On Nov. 19th, the Colorado “Sex Offender” Management Board proposed changing the term “sex offender” to “adults who commit sex offenses” in their treatment guidelines. (Interestingly, they had previously changed the language for juveniles in a similar manner without controversy.) Personally, I don’t feel the new label is an improvement as it still implies a current and ever-present danger by those convicted of sexual offenses.
The Colorado SOMB has provided a way for the public to influence the proposal to change the term “sex offender” within the SOMB guidelines to something less offensive.
If you go to the CO-SOMB front page, there is a prominently displayed link at the top of the page to vote on the propossed language as well as the chance to make comments on the proposed language. We need to flood them with comments. So take a few moments of your lives to make a statement.
Because the SOMB stated they were allowing public comments through this link for 20 days, I assume commenting ends on Dec. 9th, as it would be 20 days after the meeting held on Nov. 19th.
If you need a little inspiration regarding what to say, then read the following pages:
and
Derek W. Logue of OnceFallen.com
Guess I’ve heard it all now with this beefed up sex registry side show. Might as well call it the lame duck registry. If Einstein used his brains he would say the world is square. Wonder who the midnight cowboy is today with this registry hype.
Either one is guilty or not but the penality faze is a bit unjust in many issues. Guess Florida does need some Action to raise a good fight. One wonders who to believe when the chips are down. Sex is sex whether its with an unmarried woman a teenager, even the coach of a football team thinking about getting it on with the high school cheerleader but who tries to pry it out of another… Only on the internet. Guess dark clouds hand over all.
I’m sure many can’t even comprehend this masqurde of inducement unless they open their ears to real justice. So should we change the name to bad behavior registry or or BBS registry or who is blacklisted today by those who protect the innocent by vain evil inducement encounters as if sex is not bad enough.
I went with Client because it was an option. Besides if you are a client of the SOMB they don’t need any of this unnecessary labeling. Does the SOMB offer drug rehab, or thief rehab, or murderer rehab?
Also, besides drug rehab, ever notice you don’t hear rehab used for other offense types?
“Smash & Grab Rehab” has a nice ring to it. 😉
Once again a very valid point was stated very clearly here. The term SO sounds active and is dehumanizing, humiliating, disrespectful and down right insulting. We are no different than anyone else who has committed a crime and we should be referred in my opinion as clients
The phrase should not include “offender”. “Former offender” is not accurate if the person is an active offender. It is not accurate if the person is innocent. In any case, calling a person “offender” for years causes serious anti-social behavior and radicalization. It can get people killed.
Why can’t they just be simple and accurate? Something like “person convicted of a sex crime”? That covers even innocent people.
I feel the wording sex crime is just as bad…. we should be referred to as thousands of other persons who committed a crime. We’re all equal, none should be treated differently.
Thank You Derek for Your Volunteerism!
The Bottom Line is the Registry Must Be Removed in It’s Entirety
Until That Day, Modifications to Language are Paramount
The Biggest Conundrum is the term SORNA….it Explicitly states the term ‘SEX OFFENDER…BLAH BLAH BLAH’; so
THEREFORE, IT IS IN THE ACTIVE TENSE OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE WHICH IMPLIES THAT SOMEONE WHO PLED OR COMMITTED TO A SEXUAL BASED OFFENSE IS CONTINUING TO ‘SEX OFFEND’, WHICH IS NOT THE CASE 99.99999999% OF THE TIME
Again here is some really wonderful facts!!! SORNA should be a smash and grab… grab it and smash the heck out of it until it disappears!! It’s worthless and proven to be ineffective and harmful in many ways.
Done. Suggested “prior offender or “former offender” as much more accurate. Also pointed out that they should distinguish the reactions of victim advocates (who will complain of any change) and victims themselves (most of whom likely don’t care one way or the other).
As someone who has served his time for a crime I did not commit, I do not see this new term as less offensive.
I agree! It’s still very offensive and should be abolished from the language period!! It’s extremely offensive and should never be written or spoken!!