By: Gail

Gail — Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:53:14 +0000

In reading this article several things come to mind. First, has the world changed since the advent of the internet? To that I say Absolutely! . Everything is out there. Once information is on the internet it there in perpetuity. In fact law enforcement and victim advocates use that argument all the time as part of their argument for stronger sentencing enhancements in a child pornography cases. They go on to say having this information public like that is hurtful and damaging. It seems to me we cannot use an argument only when it suits us. It either is or it is not. IF ITS PUNISHMENT AND DAMAGING THEN THATS UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE WE CANNOT PUNISH SOMEONE AGAIN AFTER THEY HAVE DONE THEIR TIME AND PAID THEIR DEBT. If registration is about public safety then lets do what is truly about public safety and focus legislation and policy regarding public safety on what the empirical evidence supports, and is in the best interest of public safety. After all these years of public registration there is no credible research which supports this policy does anything to support public safety and protect our children and reduce recidivism. What we do know is the majority of abuse is inflicted by someone known to the family, or a direct family member. Research also tells us that risk goes down over time so just as long term incarceration is a waste of resources in most instances so is long term registration. If it is necessary for law enforcement to be able to identify the whereabouts of a former sex offender for a reasonable period of time, then let registration be for law enforcement only. The average citizen doesn’t have enough understanding of what they read to interpret the former offenders offense, the registry doesn’t even fully explain how long ago it was, how long the former offender has been offence free (new sex offense), whether treatment was completed, if they are leading a successful life etc. It damages families and keeps people from being productive members by its application to reintegration to society, finding stable employment and housing. These are counter productive to public safety. It also is a waste of public resources which can be directed to better use in education and prevention. It provides a false sense of security to parents, as they tend to think they only need to worry about someone who is on the registry. The fact is the overwhelming majority of these people are first time offenders… 95% will not reoffend whether they are registered or not!
It is also a known fact that for every $1 spent on prevention we save $34 in criminal justice costs. So lets stop this wasteful ineffective practice and give parents and children real tools to protect themselves. EDUCATE !!!

Comments on: Kansas Supreme Court Hear Arguments on Constitutionality of Registry.

By: Gail