If Other Countries Can Do This, Why Can’t We?

While the United States continues to expand sex offender registries and restrictions, what other countries have been able to implement should cause us to ask whether we have our priorities straight.

In India, researchers are questioning whether making sex offender registries publicly accessible actually improves public safety. India already maintains a registry accessible to law enforcement, but unlike the United States, it does not make that information freely available to the public. As the Bangalore Mirror reports, legal researchers warn that public disclosure can create a false sense of security while contributing to vigilantism and making rehabilitation more difficult. The question is a familiar one: Does publishing someone’s name and address prevent sexual violence, or does it simply make punishment more visible?

Meanwhile, South Korea is exploring a very different approach. According to the Seoul Economic Daily, police are pursuing legislation that would allow investigators, with appropriate authorization, to remotely access accounts used to distribute child sexual abuse material and take steps to disrupt its continued distribution. The proposal follows reports that only about one-third of removal requests for abusive material were successful during the first eight months of 2026. Rather than simply identifying and punishing offenders after the fact, South Korea is exploring ways to intervene directly to stop ongoing harm. The proposal is still under development, and questions about privacy and oversight remain.

These are different approaches to what is being done in the US, but both raise an important question for American policymakers: Are we doing what actually works, or simply doing what looks tough on crime? Public registries do not remove abusive material from the internet. Residency restrictions do not dismantle online exploitation networks. And making housing and employment more difficult for people who have completed their sentences does not make communities safer.

The Florida Action Committee does not minimize sexual abuse or oppose accountability. We believe public policy should be judged by its results, not its emotional appeal. Victims deserve effective investigations, meaningful support, and measures that prevent further harm—not simply policies that create the appearance of action.

If India can question the effectiveness of public registries, and South Korea can explore technology to disrupt ongoing exploitation, why can’t the United States critically examine its own approach?

FAC NOTE: After writing this another interesting story popped up: https://www.bailiwickexpress.com/news/monitoring-low-risk-sex-offenders-not-in-the-public-interest/