Megans Law notification delivered by Police~

[Philbert]

The silliest argument against Megan's law is that sex offenders are more likely to be related to the child than to be strangers, and therefore parents should not pay attention to known sex offenders in the neighborhood. This is a comical misunderstanding of conditional probability. Since I know that I'm not a pedophile, the posterior probability of me molesting my kid is zero, and hence I am quite correct to be more concerned about the paroled rapist down the street than about myself, regardless of the fact that more kids are molested by their fathers than by strangers. Facts about populations apply to populations - when it comes to my personal situation, I have additional knowledge beyond general statistics. I can't know with the same level of certainty that other people aren't a danger, but I can say with acceptably high probability that my kids would be safe with my immediate family and several close friends.

The statistics about known vs unknown sex offenders is not an argument against Megan's law, it's an argument about the importance of awareness, of getting to know people and about teaching your kids what to do if they feel uncomfortable. None of this needs to be exclusive of knowing who the known rapists are in your neighborhood.

I heartily endorse everything that has been said about not being blind to the dangers of abuse by people who aren't strangers, and about teaching children to look out for themselves. But that doesn't mean that the risk of stranger violence should be disregarded. Consider homicide - most victims are killed by someone they know. The same argument can be made that we are all paranoid for carrying guns to defend against burglars / carjackers / other random attackers when we're more likely to be killed by our spouses. Again, this comes from misunderstanding conditional probability. Since most homicides are domestic, I should fear my wife more than a stranger lurking outside my house based only on the general statistics about homicide. But I have more knowledge than just population statistics. I know from living with my wife that she is not a violent person and would not harm me. Thus I am more worried about being attacked by whoever's breaking into houses in my neighborhood than I am about being attacked by my wife.

I guess what I'm saying is that as a non-idiot, Megan's law information is useful to me even if it's not useful to everyone. I understand the issues with vigilantism and the skewed perception of "stranger danger" but the solution to that is not to ditch Megan's law, the solution is to educate people how to consider that information in the proper context.