NY: New Bill criminalizes registrants dressing as characters.
It’s not necessarily a bad idea, we just have to wonder how necessary this new law will be.
A New York Legislator has sponsored a bill that provides “No sex offender shall apply for or accept a position which involves substantial contact with children while said person is dressed as a children’s character.” and that anyone who employs a person to dress as a character would have to perform a background check on the person.
As a general concept, it’s not terribly concerning since anyone who has a history that includes any crime involving children should probably not work as a mall Santa. However, we need to question the necessity of this law and what unintended consequences it might have.
For instance; has there been a problem in New York with Santas or Easter Bunnies assaulting children or is this bill something that a legislator is putting out there to “look tough on crime” in order to win votes? Also, with the overwhelming majority of sexual crimes being committed by first-time offenders, won’t it give parents a false sense of security when allowing their children to interact with characters, since it’s more likely they will be assaulted by someone NOT on the registry?
And also what unintended consequences can come of this? The Bill doesn’t just preclude paid employment, but volunteering as well in any situation “that would present a substantial contact with children while dressed as a children’s character”. Wouldn’t that preclude dressing up on Halloween, or being Santa for one’s own children? How many people will get caught in this net for completely innocent activities that would not be illegal but for the person’s presence on the registry.
The bill also imposes criminal liability on the business that brings in the employee or volunteer who does not perform a background check on them. That might be doable for a mall, but what about a small non-profit? They might forego bringing in character for the children, rather than incur the expense and criminal liability.
Do we need another law like this on the books?
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This law will guarantee that whenever parents see a costumed character, that person inside would never act inappropriately toward their child. Once this law is passed, parents can thank the lawmakers because they can be assured that a man who dresses up in a Daffy Duck or Elmo costume is less likely to be interested in molesting their child than that accountant dressed in a 3-piece suit.
On a somewhat related note…
https://komonews.com/news/local/santa-insurance-why-more-professional-santas-are-getting-insured
This should be common sense
I do agree that no one on the registry should even think about applying for a job working with children even if your charge was not an offense on a minor. Why bring extra problems or accusations on yourself.
My last job before I retired was working in a warehouse where you had to be 18 because of forklifts etc. Also we did not sell to the public and were just the supply chain for other businesses so only dealt with transport companies loading / unloading of goods.
When I was on probation, my probation officer only came to my job once and was so cool she just pretended to be a customer.
Only corrupt, criminal regimes have Registries.
I’ve never wanted a job where I had to deal with children at all. What a pain! I don’t need that, there are already too many “adults” who are children.
However, because the Registries exist and only because of that, I’m personally going to go out of my way to be around children all of the time. It’s a normal way to live but I’m going to put extra effort into it and make sure I always do it. There are children around me all of the time. They are even in bathing suits very often!! Very shocking, I know.
That is the proper, moral response to the Registries. I’ve been doing it all my life but a lot more since the Registries.
So … great job, Registries! Registries aren’t protecting anyone, but they are doing something.
Sexual abuse is already illegal.
Organizations already are liable for sexual abuse by their people.
Why isn’t that good enough?
This would be laughable if it didnt adversely affect people getting jobs. I’m not talking about sex offenders dressed as Santa or the Easter Bunny. But this bill implicitly denies people jobs as sign flippers, commercial advertising actors, film or music video actors, etc. I bet the drafters didnt think about that with their good intentions.
This is just another ‘feel good’, ‘look good’ law that is a waste of the paper and ink that will be required to produce it. We must be getting close to being a ‘perfect nation’ as legislators have nothing better to do than waste their time…and tax payer money…on such nonsense.