CT: Lawmakers debate revamping sex offender registry
State legislators are debating whether they should make changes in the state’s sex offender registry, which was established in 1998.
Former Republican state legislator Bob Farr of West Hartford and other advocates called Monday for approving the recommendations of the state’s sentencing commission on changes to the registry, which is currently “based on the offense and not on the risk of re-offending.”
The current registry now lists convicted criminals for 10 years, 20 years or life. The registry started with 800 criminals who were placed retroactively onto the list when the registry was created two decades ago. Since then, the registry has grown to include people in virtually every town in the state with more than 6,000 names on the list.
“The public registry would only list high-risk offenders,” Farr said of the proposed changes. “The current registry lists too many names to be functional. … The city of Hartford has over 700 offenders.”
Some lawmakers say the list has become too unwieldy and should be pared down to alert the public regarding the most serious criminals. Farr said that a low-risk elderly person who committed
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/north-carolina-bill-would-add-convicted-animal-abusers-to-an-online-registry-much-like-sex-offenders/
If it wasn’t so damn cold there, I’d actually consider moving there lol.
The original stated purposes of the registry was to prevent recidivism and notify the public of potential threats to them. Regarding recidivism, it’s had no effect at all; the rate is pretty much unchanged from the pre-registry days (or increased, as the overwhelming majority of registrant arrests are for status offenses based on the registry itself). Regarding potential threats, statistically registrants as a whole are not among them – 97% of sex crime is committed by those not registered or without prior arrests.
Later came the “good tool for law enforcement” claim, also false. There’s nothing on the registry (public or LE only) that isn’t available through NCIC and the state counterparts that feed it and can be gained through a simple database query within a few moments. The registry has yet to play even the smallest role in the investigation of a crime or identification of a suspect. Even in the (very few and far between) cases where registrants do commit another sex offense, he’s either identified on the spot or his status as a registrant isn’t known until after arrest. Thus, the only thing the registry provides LE is bigger federal and state grants to maintain it, funds that are almost always spent somewhere else.
If “common sense” were the driving force behind this, they would be looking into abolishing the registry, not merely “changing” it. Numerous “changes” have been implemented over the years, each claiming (falsely) that it would make the registry better, more efficient, and result in safer communities. None have done so, and there’s no reason I can see that would make these proposed changes any different.
Dustin – this is very well written. Members reading this should be sharing it with their legislators.
Amen o well said for sure
I sent a very slightly modified version to Gov. DeSantis.
This would be a major cornerstone coming down, if passed.
It should’ve never been offense based. That’s what the sentence/punishment is for(hmmm?)
Well….DUH!
No one ever accused lawmakers of being the brightest bunch.
Amazing, there is some ‘common sense’…which isn’t all that common…out there. Maintaining such a useless list is like saving used toilet paper for future use. It’s time our politicians focus on the real needs of the nation and state and quit funding a ‘make work’ piece of paper that will end up in the trash dump of time.