If you're a convicted pedophile, aren't you already on the list? Isn't all this redundant?

Glad you liked the link, Amy. And thanks for the shoutout. :-)

Fingerprints? Now this one is ridiculous. I've worked in prisons and had far less in the way of police checks. Just a background check for convictions or outstanding warrants.

Reminds me though of my mother - she volunteered to do a few hours a day at the child care centre my sister works at. They needed a few extra people around lunch to get everyone fed, etc, she wanted something to do. She has stopped bothering. She wasn't allowed to touch the kids - a mother of 4! Even if they fell over and grazed their knee. She had to go a get a staff member. Like, say, her daughter. The spectacle of my childless sister having to go to the rescue of her own mother was a bit funny though.

The pervasive notion among many of today's parents that anyone who might enjoy their child's company has a secret agenda to nail the kid says more about the parents than it does anyone else.

Since the vast, vast majority of molestation is committed by either family members or someone very close to the family (Mommy's New Boyfriend, for instance), the numbers tell us it would make more sense to have Daddy and Mommy and Uncle Elmer fingerprinted. But that would be ri-di-cu-lous!

Be afraid, be very afraid. Then pay some bozo money to give you a false sense of security.

The fingerprinting is pursuant to a criminal background check by a private agency. So they're not just collecting fingerprints, but also investigating these folks. That's going to dissuade a lot of people who simply don't want their nosey neighbors digging around in their lives. I wouldn't trust some little league administrator to understand their responsibilities in this regard.

A few months ago my wife and I were in one of NJ's many malls, and we saw a little boy, maybe age 4 or 5, wandering around crying, obviously lost. My wife was about to help when his mother found him and all was well. Had I been alone I'd have HAD to ignore the situation for fear of being branded a pedophile.

It got me thinking of how I OUGHT to handle such a situation. The best I could come up would be a recruit a small group of other men, all strangers to themselves and each other, to bring the boy to a place where he could be re-united with his guardian (like the security office). The idea being (a) good men far outnumber bad men, (b) such a group would provide protection for all of us in the event that accusations were made, and (c) in the unlikely even that there WAS a pedophile in our impromptu group of five or six men, there would have been enough of us there to pound the pervert into a red stain on the floor.

It really sucks to have to think this way.

Hey Amy, is there any chance you could address the issue of how a man ought to deal with things like lost children in this environment?

If enough people care, there will be no Little league in Tenafly, NJ. Remember, it's "for the children."

Or yet another man's job will be given over to women in the interest of "protecting the children".

How long after that happens will we be catching the (female) little league coaches in the back seat with a 12 year old like we already do with the school teachers?

How long after that happens will we be catching the (female) little league coaches in the back seat with a 12 year old like we already do with the school teachers?

female pederasts good, male pederasts bad - get it straight.

>> female pederasts good, male pederasts bad - get it straight.

When I was 16, shortly after getting my first adult job, I had a brief affair with a 28 year old married woman. Other than a broken heart when she dumped me, I would say it was one of the best experiences of my life. It was a great boost to my self esteem, gave me confidence dealing with girls my own age, and helped to usher me into adulthood. Truly, I have never since felt the high and euphoria I did when in her presence.

I wonder today if she would be arrested and possibly imprisoned...

I never gave this much thought. It has already been a fact of life here for years. I had to be investigated and have my fingerprints taken to student teach. Even with that, I am not truly alone with a child. The door is always open and there are other adults in the building.

Even volunteers in our school district must have fingerprints taken and a background check done or they may not even attend class parties. I found this surprising because they would never be alone with students. I would be right there along with other parents.

My husband has also had background checks done to coach little league. It actually eased my mind. Of course, even a pedophile will have a clean record before they are caught and convicted.

All of these "...IF you have nothing to hide" people really piss me off. The point about the police state has already been made, but let's think about WHO you're giving your personal information to. Why should I trust YOU with my fingerprints or social security number (or my husband's?)

I think next time someone needs to do a background check on me, or requires my SSN or DL number on a form, I'd like to request the date of birth, SSN, and mother's maiden name of EVERY SINGLE PERSON who's going to have access to my information. 'Cause I know MY background check is coming back clean, and they should have nothing to hide.

If enough people care, there will be no Little league in Tenafly, NJ. Remember, it's "for the children."

It is not just the unnecessary police state invasion of privacy. Administrating a program like this will have huge economic costs. They don't do those fingerprints for free, and then the have to be cataloged and kept in compliance with a myriad of federal and state regulations.

My guess, the little league program in Tenafly will cease to exist within 5 years.

Consider yourself lucky Eric. If you'd knocked her up, you might have ended up paying the bill and be somewhat responsible for breaking up a marriage.

Would you have a problem with your wife having a brief affair with a 16 year old boy? Would you want to be stuck raising a kid sired by a "kid"? Depending on where you live, just being married means any kid born of your wife, is yours legally.

All of these "...IF you have nothing to hide" people really piss me off.

Next time someone says that, start asking them some personal questions, their 'nothing to hide' pose will fall apart pretty quickly.

Also most people don't have a good sense of how much information on them is available and can be constructed by combining sources. The average non-violent criminal liability of an adult in the US is estimated to be about 12 years. That is, on average, adults in the US who've never been charged with a crime are still liable for criminal penalties adding up to 12 years for crimes that they haven't been charged for, and often aren't aware of. Mr. Nothing To Hide would be sorely surprised to learn that he's going to prison for 3 years because the car battery he threw out wasn't disposed of correctly.

Geez Sio- total buzzkill.

I second Eric's comments. Women in their 20s an 30s absolutely should have sex with teenage boys. It is great for the boys. Helps with their normal, healthy development and self-esteem.

Why would anybody want to stop this?

It probably works vice-versa too, but as a guy who had sex with older women, I can only speak to my own experience.

Reality often bites Eric. Sorry. :)

I've seen that type of deal play out in real life. Changed my attitude a lot on the "older woman" deal. I'm sure its great as long as no kids get created...

That and reading stories of 14 year old boys forced to pay child support to their rapists. Look up the Alexander Shire case in MI/NY.

I second Eric's comments. Women in their 20s an 30s absolutely should have sex with teenage boys. It is great for the boys. Helps with their normal, healthy development and self-esteem.

Why would anybody want to stop this?

I third Eric's comments. Men in their 20s and 30's absolutely should have sex with teenage girls. It is great for the girls. Helps with their normal, healthy development and self-esteem.

Why would anybody want to stop this?

In my case, that horse is long gone from the barn -- because of the work I do, there are probably a dozen government agencies that already have my fingerprints. MarkD had a great point about what they're getting themselves into. Doing an intensive background check on someone is not an inexpensive process, particularly since it's very important to get it right. If someone is doing an investigation on X and they ask me about X and I say "He's a pervert who has sex with goats", am I telling the truth, or do I have a grudge against X because he won $500 off of me in a poker game? How does the investigator know? It takes a lot of digging to get in the general neighborhood of the truth. And if X fails to get his clearance because of something I said, how does he know? Is there a process for finding out, or appealing the decision? And what is the potential liability if false information about someone leaks out of the system and becomes public knowledge? They are playing with fire and they haven't a clue that they are.

Oh please. Fine if you don't want anyone having to get fingerprinted, but this isn't a man-hating policy. I coached track at my old high school last year and had to be finger-printed. I even tried to put it off hoping they wouldn't notice until the season was over and they enforced it. I'm a 25 year old woman. With no intention of sleeping with teenagers by the way.

Doing an intensive background check on someone is not an inexpensive process, particularly since it's very important to get it right.

The article mentions that they've received a grant from some foundation for the first 500, so there is some cost involved which the league will have to pick up eventually. But I wouldn't be surprised if these checks are relatively cursory, equivalent to what you can get off of the internet. It may be that many of the organizations requiring fingerprints aren't actually doing anything with them. They're just collecting them in the hopes of making the checks seem more sophisticated. It may be a bluff.

That's probably true Norm. Like airline security checks, they're more there to make people feel better than to actually achieve anything.

But I don't want people taking my fingerprints for minor things. I've never had to do it, and unless I get a sensitive Defense job or something I never expect to do it. Whether they're using them or not doesn't matter. These things have a way of still being there years later.

Look at it this way - I'm relatively anonymous on the internet. I have a very common name (Luke
Williams, try googling that! If you can find a link that is actually me, you get a small prize. There are two that I know of). But Amy could probably track me down from my email address with a couple of phone calls. My company wouldn't give out personal details, but I don't doubt a simple enquiry would get enough to find my address elsewhere.

The point here is they're asking for sensitive personal information out of paranoia. Whether they're using it or not, it could be used against you one day. It's not right.

"Fine if you don't want anyone having to get fingerprinted, but this isn't a man-hating policy. I coached track at my old high school last year and had to be finger-printed. I even tried to put it off hoping they wouldn't notice until the season was over and they enforced it. I'm a 25 year old woman. With no intention of sleeping with teenagers by the way."

Of course, you would say that.

And so two wrongs, magically, again make a right.

I never gave this much thought. It has already been a fact of life here for years. I had to be investigated and have my fingerprints taken to student teach. Even with that, I am not truly alone with a child. The door is always open and there are other adults in the building.

Fascinating. Meanwhile, family members - who are around the child much more often, in the privacy of the home, and are statistically FAR more likely to do nasty things to kids - well, I guess they'd raise holy hell if anyone dare suggest they be fingerprinted.

You first, Mom and Dad. Oh, and Mom's New Boyfriend: you go straight to the front of the line.

Oh, and Mom's New Boyfriend: you go straight to the front of the line.

Love it Kevin! Imagine the outcry if mothers had to register their boyfriends! "Sorry, you need to provide fingerprints before you have this one-night stand"!

Oops, I'm a bachelor late 30's uncle. Just realised I'd be first on the list. Support withdrawn.

I'm in favor of only hiring volunteers who are not seeking someone to abuse and not afraid to prove it. I have to put a fingerprint on every check I take to the bank to cash, so it's not like my fingerprints are already a secret. I am not in favor of a police state and invasion of privacy, but the extremely defensive nature of the "OMG how dare you want to know who I am before you trust me with your children" comments that really raise a red flag for me. There was a story on the news where I live about a child molester who was sentenced last year to two life sentences. The perp was my neighbors little league coach over 15 years ago. Although non of the victims knew him through little league, it's probable that he did find some victims there who just didn't report it.

Mark, I would hope that you would not leave that child unassisted. Simply follow the advice that we give children: If you are lost, find a grandmotherly looking woman to help you. You can say that this child appears lost. Would she accompany you to the nearest help (security guard, cashier, etc.) who can call for assistance.

gwyn, until that guy acctualy got convicted a background check wouldnt have turned up shit on him - it literally is a POINTLESS invasion of privacy.

And as its been pointed out time and time again children are more likely to be molested by
1 FAMILLY MEMBERS
2 familly freinds
and last, and incedentally least strangers

I think it's a shame that our society has come to this point. I think resorting to finger printing is a way to avoid lawsuits down the road in-case someone is abused. I do understand and sympathize with the parents though as there are so many kids being abused and the punishment for the folks who are caught is hardly a deterrent. I propose that at the very least men who abuse children should be castrated.

and what about the women? And what is a child? what about consetual re;ationships between teenagers? or teengers and adults?

and what about the women? And what is a child? what about consetual re;ationships between teenagers? or teengers and adults?

and what about the women? And what is a child? what about consetual re;ationships between teenagers? or teengers and adults?

Also I could slap you and cause less physical and psychological damage then a circumcision. But that would be a crime