|
It started in the early 1990s: a great new idea to track sex offenders who had been released from prison. The intent was good and the motivation sensible; the program would allow law enforcement to keep track of released sex offenders and, as it developed let people know when a convicted sex offender was living down the street. There was a flaw in the plan right from the start. As a parent, sure, I’d like to know if there’s a sex offender living next door. I’d also like to know if there was a child batterer, a drug dealer, or a murderer living next door…but for some reason the legislatures didn’t think those things were quite so pressing. Sex offenders got special treatment. The selectivity had some absurd results, too. My family was safe from the 19-year-old kid who’d had six with his underage girlfriend. In most states, that makes him a sex offender subject to registration requirements and doomed to show up on watch lists and websites for years to come—maybe even for the rest of his life. Just the price he has to pay to keep my family safe. Well, except from armed robbers and kidnappers and burglars and identity thieves and serial killers and stuff. It is useful, though, to be able to find out when there are convicted child molesters in the neighborhood. And if child murderers also happen to have been convicted of some sexual misconduct, we might be able to find out about them to. As a mother, I sincerely appreciate that. Or I appreciated it in concept, anyway, until I attempted to USE my local sex offender website. You see, the extreme thoroughness that put every person convicted of a crime tangentially related to sex had an unintended effect: it buried the real threats in a landslide of relatively petty criminals and people whose sole offenses had occurred many years ago. But at least the records weren’t cluttered up with murderers and such. After a while, though, registration and websites weren’t enough. Legislatures started having more great ideas—ideas like restricting where convicted sex offenders could live. Again, the concept made sense: let’s make sure convicted child molesters don’t set up shop across the street from the elementary school. But in many states, they neglected to confine the restrictions to child molesters (although it’s extraordinarily rare for an offender to target both children and adults), and in some of those states it wasn’t just schools and playgrounds that were off limits. In Georgia, for instance, no sex offender may reside within 1,000 feet of a child care facility, church, school, or "area where minors congregate." Those areas are defined as: parks, recreation facilities, playgrounds, skating rinks, neighborhood centers, gymnasiums, school bus stops, public libraries and public and community swimming pools. In some communities, that makes it virtually impossible to find housing that doesn’t violate the law—and the law applies even to those convicted of crimes of indecency such as public urination. Not feeling too sorry for the convicted sex offender who has trouble finding a home after he’s released from prison? You’re undoubtedly in good company. But you might want to consider this: homelessness not only makes offenders harder for parole and probation officers to track and makes notification of neighbors impossible, it increases the likelihood of recidivism. Thus, by making it difficult or impossible for convicted sex offenders to find stable housing, we’re minimizing the ability to monitor them and making them more likely to commit new crimes. Portions of the Georgia law were struck down as unconstitutional in 2007, but the legislature was determined, and a modified but substantially similar law is back on the books. In California, the number of homeless sex offenders today is more than 12 times what it was just over two years ago, when voters approved residency restrictions in an initiative. A state panel is reporting that there is no evidence suggesting that the restrictions decrease recidivism, and has asked the governor and legislature to change the law. Meanwhile, California officials determined not to let those offenders slip through the cracks are spending nearly $25 million/year to house convicted sex offenders who are unable to find legal lodging under the law. In addition to the expense and ineffectiveness of the operation, it often has the undesirable effect of grouping convicted sex offenders together in temporary housing or residential hotels—precisely counter to the usual effort to separate released convicts. One small town recently considered a revised proposal about sex offender living restrictions: the initial plan would have prohibited sex offenders from living in 98% of the town, while the revised plan cut that figure back to 84%. It’s easy to say “That’s fine—we don’t want sex offenders in our town!” Probably no one does. But restricting where they can live isn’t going to make them disappear: it’s been tried in more than 20 states and the proven result is that it drives them underground. Sex offender registration in its current form ruins the lives of people as the result of very minor transgressions. A man who was arrested for urinating in an alley on his way home from a bar one night in college might find himself, years later, unable to work in (or even live near) a school. The teenage girls recently charged criminally for sending nude pictures of themselves to their boyfriends’ cell phones could face similar restrictions. Perhaps it’s easy to shrug that off—however petty, they did commit crimes, and in today’s climate it’s arguable that everyone should know that a very wide range of activity to criminal charges and lifelong consequences. But what about the children these laws were intended to protect? The simple fact is that mass sex offender registration, without charge-specific filtering, provides little or no value—and whatever minimal value it does provide comes at the expense of something far more important: the ability to track and monitor sex offenders in a stable environment that may reduce recidivism. It’s time we stopped racing to the polls to vent our emotions and pass laws that make us feel better, and started thinking about the kind of law that might make a difference. More Sex Offender Registration / Restriction Absurdities Unveiled
How to Stay 30 Feet Away from Kids Florida Housing Sex Offenders Under Bridge How to Deal With Sex Offenders Banishment by a Thousand Laws: Residency Restrictions on Sex Offenders Never Going Home: Does it Make Us Safer? Additional Resources on the Impact of Sex Offender Registration and Restrictions
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email This
Trackback(0)
Comments (24)
  written by Querty, January 29, 2009
All very valid arguments worth considering. However, your hyperbolic title does not serve your cause well. You are arguing for reforms to the system, not calling it all stupid.
 written by constitutionalfights, January 29, 2009
Thank you for a thoughtful, well-written, well-studied, rational common-sense article on this important topic. www.constitutionalfights.org
 written by Sex Offender Issues, January 30, 2009
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com
First, let me get this out. I am totally against ANY form of abuse to any human being. And I believe anyone who murders another human being should be in prison for the rest of their life (until they die). I do not believe in the death penalty for anyone. Also, I believe that once a person has been in and out of prison and has served their probation and parole, done everything required of them, and what was signed on the "contract" when they took the plea, none of this should be required of them, none of it. The state cannot tear up a contract like this, which they are basically doing, it's unconstitutional. Many people, if they had known they would be faced with all this, they would have NOT taken a plea deal. And the courts are very aware of this and this is why they made it retroactive; thus violating ex-post facto laws! They should be allowed to get on with their life as if nothing happened. I'm not saying for it to be removed from their record, but, the crime should be removed from public view and background checks, they should not have any more restrictions, shaming, etc. If they commit another crime, then they face a lot more punishment, like everything else is treated. When are we going to move away from being "TOUGH ON CRIME" and move to being "SMART ON CRIME?" If you locked every single s*x offender up, at this moment, or killed every one of them, do you think the problem is over? No, more will follow. I've heard many people say "If these laws protect one child, then they are worth it!" And at the same time, if millions are tortured, it's ok. Offenders are losing their homes, jobs, families, and children and cannot find new jobs or homes due to the insanity of these laws. The families are also made into outcasts for associating with or being related to an ex-offender and their own children are harassed and bullied at schools due to a family member being an ex-offender. I know these laws are a sensitive issue, but as all issues, they must be discussed and we must come up with a valid solution that will work. The laws, as they exist now, DO NOT WORK! People are always saying they cause unintended consequences. These laws have been on the books for years now, so nothing is unintended anymore. When are we going to set aside fear, hate, rage and anger and come up with a real solution? History has proven that these feelings NEVER get good laws passed but only create bad ones that punish and torture many people. These knee-jerk reactions to a slim number of high-profile crimes, like Adam Walsh and Jessica Lunsford, MUST STOP! When an ex-offender is forced to move from his/her home, thus having to sell it, cannot find another home within the law due to the residency "buffer" zones, get fired from their jobs due to being on the registry, cannot find a new job due to being on the registry, their husband/wife lose their jobs due to a significant other being on the registry, their children lose their friends and are harassed and bullied in school due to a family member being on the registry, thus destroying the children's lives, ex-offenders are forced into homelessness and to live under bridges, harassed by police, neighbors and probation/parole officers, have to wear "I'm a s*x offender T-shirt" or have a neon green license plate on ALL their cars, have "s*x offender" on their drivers license and forced to renew their licenses every year, forced from shelters during tornadoes or hurricanes, cannot give blood at some places due to being discriminated against for being on the s*x offender registry, denied housing due to being on the registry, signs placed in their yards inviting harassment and ridicule from the neighbors, forced to move when the neighbors start picketing outside the ex-offenders home, the list is endless. I THINK THIS IS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT, BEYOND THE EXTREME!
 written by Melinda, January 30, 2009
As a psychologist, I know that sex offenders are almost impossible to treat. Perhaps the public should not know who's on that list--but I like the idea of law enforcement keeping an eye on where they might be because the propensity for repeat offenses is just so great.
I do agree that it is inhumane for people who have served their time to not be able to live where they want. IMO, they should give much heavier sentences--but they are too busy locking up addicts and other non-violent criminals to keep the jails available for REAL criminals.
 written by John, January 30, 2009
>>>As a psychologist, I know that sex offenders are almost impossible to treat.
Please explain this remark. As a psychologist, I would imagine you might have a little more sense than to make such a blanket statement, which, ironically enough, is the same statement repeated ad-nauseum by politicians and political pundits. Where is the evidence? Is it in the US Dept of Justice study that states...with actual numbers...that "sex offenders" reoffend at a rate of 3-5%, or is it the "they all reoffend all the time" that Nancy Grace and Bill O'Reilly spout off? America really bought this thing hook, line, and sinker.
 written by MSLGWCEO, January 30, 2009
As a psychologist, you should know that the vast majority of child sexual abuse, is committed by family members and those known to the family. This category of offenders have the lowest rate of recidivism, and that without treatment.
There are to my understanding, three (3) other categories and it is to those I hope your referring to. 1. The offender who DID NOT KNOW their victim. 2. The REPEAT offender. 3. The VIOLENT offender. Another fact is that all new sex crimes committed in the United States, 98% are committed by those NOT on the registries. And BTW, This is a very good article. www.cfcoklahoma.org
written by MSLGWCEO, January 30, 2009
Here is a link to some recidivism rates
You may have to "copy and paste into your browser http://cfcoklahoma.org/New_Site/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=0&func=view&catid=87&id=&id=636&catid=87
 written by The Fallen One, January 30, 2009
It seems like every initial comments in every comment board on sex offender issues is either a kill em' all comment or someone claiming to be a professional who then makes a very cliched claim. Hence we have this: "As a psychologist, I know that sex offenders are almost impossible to treat." Statistics say otherwise, it says reoffending is low. The vast majority of Former Offender won't reoffend. There are a number of sex offender myths that fuel these laws. But the truth is the exact opposite of what society has been taught to believe:
http://www.oncefallen.com/SOMyths.html Millinda, if you believe people can't change, then you need to find a new line of work. It defeats the entire philosophy of psychology. Get the facts, don't buy the hype! Great article, by the way.
written by Melinda, January 30, 2009
I should probably have clarified my position and my profession. I am NOT a clinical psychologist, I am a teaching/research psychologist who does not study this particular issue.
I was also extremely tired and at the end of my day when I posted my original statement--and probably should not have posted at all--I really regret this now. I am also a victim of childhood abuse--so this also influences my view. Child predators are almost impossible to treat. My focus is primarily on this. "The U.S. Department of Justice has indicated that "the average child molester," as if any such two-legged monster that could be considered "average," commits 380 acts of child molestation during his lifetime. A 1992 study in one state looked at almost 800 child molesters and rapists who had completed psychiatric treatment as part of their sentence, and noted that these "graduates" were arrested more often for new sex crimes than were those who had not been treated. An international study found a 43% rate of "known" recidivism among child molesters, with the more violent the offense, the greater the chance for repeat behavior, while another study indicated that a group of less than 250 known child molesters had admitted to attempting over 55,000 molestations involving almost 20,000 victims. And finally, California Sen. Dennis Hollingsworth indicated that there were 33,000 sexually violent felons missing or unaccounted for in that state, a sure recipe for future crimes against children and others." Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7256308/
 written by nathan, January 31, 2009
that bullcrap Im on the sex offender list and have only "molested" one child BEFORE I was arrested and never molested another child again after I was released. BELIEVE IT !!!
ME and 100's other rso are living proof that that STAT is WRONG !!!!
written by nathan, January 31, 2009
oh yah your "source" don't revel the REAL source of where that source come from.
 written by Darren Tan, January 31, 2009
Imagine walking down a street and these two situations happen:
a. We know that the guy coming our way is a registered sex offender, we're flinching away. b. We don't know the guy coming our way is a registered sex offender, so we keep walking until we actually see his face. And then suddenly the crime happened... From this situation, we would definitely pick situation a for our own safety. Well if we keep getting away from the so-called sex offender, it's like we're creating a conspiracy against them. Sex offenders were criminals, but they are humans as well. They should be given a chance to start over.
 written by Kobra, January 31, 2009
Sex offender registration in and of itself isn't a completely bad idea, but when they slap the "sex offense" label on nonsexual crimes, it falls apart.
 written by Loogie, February 13, 2009
"The fallen One" is Derek Logue, a Tier III sexual Predator, who served years of prison time for molesting an 11 year old girl. He is violent, cuts himself and has lost numerous appeals to be reclassified. He is a danger to children.
http://truthaboutdereklogue.blogspot.com/
 written by TruthAboutLoogie, February 24, 2009
The fake name "Loogie" is really a member of cyberterrorist group Absolute Zero United, who has a leader in the skinheads, called Patty Wetterling (the one who crated the first national sex offender registry a "pedo enabler," promotes rape and murder of their detractors, and exploit children for personal profit. They are a danger to society and should be reported to the FBI immediately.
http://absolutezerounites.blogspot.com/
 written by Fima Fimovich, May 22, 2009
I am volunteer for Minnesota RSOL ( Reform S..x Offender Laws ) http://www.reformsexoffenderlaws.org/index.php I would like to provide you with additional information about this year sex offender bill in Minnesota: No network for predators. In first version of this bill Karla Bigham planned to ban all 20,000 s..x offenders in Minnesota from accessing Social Network web sites. I testified against this bill at Civil Justice Committee meeting. I told lawmakers that there was 20,000 s..x offenders in Minnesota, and I estimated about 100,000 family members. They would be very upset. Lawmakers had many concerns about bill banning all s..x offenders, even former streakers. After I testified this bill was defeated, but next day they reconsidered votes. Probably under pressure from Attorney General. I offered lawmakers to apply this bill only for most dangerous offenders, visited Senate and had conversations with some senators. Also I sent many messages to lawmakers, explaining that recent research found that only 4% arrested as online predators were registered s..x offender. What is good for most dangerous offenders, may not be good for low level offenders. Also I wrote article about political games in Minnesota House. Green License Plates for SO in Minnesota. http://estrinyefim.newsvine.co...4#c6909784
 written by ThosewhoCare, October 20, 2009
I too second your opinion. In the early 80's my brother was convicted of rape, no DNA evidence was presented and the woman herself had a shaky background. He had proof that he was at work at the time of the incident yet the DA's office went after him big time (white woman/black man) in one of the most racist states in the union (Texas). He's been out of prison for over 20 years and his life is s**t. Not only do the neighbors shun him, his wife and kids but the school systems won't allow him inside the schools. He can't seem to hold a job becaue someone is always complaining that they can't work around a sex offender int he office. He's encountered more trouble from having his name on the registry than necessary. The woman who accused him even tried to recant her statement after 10 years but yet he's still on the list. The DA says she's lying. Yet all the evidence points to my brother was innocent. WHY?
Society believes that by having a list they are safe -- they are not. After volunteering for the rape crisis center for years I can tell you that most of the offenders that rape children are within your family circle. Sick isn't it? But know one wants to tell on Uncle Henry because he's married to Aunt Ruth. Or take the family who refuses to leave their children with a certain cousin because he's been known to touch inappropriately, why isn't his name on the list? Better yet why hasn't someone called the police? We all worry about our children but having a list isn't enough when that list is filled with non-criminals (CT arrested gay guys and placed them on the list for committing sodomy). America needs to wake up and take control of their own lives and stop relying on scare tactics created by governments and the media to distract you from the real issues.
 written by Kristine, December 06, 2009
MY COUSIN WAS ACCUSED OF MOLESTING A CHILD. HE DID NOT DO THIS CRIME. HE WAS STANDING ON A PAY PHONE OUT SIDE OF HIS CHURCH WHERE HE WORKED AS A BROTHER TO THE CHURCH AND IT WAS DARK OUTSIDE. THE FAMILY THAT HAD TAKEN HIM IN WHILE HE LIVED ON THE STREETS HAD A DAUGHTER ABOUT 2 YEARS OLD THAT LITTLE GIRL WAS RUNNING IN AND OUT OF THE CHURCH DOOR AND ALMOST LANDED IN THE STREET IN FRONT OF A CAR, MY COUSIN THREW THE PAY PHONE CORD DOWN AND GRABBED HER BY THE BACK OF THE PANTS TO KEEP HER FROM GETTING HIT. HE THEN RAN BACK TO THE PHONE WITH HER ON HIS SHOULDER AND IT JUST SO HAPPENED THAT HER PANTS BUTTON AND ZIPPER BROKE WHEN HE GRABBED HER TO KEEP HER FROM GETTING HIT BY A CAR, HE THEN TOLD THE PERSON ON THE PHONE I HAVE TO GO AND TAKE MY LITTLE SISTER BACK IN THE CHURCH TO MY ADOPTED PARENTS AND RIGHT AT THAT MOMENT A POLICE WOMAN PULLS UP AND SAYS WHAT ARE YOU DOING WITH THAT CHILD, HE SAYS TAKING HER BACK IN THE CHURCH TO MY PARENTS, AND SHE POLICE WOMAN WHO WAS BLACK SAYS TO HIM, HER PANTS ARE UNZIPPED AND WHY ARE THEY UNZIPPED HE TOLD HER THE STORY ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED, WITH HER ALMOST GETTING HIT BY THE CAR AND SHE SAYS WELL IT DOES NOT LOOK RIGHT AND I AM TAKING YOU IN FOR CHILD MOLESTATION. MY COUSIN DID NOT A THING WRONG TO THAT CHILD AND CAN YOU BELEIVE HE WAS TRIED AND CONVICTED, NEITHER THE MOTHER OR HER CHILD APPEARED IN COURT BECAUSE THEY HAD NOTHING TO SAY AGAINS HIM SO AN ARREST WARRANT WAS ISSUED FOR HER AND SHE WAS BROUGHT IN AND TESTIFIED TO THE FACT THAT MY COUSIN DID NOTHING WRONG TO HER CHILD, THE CHILD THEN GOT ON THE STAND AND SAID, SHE LOVED MY COUSIN AND HE NEVER DID ANYTHING TO HURT HER AND THAT SHE SWEARS THIS ON GODS LOVING NAME. THE f**kING JURY FOUND HIS GUILTY. I DONT UNDERSTAND THIS , OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM IS SUPPOSED TO WORK FOR THE INNOCENT AND IT DOES NOT, I NOW FIND THAT AROUND THE TIME HE WAS CONVICTED MORE THEN 90 PERCENT OF MEN ARRESTED FOR THAT CRIME WERE ALL FOUND GUILY. SO NOW HE WALKS AROUND WITH A SEX OFFENDER OFFENSE ON HIS HEAD AND HE IS SCARED TO DEATH TO LEAVE THE HOUSE FOR FEAR FO BEING KILLED. HE CRIES ALL THE TIME. THIS IS SO SAD AND DETRAMENTAL TO HIS HEALTH AND WELL BEING. I JUST FOUND OUT THAT THE NATIONAL COALITION OF DEFENCE ATTORNEYS HAD A HEARING SOMETIME AROUND THE 24TH OF NOVEMBER TO GET THE STATE TO INVESTIGATE THESE AND OTHER SEX OFFENDERS CHARGES. I CAN COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND IF HE WAS GUILTY BUT THE GUILY LIES IN THE HANDS OF OUR SYSYEM.
 written by Mackenzie, December 13, 2009
Didn't you think of creating a journal based on your blog (many people already do so - have a look at their experience at http://www.pdfqueen.com the search engine on pdf periodical)? In comparison with the blog, journal is more convenient to read
 written by daniel goichman, February 22, 2010
i committed a sex offense crime one time 8 yrs ago. its ruined my life now. having to register. having to be denied employment by 98.5% of all employers. registration for life is excessive punishment for this type of crime. i'm not proud of what i did, but on the other hand, i dont think my life should simply be over because i made one mistake, one time.
Write comment
You can add your comment here
|
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
