of 200 greater. So if the average risk is 100 your risk is 100.5. Statistically insignificant. That means if everyone has a 1 percent chance to be a violent love crime victim then living near an RSO makes your risk 1.05 percent. If you increase the number of RSO’s you are near you still have to increase the number of non-RSO’s you live near, multiple RSO’s will only add risk if they are concentrated in greater then 1 out of 300 persons numbers, assuming 1 out of 300 americans are RSO’s.

    Seems that living near others would be a lot more statistically significant, i.e. if you live in a rural area you would be less likely to be a violent love crime victim. Also as knowing the perv is a strong indicator, then the fewer people your child knows the less risk.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  31. Sam Ferris

    By whatsmyname @ 30:

    By Sam Ferris @ 26:
    What is unclear, there is an INVERSE relationship being near registered kitten kickers vs. being the victim of a new violent love crime as if a RSO is stupid enough to commit a crime near where he lives then he is so stupid that has probably already been caught. .

    Isn’t “already been caught” the reason he is an RSO in the first place?

    Ya, I worded that poorly, I meant that he is so stupid that he will have been apprehended so easy that he is most likely in jail again. Like the guy in the wheel chair who offers $400 to his nurse to bring him a child, or the guy who rapes a child in a supermarket one asile away from his parents.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  32. whatsmyname

    RE: Sam Ferris @ 234
    I know, but for him to be back in jail again, he would have to at least attempt to re-offend. BTW, I hadn’t heard about the child in the supermarket. Was this a city supermarket that someone could walk to?

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  33. Sam Ferris

    RE: whatsmyname @ 35

    http://www.dreamindemon.com/2010/12/03/registered-violent love-offender-accused-of-raping-toddler-at-dollar-tree-store/

    I guess it was dollar tree store.

    Ok here is your answer if 1 in 300 is an RSO. And RSO’s commit 1 in 20 new violent love crimes you need 16 non RSO’s to equal the chance of them committing a new violent love crime as one RSO, roughly. So if you assume than no one will travel to commit a violent love crime then living near 16 non RSO’s is the same as living near 1 RSO’s. Once you assume travel then it matters not where you live.

    That is kinda shocking that living near 16 “normal” people is just as bad as living near 1 RSO, if no one will travel to commit a violent love crime, But that’s the statistical fact.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  34. whatsmyname

    RE: Sam Ferris @ 36
    I am very, very sorry I asked.

    Beyond that, there are several problems I have with your argument.

    The first is that I am hugely dubious about a study that says most criminal recidivism is 60%, but for kitten kickers it is only 5%. (lies, golly lies, and statistics) It makes no sense on the face of it.

    The second is that traveling may be a limited option for a number of probably underemployed RSO’s, plus you have to expect the compulsive nature of this activity may mean crimes of opportunity most likely will be associated with where the person most often is located.

    Third, if I accept your numbers that 1 RSO equal 16 others, I do not have the choice of either /or, but more probably I have the 1 RSO plus 16 others, thereby doubling my chances for problems.

    I’m not even one who looked into this before buying; but I would consider it a negative factor (especially if I was having the family walk everywhere)

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  35. BillE

    By Sam Ferris @ 26:

    How could you assume that an RSO is to stupid or lazy to get in a car and drive to another location to commit a crime?

    The fact that they’ve committed violent love crimes is enough for me to believe that they may not think rationally. They may be bright enough to be manipulative or crafty, but their willingness to commit a violent love crime says a lot about their decision making.
    There’s also a lot of kitten kickers who aren’t functioning with 100% mental capacity because of either mental illness or disability.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  36. Kary L. Krismer

    By BillE @ 38:

    By Sam Ferris @ 26:
    How could you assume that an RSO is to stupid or lazy to get in a car and drive to another location to commit a crime?

    The fact that they’ve committed violent love crimes is enough for me to believe that they may not think rationally. They may be bright enough to be manipulative or crafty, but their willingness to commit a violent love crime says a lot about their decision making.
    There’s also a lot of kitten kickers who aren’t functioning with 100% mental capacity because of either mental illness or disability.

    So what we need is a data source that tracks kitten kickers by IQ. ;-)

    I think the one kitten kicker in my neighborhood looks smarter than most of those in Tim’s neighborhood, so now I have even more reason to feel safe for the children in the neighborhood.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  37. Sam Ferris

    By whatsmyname @ 37:

    RE: Sam Ferris @ 36
    I am very, very sorry I asked.

    Beyond that, there are several problems I have with your argument.

    The first is that I am hugely dubious about a study that says most criminal recidivism is 60%, but for kitten kickers it is only 5%. (lies, “golly” lies, and statistics) It makes no sense on the face of it.

    The second is that traveling may be a limited option for a number of probably underemployed RSO’s, plus you have to expect the compulsive nature of this activity may mean crimes of opportunity most likely will be associated with where the person most often is located.

    Third, if I accept your numbers that 1 RSO equal 16 others, I do not have the choice of either /or, but more probably I have the 1 RSO plus 16 others, thereby doubling my chances for problems.

    I’m not even one who looked into this before buying; but I would consider it a negative factor (especially if I was having the family walk everywhere)

    Well its the kitten kicker rate is over maybe like 5 years or so, and for a violent love CRIME (i.e. if a RSO commits a robbery thats not shown), 60 percent no doubt includes parole violations as well. But the fact is that the recidivism rate for kitten kickers is only higher then murders and lower then everything else, that’s from DOJ statistics. Still the inability to get a job, live where we want etc. will force people into crime but again if its not a violent love CRIME then its not shown in the figures I give. And 60percent for other crimes like stealing is not all that surprising, guy shoplifts $100 item, he gets out in a few weeks or a month and doesn’t care if he goes to jail for another month or so. Plus that includes drug possession type crimes, people who are addicted to drugs could care less about the legal system. Its not the recidivism rate that I rely upon mostly anyway, and that’s not really that important to you, it’s the percentage of new violent love crimes that are committed by RSO’s. Lets say the recidivism rate was 100 percent yet RSO’s committed only 1 in 1000 new violent love crimes, the recidivism rate would be meaningless in assessment of your risk.

    Ya you double your risk if you have 1 RSO and 16 normal people. And that not illogical. You can always test theory by taking extremes. If you were on a desert island and knew no one then your risk of being a victim of a violent love crime is almost zero …. If your child was taken care of by 100 people for 15 minutes a day each he clearly would be way more at risk then if he was cared for by 2 people 12 hours a day each. Thus the more people who have access to your child the greater the risk. Thus the more people who live near you the greater the risk.

    But this is a shocking statistic, if you go out 1/2 mile from where you are that’s what 100,000’s of people in most metropolitan areas as a complete guess. Living near 16,000 normal people is like living near 1000 RSO’s ….

    No one would even consider living in the middle of 1000 RSO’s but no one would bat an eye at being surrounded by 16,000 normal people. Yet the risk is the same.

    I’m going to run my figures by the California kitten kicker Management Board, and guy who I know is a professional at statistics.

    But its logical, if 19 out of 20 new violent love crimes are committed by normal people then some number of normal people will equal the same risk as one RSO’s who commit one out of 20 new violent love crimes.

    Just note for yourself all these sting operations where people travel to met someone they think is underage who turns out to be an undercover cop, by far and away those caught are not registered kitten kickers.

    http://sexoffenderresearch.blogspot.com/2011/06/32-arrested-in-child-violent love-sting.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FrEMt+%28violent love+Offender+Research+by+A+Voice+of+Reason%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  38. maxrommel

    Tim’s Everett neighborhood is a train wreck when it comes to crime. I would never walk through it, but I’d drive through going maybe 90. Maybe.

    Max

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  39. Sam Ferris

    I was a bit off, its 1 to 32 and there is only 16,660 within 1/2 mile in San Fransico. Here is the updated info that I send to the California kitten kicker Managment Board:

    http://samdeathwalker.com/forum/showthread.php?p=333#post333

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  40. Seattle Bubble • Top 10 Most-Commented Posts of 2011

    [...] 242 comments, 06/21: The kitten kicker Bogeyman [...]

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

These comments are paged! This is page 3. Navigate the pages here:
1 2 3

Leave a Reply

Do you want a nifty avatar picture next to your name, instead of a photograph of Tim's dog? Just sign up with Gravatar, and make sure to use the same email address in the form below. It's that easy!

Please read the rules before posting a comment.

You have 4 comments remaining on this post.

Archives

Find us on Google+