This morning’s arrest of Daniel Joseph Griffin got me to thinking about so-called “ex cons” and payment of a debt to society.

First, some details of this present case (from the first link):

34-year-old Daniel Joseph Griffin is believed to be with 19-year-old Christina Harrison. Witnesses tell police on Monday, he stabbed Harrison’s mother to death, tied up her sisters, then kidnapped Christina at gunpoint.

He is also said to have sexually assaulted one of the girls before taking off with Christina (his girlfriend).  According to the local news reports, he has a criminal history that includes theft, burglary and escape.

In the past I’ve written that I thought that once you’ve served your time you should be a full member of society again (of course, this presupposes that punishments are severe enough to fit the crime).  Theoretically, our system is supposed to be this way, but we all know that it isn’t.  There’s a stigma that follows these people around, often making it difficult for them to work and integrate back into society.  And then we have the case of the “sex offender,” who we brand for life and require to register so we can keep him under a microscope.

Cases like this one only serve to make me wonder if it’s hopelessly naive to think that we could ever trust or reintegrate some offenders back into society.  The problem is determining which ones should be considered an ongoing threat and never allowed out.  Griffin’s history doesn’t appear to have any crimes against persons, just property and financial crimes.  Still, common social stigma against consorting with ex-cons might have been very useful in this instance in keeping at least one person alive.  Is that unfair?  Probably so.  But on the other hand, it’s simply another factor to keep in mind when making the decision to break the law.  If someone has shown themselves as being unable to live in polite society once, it’s going to take a lot of good behavior afterward to regain any semblance of trust.

This also ties into recent proposals for the death penalty for child molesters.  I know some hand-wringing types get the vapors at the idea, but it doesn’t bother me.  It seems preferable to the strange legal limbo of registration.  That type of system seems to acknowledge that these people are dangerous, yet it still allows them out.  If someone is so dangerous that he has to be watched at all times, maybe he shouldn’t be allowed out in society again.  If not the death penalty, at least give them life in prison.

Oh well… there are no simple answers here.  Just bad situations.