In a perfect world they wouldn’t.
But its hard to ensure that everyone gets a traumatic free childhood, or that any natural insedent traumatise some people to the point where they cant/won’t be helped.
I guess the downvotes is because your comment feels too unrealistic idealistic (otherwise I can’t see why)
If they can settle in their own town, there is no threat and they don’t need welfare. An example where initial assistance is needed but no continuous welfare.
Why does such a group have to exist?
Why the downvotes. I cannot think of a group that is inherently unsafe. Who do you have in mind that you consider it an insult?
In a perfect world they wouldn’t. But its hard to ensure that everyone gets a traumatic free childhood, or that any natural insedent traumatise some people to the point where they cant/won’t be helped. I guess the downvotes is because your comment feels too unrealistic idealistic (otherwise I can’t see why)
non offending pedophiles are a classic example of a group that makes others unsafe. and removing them would be mass murder of innocent people.
If they can settle in their own town, there is no threat and they don’t need welfare. An example where initial assistance is needed but no continuous welfare.