This is exactly what the US registry was suppposed to be, but look at it now. You can’t trust any public registry to stay “high-risk only.”

Think about how we here in the states have expanded what defines a “violent” offense. Most, if not all, sexual offenses are treated as “volent” offenses even where there is no violence.

Here’s another example of the problem with how folks inflate the danger to justify expanding the registry. Here’s a 2021 Iowa State study that I found dubious to say the least:

https://soc-cj.iastate.edu/2021/03/24/delisi-study-finds-sexual-offenders-commit-more-crimes-than-their-record-shows/

This line really sticks out to me:

“Their latest study comprised 216 federal offenders who were on supervised release between 2016 and 2020. Of the 216, 109 (50.5%) had an official arrest charge for a sexual contact offense and 107 (49.5%) did not. The top three most common offenses of this group included possession or receipt of child pornography, noncompliance with the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act and distribution of child pornography.”

Here he’s considering both CP offenses and Failure To Register (FTR) as “sexual contact offenses.” I don’t believe this is just poor wording, I think it is intentionally misleading the public.

No doubt this so-called “study” has been used by victim advocates to push for expanding the registry.

Nemo, were you under the impression that the registry software is developed by volunteers? Or that the registry laws are administered and enforced by volunteers?

Bless your heart. Money is made by OffenderWatch LLC, by sheriff employees who clock time using OffenderWatch products, and by multi-agency officers receiving overtime pay to conduct compliance operations. Among others.

Another FAC post, with zero evidence, that the registry is a profit center. Someone please explain how money is “made” via the registry.