[milo]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Really? In the average sense I don't think it would for me. I've only met one ex-bank robber once, and he didn't seem particularly threatening (he was kind of old though).

well yes, its easy to disassociate the actions of a bank robber from possible harm because they target corporations, but like i said unless you're talking about some sort of mythical friendly bank robber you'll most likely be dealing with ken noye types

You have more faith than most in the criminal justice system. Doesn't rape have one of the highest recidivism rates? In addition to this, I have no idea how you could convincingly say that someone was no longer a threat, unless they had undergone some physical transformation.
Well, no. But there's an issue of risk management for most people. If I know someone is a reformed alcoholic I don't unnecessarily offer them booze or ask them to look after my drinks cabinet (for their benefit and mine) and if someone was a reformed child molestor I'd probably not ask them to look after my children. To be fair, this is the same if they were convicted of certain types of murders.

I don't know, although id doubt it unless the individual had a prediliction towards rape but again we're getting into a situation where you're applying the term rape without any real care for what the particular situation was. I wouldn't even think certain acts that land you on the sor as worthy of being crimes so im quite happy to state that i wouldn't think they'd automatically present a threat, if they abducted/raped/murdered a child (which i think is being insinuated at) they'd most probably get a whole life tariff now anyway


Ive happily been the passenger in a car driven by someone who killed a person with their driving

There are certain categories of crimes I wouldn't really be interested if they were going to reoffend. I'd simply wish they were dead, and in good conscience couldn't help them.

Can't say the same.