Proposed Bill in Mississippi Will Make Employment for Sex Offenders Even More Difficult
A bill pending in the Mississippi Legislature would require employers of registered sex offenders to notify parents or guardians of minors who might be in direct, private and unsupervised contact with the employee.
The bill would apply to all registered sex offenders regardless of the date of conviction.
The House Judiciary B Committee on Tuesday passed Senate Bill 2532 to the full House for a vote. If the full House approves it, the bill will go to Gov. Phil Bryant to sign.
The bill can be read here: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2019/html/SB/2500-2599/SB2532IN.htm
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I live in a rooming house with 5 other S/0’s that I do not know personally. The sheriff officer threaten to lock me up because I didn’t register their vehicles which is absurd becayi have no access to their vehicles
This is not a big deal.
Now that I’ve got your attention, look it: It does not apply to jobs where that contact that might be direct, might be private, might be unsupervised. It specifically exempts jobs where the contact will be casual or incidental.
It only applies to those jobs where the employer has reason to know that the contact WILL be private AND direct AND unsupervised. Not the sorts of jobs that many registrants were going to apply for in the first place.
It would be reasonable to advocate for an amendment which exempts those who haven’t offended against children and/or have been offense-free in the community for x years. But beyond that, there’s no clear argument against such a law, is there?
Yes – because it imposes an obligation on employers, many will not want to deal with it because of the contingent liability or potential exposure. If it becomes law that employers of registrants have a special set of obligations – many will avoid hiring registrants simply to avoid the hassle.
That’s pretty much the entire purpose (unspoken intent, if you will) of the bill – to prevent anyone from hiring registrants.
Were there numerous reports of registrants reoffending at their places of employment? Was there a spike in sexual recidivism among registrants at all? What exactly was the inspiration behind this legislation?
Absent any other explanation, I would argue that this bill is nothing more than evidence of a legislative body whose compulsion to write more SO laws is comparable to the proven mythological urges they claim registrants have to commit more sex crimes. Honestly, can any legislature in the US go one single session without writing more SO laws based on purely on phantasms and without any hard evidence or statistics to show their necessity? Guessing not.
Nonsense man, give them in an inch and they will always take it up a level.