Out of 747,408 Registered Sex Offenders, How Many Are Actually Dangerous?

The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC) reports that the number of registered sex offenders in the United States has increased by nearly a quarter in the last five years. The total in the most recent survey was 747,408, up from 606,816 in 2006, the first year NCMEC did a count. That was the year when Congress enacted the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act (currently up for reauthorization), which imposed new requirements for state sex offender registries and created a national database incorporating information from those registries. NCMEC CEO Ernie Allen says registration "is a reasonable measure designed to provide important information to authorities and to help protect the public, particularly children." Yet his group does not say how many of the 747,408 people listed on sex offender registries are predatory criminals who actually pose a threat to public safety, probably because it does not know.

The usefulness even of properly focused registries is debatable, since Justice Department data indicate that almost nine out of 10 sex crimes are committed by people with no records for that kind of offense. Furthermore, as I explained in a July Reason article, registered sex offenders include people convicted of nonviolent crimes such as solicitation, public urination, streaking, and consensual sex with teenagers (even teenagers they subsequently marry). Allen avers that "these registries are especially important because of the high risk of re-offense by some of these offenders" (emphasis added). As I note in the Reason piece, recidivism rates for sex offenders seem to have been greatly exaggerated. In any case, if protecting potential victims is the raison d'etre for the registries, shouldn't they be limited to people who are likely to commit crimes against others? 

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Bee Tagger||

    Oh, look, it's Angel Batista.

  • ||

    Me.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Justice Department records indicate that 9 out of 10 sex crimes in the United States are committed by Warty.

  • ||

  • Zeb||

    I didn't think people from Ohio, or wherever the fuck you are, knew about Scissorfight. New Hampshire's alright if you like fighting, you know.

  • ||

    And the other 10% are committed by Steve Smith.

  • Zeb||

    Has anyone ever actually seen Warty and STEVE SMITH together?

  • ||

    When working out and people ask "what are you training for?", some smartasses would answer "Life." Warty's answer: rape.

  • Tim||

    NAMBWA
    North American Man-Boy-Warty Association.

  • ||

    "You really do look like Marlon Brando!"

  • KW6||

    They're still covering for Slick Willie.

  • There is no "we"||

    Behold the OWS/Police-State convergance:

    http://thephoenix.com/Boston/n.....ender-ban/

  • "Furious" Styles||

    http://tinyurl.com/85vye7z

    Two questions: Will this guy be put on a sex offender registry, and should he?

  • Soccer Mom||

    ALL OF THEM! They should not be allowed to live within 100 miles of any other human being!

  • Shana Rowan||

    Sorry, not only is that impossible but incredibly ignorant. Did you even read the article? Sex offenders have one of the lowest recidivism rates of all felony offenders, and the majority of them are not pedophiles or rapists who molest children. Please educate yourself before making ridiculous comments. www.endsexcrime.org

  • wareagle||

    this registry has been so bastardized it should be rendered useless. That or perhaps the single greatest monument to well-intentioned govt ideas gone astray in our history. It serves no one, certainly not the folks on it for taking a leak and consensual sex between teenagers.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    We are all sexy offenders now.

  • Id||

    I can't wait for next Newsweek issue

  • ||

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c.....index.html

    Read this and weep. A basically good kid with a real future had his entire life ruined by these damned lists. We are a barbaric society.

  • ||

    The terms of his probation that he broke and got him sent to prison are almost the worst part. Is probation always set up specifically to make you fuck up and go to prison?

  • ||

    Pretty much, especially probation for sex offenses. And the guy was 18 and had consensual sex one time with a 12 year old girl who lied about her age. To fuck that guy's life like that is just wrong.

  • wareagle||

    didn't Lawrence Taylor wind up having to register as an offender after paying a hooker who lied about her age?

  • ||

    I hope he reported her to the Better Business Bureau for misrepresenting her product. False advertisement hurts everyone.

  • Football is Everything||

    When you say "good kid," you mean you're an Okie fan.

  • ||

    Oh bullshit. I don't give a shit if he was cripple who couldn't play at all. What happened to that kid was wrong. And fuck you if you think otherwise.

  • Football is Everything||

    I think he lived the jock lifestyle and was surprised when reality caught up with him.

    Who knew, right? I mean, linebackers are renowned for their critical thinking skills.

  • ||

    Because only jocks go to parties and have sex in high school. Apparently he is not the only one out there who is not noted for their critical thinking skills.

    Take your stupid elsewhere.

  • Football is Everything||

    Most people manage to achieve adulthood without sex with underage children. It's common enough we have a term for it-"adult".

    When it goes the other way, we have another term for it, "sex offender". Or, more commonly, "NFL superstar".

    Which came first, the sex offender registry or a culture that encouraged behavior that was inherently destructive? I look forward to John's first post where he's proud that his 12-year-old daughter made sweet love to a linebacker while drunk.

  • Ken Hagler||

    "Most people manage to achieve adulthood without sex with underage children. It's common enough we have a term for it-"adult"."

    According to Wikipedia: "The average age of first sexual intercourse in the United States is 17.0 for males and 17.3 for females." Also according to Wikipedia, the age of consent in twelve US states is 18. In other words, for most people achieving adulthood without sex with underage children depends entirely on how delusional their state's definition of "underage children" is.

  • wareagle||

    you're right, foot. Every horny teenager should check the ID of every girl that is willing to have sex with him. Most amazing is that you expect higher level thinking from a high school kid than from the degreed geniuses who concocted this list.

  • Evergreen State College||

    Shouldn't you be in class?

  • mad libertarian guy||

    "Jock lifestyle?"

    What the fuck is a jock lifestyle?

    Collectivist much?

  • SFC B||

    "Jock Lifestyle" is what he fantasizes he'd be doing if he was a "jock".

    Just like how he'd let his grandma die of starvation if the state didn't force him to be "charitable".

  • Ted S.||

  • Joe M||

    Urinating in public is like raping America.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    R. Kelly-style.

  • ||

    The only reason that I don't have to register as a sex offender is because my wife's parents liked me when we first started dating. We've been together for almost 16 years now and married for 10 and have two children.

  • ||

    Yeah but most parents are a little more hard nosed about some 40 year old guy banging their 12 year old daughter.

  • ||

    Apparently his wife's parents weren't. That's their right as Americans.

  • ||

    Very true.

  • ||

    "Yeah but most parents are a little more hard nosed about some 40 year old guy banging their 12 year old daughter."

    And they should be, but my wife and I are only 2 years apart and in high school when we met. My earlier post wasn't to push the envelope or generate a shock; it was to illustrate a common occurrence that happens everyday in this society: teenagers have sex. Should every boy who bangs his girlfriend after prom be thrown in jail and branded a sex offender?

  • ||

    I was just giving you a hard time RedDragon. I totally agree with you. It is absurd. If I ever have a daughter and someone has sex with her when she is 11, I will kill that person. If she has sex with someone when she is 16, I am holding her responsible. That is not rape. Teenagers are plenty old enough to know better or to make a decision.

  • Tim||

    "There's a guy living near us "

    Unless its Warty...

  • ||

    "If I ever have a daughter and someone has sex with her when she is 11, I will kill that person."

    I with you on that one. I have two daughters, and my wife and I spend our nights praying they don't act like we did when they get into high school. But ultimately, I have faith that if they're armed with the right education to make informed decisions, then that is the best that any parent can do for their child to ensure that they grow up to be functional adults. Part of that education, though, is teaching my girls how to shoot.

  • ||

    I had a long discussion with a college once about this topic. He had two daughters 15 and 17. And he refused to admit even for a moment the possibility that one of his little angels could ever consent to having sex or ever lie about their age or in bear any responsibility whatsoever for their actions. When I pointed out the numerous absurdities of this position, his response was "you will think differently when you have kids". What? Do they remove all of my common sense at the hospital?

    This is what we are up against on this issue. There is just no discussing it with a lot of people.

  • wareagle||

    the best tool that any parents of teenagers has, can have, or will have is his/her own memory of that time. If you did it, seems naive to believe that your child will not even think about it.

  • ||

    But that was different then...

  • Paul||

    "you will think differently when you have kids".

    I think the operative word here is "think" differently. Not "know" differently. When my daughter is 17, I'll also "think" she's completely innocent. But I'll "know" different.

    Besides, lots of woods around here to hide the bodies of her boyfriends, so...

  • wareagle||

    when you tell prospective boyfriends "I got no problem going back to prison", it is interesting to watch their reactions.

  • Really?||

    the *only* reason?

  • ||

    I say the 'only reason' because in many instances, the "only" reason that some men are forced to register is because mom and dad couldn't handle the idea of their teenage daughter choosing to have sex with her boyfriend. The point is that not everyone who has to register as a sex offender deserves to be lumped in the same group as rapists and pedophiles. When most people hear the term 'sex offender,' they think that person is a monster and never even consider the possibility that he is being wrongfully labeled for something they themselves may have done in high school.

  • ||

    This is very true. The idea that anyone should be on a list for the rest of their lives for having sex with a 16 year old is absurd. IT all goes back to mommy and daddy refusing to believe that their little snow flake actually wants to have sex.

  • Extremely Disgruntled.||

    Most states laws state that age of consent is 16. Well, that is NOT true anymore, it has been qualified to mean less than a 4 year difference. If they wanted to change the age, then it should actually be changed to 18, with certain exceptions, not just "let us put more people in prison" mentality for what has been going on naturally since before the written word.

  • ||

    There's a guy living near us who is on the registry for "crimes against nature", which is all the information given. Guessing by the date and the rural locale where the "crime" was committed, he was apparently caught molesting farm animals, a long time ago, when he was in his teens.

    Here in the suburbs, where zoning laws forbid the keeping of livestock, what threat could he possibly pose, even if he DID want to do it again (which is doubtful)?

    Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that these databases DO prevent further offenses. If that's the case, wouldn't all this "noise" in the database render it LESS useful, or even useless?

  • ||

    Yes. It already has.

  • Tim||

    "There's a guy living near us..."

    It's you, isn't it?

  • ||

    Not this time.

  • Jeff P.||

    Hell, ketchup on a hotdog is a crime against nature.

  • KDN||

    Indeed. Though now Big Catsup is going to train their guns on this thread as part of an ongoing pursuit to maintain their ill-gotten lead in the condiment wars. Thanks for ruining it for everyone, Jeff.

  • ||

    I prefer A-1 and relish.

  • annonymous commenter some guy||

    I prefer bacon and melted cheese on a hot dog. But then I prefer bacon and melted cheese on most things.

  • annonymous commenter some guy||

    ... he was apparently caught molesting farm animals...

    And how does the list help his potential victims? Can they even read?

  • ||

    I haven't seen any adaptive keyboards that work with hooves, either.

  • Tacos mmm...||

    This highlights the fact the one of the points of the registry is simply to ostracize "perverts." It's a scarlet letter for the 21st century.

  • commercial guy ||

    I like tacos

  • ||

    The registry allows various politicians to claim they "did something" about the problems of people pissing behind a tree. It helps the local fuzz inflate their crime stats so they can get more dough. And it helps hysterical mothers fuss over their precious snowflakes. Why, if you don't want to be put on a registry for the rest of your life for streaking your college's football game, then maybe you shouldn't drink so much. Some to think of it, the registry also helps the geniuses at MADD issue more hysterical reports about the evils of binge drinking. Those individuals on the list are just the eggs for the omelet.

  • ||

    And don't forget sexting. We now put people on lists for sending naked pictures of themselves. But the children in child pornography are supposed to be victims? We have gone batshit insane as a society.

  • Extremely Disgruntled.||

    And the worst part about sexting is that you can NOT control who sends you what. So if someone wants to put a ChildPorn case on you, all they have to do is have a 14 year old sext you a pic, and your life is over. All because you cant stop them from doing something you never wanted in the first place. Nice Laws.

  • KDN||

    evils of binge drinking

    Because 5 drinks in two hours is too much for ANYBODY. Teetotalers are ridiculous.

  • Teetotaler||

    If I can't handle it, no one can!

  • Tim||

    Any chance we could follow these guys with drones?

  • ||

    Out of 747,408 Registered Sex Offenders, How Many Are Actually Dangerous?

    Unfortunately, most people in our society do not care to know what the answer to that question is. "Safety" has become the Holy Grail, the thing that overrides ALL principles. The desperate desire of the statists to create Nerf World plus their incredible belief that politicians can create it is one of the big reasons why I laugh out loud when they call libertarians "utopian".

  • ||

    But if even one child is saved, isn't all of this worth it? What do you hate children? Why do you hate children?

  • ||

    Because if I loved them I'd have to be in the registry.

  • ||

    Touche

  • Mr. Spock||

    Flawless logic

  • ||

    You haven't met any children, have you?

    They're really not nearly as cute in person as they are in pictures. Kind of like these animals: http://www.cracked.com/article.....y-you.html

  • Priestess||

    This quote is epic:

    The platypus is mother nature's way of saying, "I made this thing out of spare parts I found on the workshop floor, and it can still fucking cripple you."

  • Tonio||

    Thanks, Warren. I just had to deal with a very annoying customer and needed that.

  • annonymous commenter some guy||

    People don't even care how many "drug" offenders are actually dangerous. Why would they care about "sex" offenders?

    Unapproved use of the privates is pretty much the only thing Americans hate worse than unapproved use of the drugs.

  • GILMORE||

    Out of 747,408 Registered Sex Offenders, How Many Are Actually Dangerous?

    I don't consider Warty dangerous. Unless you're physically near him, that is. Then you need to run as fast as you can, leaving a cloud of pepper spray in your wake. No, as long as he stays in his cage with his internet, he's perfectly safe. So that's at least one down!

  • GILMORE||

    har. warty jumped on the comment-thread and started dry humping it so fast, I didn't even notice.

  • Hugh Akston||

    You don't seem to understand. STEVE SMITH is considered dangerous to anyone in his proximity, but authorities don't even warn about Warty because the very effort of contemplating his crimes will break your fragile mind.

    Warty has transcended the limitations of euclidean space, and is literally able to rape in two places at once. Whole new fields of mathematics have been minted just to understand how he perpetrates so many acts of non-consensual penetration within the physical universe.

    If Santa Clause weren't already such a dangerous pederast, Warty would be the Santa Claus of rape.

  • annonymous commenter some guy||

    In fact, he is always raping everyone. Transcendant, indeed.

  • ||

    Hyperrapeolic functions?

  • ||

    I'm laughing, but only to cover up the pain. I'm pretty sure Warty is raping me right now.

  • Hugh Akston||

    It can truly be said that there is a Little Warty in all of us.

  • Paul||

    I thought there was a little Elvis in all of us?

  • ||

    When last seen Steve Smith was on the run from the Russians.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....dence.html

  • Hugh Akston||

    Putin versus Sasquatch: which one will rape the other to death?

  • ||

    The picture of the Russian scientist is my favorite part of this completely awesome link. I think the odds are good that that photo was taken in the "Yeti Insitute" and that it is actually his living room and that he is plastered on vodka. Keep on rockin', Igor.

  • ||

    The most disturbing part is the picture of Steve Smith after he has spent a few days camping in the Siberian wilds without shaving.

  • ||

    I don't take all these rapeabolic steroids for nothing, you idiots.

  • ||

    "See, you don't know what rape is like. For years, I thought it was funny. 'Oh, yeah. Rape's so funny.' Until you've been raped. You're about to find out what that's like, Hand Banana."

  • Historian||

    Sex with 12 year old women used to be commonly accepted in the United States, especially among the intellectual elite. It wasn't until the great anti-intellectual climate of the 1890s that the first "age of consent" was set at 13 years.

    True story.

  • Tim||

    Warty?

  • Historian||

    I'm not sure why 11 year old and younger weren't considered. Some theories suggest that the meager stipend that PhD students and post-docs lived on in those times wasn't sufficient to pay for the young woman's father for the loss of income the family would incur without their child working for them.

  • Historian||

    By 12 years of age, the woman's hands and legs had lost their usefulness in labor, leaving only the pussy and reproductive organs in working order (assuming the male members of her family hadn't tapped this precious resource for themselves).

  • bensomewhere||

    My brother had consensual sex with a sixteen year old when he was 25, after returning from Iraq with PTSD and being qualified mentally disabled. Due to these lists, if he ever has to live with me, which is most probable, I will have a convicted "sex offender" living in my home. Legislation passed in Louisiana to not allow anyone with a sex conviction to use social based web programs such as Facebook, taking away one of the few means he felt comfortable communicating with me on a regular basis. Fear based propaganda and ignoring the individual conviction go a long way in taking away rights.

  • ||

    My god, that's awful. People really need to hear these kinds of stories more. I would like to see the asshole politicians who passed that LA law and who convicted your brother tell you to your face why they should be able to ruin the life of a veteran with PTSD, who didn't in fact do a damn thing wrong. Truly disgusting.

  • PTSD Soldier||

    Feel my pain baby. Getting sixteen-year-old pussy after blowing up brown people, it's been hell.

  • Spoonman.||

    Some guy on Fark just told me that "corporations aren't peaceable assemblies of people, they're more like an airplane or stadium."

    MY HEAD ASPLODE

  • ||

    Do not go to Fark, you moron, and certainly do not comment at Fark. What are you thinking?

  • ||

    Clearly, he isn't.

  • ||

    The "method" used to arrive at this number is quite unreliable and therefore casts serious doubt on the entire report. The DOJ has not published a number in many years, not since they realized that the number is inflated due to multiple listings of the same person in more than one state and/or jurisdiction and that it includes a certain percentage, no one knows what, of persons who have died. One example:
    If you go to the Dru Sjodin National Sex offender registry and enter the name James Glasgow, there is a listing of a man from Los Angeles, CA, who has been considered non-compliant since 1996. His birth date is listed as 1911. Since he was around 85 years old in 1996, I would presume that he may have passed away and they never removed his file, so they have been collecting grant money for him since then. I would hazard a guess that they never even bothered to check up on him, let alone look for him.
    And as far as the "missing" 100,000 registrants, that number has been de-bunked by at least two reputable studies. I have begged Ernie Allen of NCMEC several times for a link to the study or studies that produced that number; no one there will even do me the courtesy of answering my email.
    Bottom line: if you don't have research or evidence to back it up, it's just a glorified lie.
    And as for the number dangerous, this article is right on the money. The DOJ sets it between 5 and 6% of the total, the ACTUAL total, that is; the deceased registrants have not proved to be very dangerous.

  • ||

    And if we know which ones are dangerous, why are those not on lifetime supervised probation or in jail?

  • Zeb||

    Yeah, that's the question. I see no problem with locking up truly dangerous rapists and whatnot and throwing away the key. It seems to me that anyone so dangerous that they need to be monitored for life probably shouldn't be free at all.

  • ||

    John and Zeb, that is the question, and many are on life-time supervision. The problem is, too many are, so it's hard to tell the ones who should be from those who shouldn't. Example: almost all registration in Texas is lifetime, regardless of the offense. Go to the Texas SO registry and search by name for Frank Rodriquez, Jr. When you get a list of names, find the one who lives in Caldwell, TX and click on him. You will see lifetime, and you will see an offense of sexual assault of a child when the victim was 15. Now, the rest of the story; Frank was a senior and Nikki a freshman. Her mom, fearing they were getting too serious in their relationship, called the police to teach them a lesson. That was 16 years ago. They have been married now 14 years and have four children. He has petitioned for removal under Texas's new R&J law, but it hasn't happened yet. He is one; there are so many of the same sort that it dilutes the entire process; the Girardo's just blend in.
    And TPYB, I obviously touched a sore spot with you, and I apologize; that was not my intent. It's just that this whole thing needs reform so badly, and when research-based evidence clearly shows that something isn't working, we need to have enough sense to try and fix it.

  • Not an Economist||

    Well, least they have a way to get off the list. That is a start. A way to get off the list should have been a mandatory part of the law, but they were too dumb to think of the unintended consequences that were apparent to many.

  • TPTB||

    Bottom line: if you don't have research or evidence to back it up, it's just a glorified lie.

    Evidence: Fuck you, that's why.

  • rho||

    The sex offender registry is probably a bad thing, but I check it anyway.

    This either makes me a bad parent or a bad libertarian.

  • Tim||

    Hey? You might as well check, make sure you're not on it...

  • SOPA Duper||

    Ha! Checking is what gets you on it.

  • ||

    My wife looked through it when she had an excruciatingly slow day at work, but couldn't leave because she was "covering" a customer service point. So it has SOME redeeming social value.

  • Zeb||

    Do you check out of curiosity or because you actually think it might matter to your childrens' safety?

  • rho||

    Mostly because it's there. The same reason I look at my house on Google Earth.

    If I'm living a few blocks from a Jeffrey Dahmer on parole or a giant sinkhole, these are fact that are relevant to my interests.

  • Colonel_Angus||

    As a parent, you are more likely than a stranger to violate your children.

  • rho||

    I counter your meaningless assertion with another:

    As a human, you are more likely to be struck by lighting than eaten by sharks. Therefore it is completely safe to wear seal-shaped wetsuits stuffed with Kobe beef while diving in Belize.

  • ||

    Rho, his assertion isn't meaningless; it is accurate. Over 90% of child sexual crime is committed by parents, other family members, and trusted family friends and acquaintances. In very young children, six and under, it's like 98%. And with all sexual crime, adult and children, 95% of the offenses are committed by those who have no history of sexual offending and therefore aren't on sex offender registries. It's interesting that you mention being struck by lightening because several analysts, looking at data, have compared the odds of a child being molested by a stranger who is on the registry to that of the child being hit by a lightening bolt.

  • SFC B||

    When I was in recruiting we had to do a sex offender check on everyone who processed for the service.

    The databases were horribly useless. False positives abounded, and even a couple of false negatives.

  • ||

    When a 28 year old man is jailed for 35 years for having an affair (consensual, over several months, without physical abuse) with a 13 year old girl and a man who had shot and killed two men because he thought (thought) they had molested his son, was sentenced to four years, something is very wrong in this country especially with the label "sex abuse". Grow up, America, and stop over-reacting!

  • ||

    The answer to the question "Out of 747,408 Registered Sex Offenders, How Many Are Actually Dangerous" is impossible to determine. It is a matter of professional opinion, and the opinions of defense and prosecution "experts" are diametrically opposed regarding the same individual. Washington state has a law allowing the state to continue to incarcerate those sex offenders whom a judge or jury has determined will reoffend and represent a lethal threat to the public. The per capita cost of these inmates trying to get free through the courts is about $450,000 per case. And the taxpayer pays for both the prosecution and the public defense attorneys! The taxpayer pays to incarcerate them AND to attempt to release them. Who benefits? Not the taxpayer, especially if a habitual offender is released to attack again. Sex offenders are not curable. They need to be either incarcerated for life, surgically altered, or executed in the name of public safety. The taxpayer should get SOME bang for his buck.

  • ||

    Dick98260, There are also other classes of offenders that are on this registry for Adult on Adult CONSENSUAL crimes only because they are statutory. For example, in Ohio, there are 2 sub-codes on Sexual Battery that by definitions effectively DENY a stepfather or a College Teacher from ever becoming a victim of their ADULT step child or adult students. They are the guilty ones even if the conduct was consensual, or if the person in "authority" was actually the VICTIM as defined by any other State!! This is simply by Statute and Definitions! No defense accepted, entertained or allowed. GUILTY! One OSC Justice used the term "Slam Dunk" conviction on these codes. These are offenders that are on the registry as Tier 3 with community notifications for life. Crimes that are legal everywhere else in the world! As for the media and the public hype, as reading here, they should be given the death penalty. I don’t agree that ALL crimes are the same. “One size fits all” is only good if all are the exact same size. The AWA system is actually seen to be broken now in many ways. Ohio being the first to implement the AWA on a State level, now since 2008 has deemed 4 different parts of it UNconstitutional! The older Megan’s Law style of registry as still used in NY and NE, is much better at doing its stated intentions. No disrespect intended: The Adam Walsh Child Safety and Protection Act was named for a murder victim, and Megan’s Law for an actual sex crime (murder also) victim. So the AWA being only a sex crime offender law is a bit misleading. The descriptions have got a bit skewed at this point in time. Statutory, consensual, and non-victim “crimes” I need not worry about for my children. Grandpa who is incontinent, the streaker (remember the old song,) the Public Mooner, and Romeo: NO! BUT… that "other" grandpa who abused every single one of his grandkids until they were adults, (he actually would end up not ever let out of prison before dying because of quantity of his crimes), but if he is, HE is one I would like to know about. An accidental grab of a body part, is usually classed as a sexual assault. THAT one I don’t care about either. Only when there is an actual victim of FOUL PLAY should I be notified. An elbowed breast on a train NO. A man’s “bell” being "rung," NO. Make the registry accurate. ONLY publicize who a (n elected- “voice of the people” here,) Judge has classified a threat. One last gripe, If a State has a stated Age of Consent, that IS the AGE OF CONSENT, PERIOD! The other person could be 64 years old (noting that underage and the elderly are treated the same in most states!!!) None of this “less than four years” or some other age number garbage. If they were to legislate it correctly, it would be AoC=18 years old with certain CLEARLY defined exceptions that vary only by State.

  • ||

    I strongly support the Occupy movement. But changing the sex offender laws is something I equally support. (from the number of silly, dumb comments on this, I suspect trolls who are anti-Occupy)

    Few people know how bad (how ineffective) the sex offender laws are.
    I am sure it makes some feel that children are safer but how can bloating the registry with people who are not dangerous really protect children better? If Garrido isn't proof of this, I don't know what is. 18 YEARS it took to get him. And he was in compliance! Maybe if law enforcement was only watching out for the truly dangerous s.o.'s, it could work better? We need smarter sex-offender laws, not ones that put quantity over quality. But these laws are a big hit with all those who are making money (or gain power) from them. Unscrupulous politicians, who never would have gotten their butts elected if not for these laws, are happy about them. Media that is drama-driven, esp. FOX loves them.Overly-zealous prosecutors trying to make a name for themselves by increasing the notches in their legal gun belts like them. The private prisons that have an unending need to keep their beds full and the voracious surveillance industry like them. So, they'll probably be around for awhile. Parnoia sells. Sex sells. The two together with wanting to protect children in there is an extremely potent mix.

    MOST who are on the registry are NOT Dangerous,. Their lives sure are being ruined, ALONG with their family and their CHILDREN'S lives ...job loss, family loss, having to move, becoming homeless, having to look over their shoulders for some nut- case vigilantes, some who have gotten the wrong people. Who cares that the big majority are Romeo-Juliets (19 yr. old boyfriend and 15 yr. old girlfriend), urinated in public while intoxicated, mooned somebody for fun after a game, visited an adolescent prostitute who lied about her age....he may be a pathetic scumbag, but dangerous? Or he could be one of the burgeoning numbers who downloaded "child" porn, MOST of which is adolescent girls/guys and do most men check to ask the age on there??? Mothers, fathers, warn your sons! That's one of the largest growing groups on the registry. This insanity is being used to trap men that would never harm a fly. It is getting more and more unreal. What has happened to our justice system?

    If you are someone who does care about justice, educate yourself and help us in this David-Goliath fight Catching and persecuting people who don't deserve it doesn't help protect our children from those who do.

    http://ilvoices.com/media/2394.....ffe415.pdf

    http://www.thecrimereport.org/.....-offenders

    Read Jim and Nancy Petro's book "False Justice" and Richard Wrights' "Sex Offender Laws: Failed Policies, New Directions"and Sean Penn's "Witch hunt"

  • amagikid||

    Watch Herman Cain deliver the Tea Party State of the Union at www.TeaPartyExpress.org ! The live stream starts on Tuesday, January 24th at 10:30 EST/7:30 PST.

  • ||

    Yeah, but Warty is, like, repeated 100,000 times. So, meh.

  • ||

    Rapists, child molestors, child pornographers and sex-slave traffikers belong on sex offender registries. Not someone who had too much beer a pissed in his neighbor's shrubbery.

  • ||

    I forgot. TSA inspectors belong on that list as well.

  • ||

    Law's the law...man up. ;)

  • ||

    So basically, if a kid is so screwed up by boffing thier 6th grade teacher that they subsequently marries them, then the teacher didn't do anything wrong?
    Mary Kay Letourneau, you're not a sex offender anymore, yay!

  • Tina Trent||

    Sheer histrionics. Kind of like a "sex offender registry panic." In reality, there are many sex offenders not placed on the registry. You should read state statutes if you are going to write about this subject. States protect the cohort of consensual teens without other records; you don't know the real and pled crimes that place many youths on the list and are just assuming that young people are being victimized somehow. Sex offenders are very prolific in their teens, too, and select in-home and neighborhood victims -- believe me, more get away with this, and the few who get processed usually have long and gory records, very early. That's reality.

    The statistics on re-offending and alleged "first offenses" and thus potential recidivism are sheer nonsense. For decades, and even now, sex offenders caught sexually stalking or victimizing were widely permitted to plead to drug and property crimes. Let's revisit this issue when there are real statistics, instead of pretending we have them now. We don't.

    And so on. Is it really too difficult to ask that reporting be unbiased? Authoritative? Thoroughly and objectively researched?

    No? Well, OK then. Just keep making stuff up.

  • Sex Offender Issues||

  • oncefallendotcom||

    The registry needs to be abolished. Soon, there will be one million RSOs. Out of those, only a few are truly a threat. The registry is full of minor offenders while major criminals remain in prison. It is one big scam.

  • ||

    contact me at diehard25fl@yahoo.com . i need people who want to help me get rid of megan's law, jessica's law, cori and public notification. i need to assemble as many people as possible. and i need at least $5,000 to get a good attorney. have to sue in federal or state courts to shut down registry and let people live normal lives again. please help me change the laws now. thank you and god bless

  • ||

    the best things about the registry and CORI. is that prevent an ex felon, specifically a sex offender from being employed. how are kids protected by forcing sex offenders into unemployment, homelessness?
    the best thing about the registry besides the fact that its 100% useless in preventing crime or making kids safer is that we get to watch the US govt waste $200 million a year on montioring non-dangerous felons. yeah all the kids are safe and 740,000 americans are unemployed. we got safety at the expense of individual feedoms and personal liberties. the only people still in favor of the registry are the 25 people who were molested by their uncles,step-dads,brothers, cousins. yeah everybody is safe now. there are no more sex crimes with these terrrific laws. its great to live in america. land of the free home of the stupid.

  • Kat-Child-of-RSO||

    This entire issue of sex offenders is based off a small but real threat which has been deliberately manipulated into a massive moral panic in order to gain power, influence, prestige and money. The government does have detailed information about what it is doing; just consider the fact that they have 700,000+ registered sex offenders whose criminal records are available to be examined. They do know the true recidivism rates for new sex crimes and to pass many unconstitutional laws against RSOs based on lying about the true statistics should be a felony crime.

    Sex offenders are not the only victims, so are the families of sex offenders, people like me whose childhood was destroyed for no valid reason, and they knew they were going to wreck my life when they did it.

    Look at the real recidivism rates, as best as can be analyzed from the poor data the government has made available.

    http://childhood-destroyed-for.....nders.html

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement