Study from Australian Institute of Criminology finds Sex Offender Registries Do Not Work
A report from the Australian Institute of Criminology. which examined the public registry in the United States and the non-public registries in the UK and Western Australia came to the conclusion that registries are not effective in reducing recidivism.
Among other findings, the report highlighted some facts we already know:
- There is no significant difference in sex offense recidivism in the 4.5 year follow-up period for pre-Megan’s Law offenders and post-Megan’s Law.
- Sex Offender Registration and Notification did not prevent sexual offending in the general community.
- There is no difference in sex offense recidivism between offenders who registered and those who did not
- Being placed on a public sex offender registry can result in exclusion from a neighborhood or residence, job loss, anxiety and other psychological problems, all of which are counterproductive in terms of reducing re-offending.
- 95 percent of sexual offenses were committed by those without prior sexual assault convictions.
- There is a two to eight percent decrease in the sale prices of residential properties near a registered sexual offender’s residence, along with an 84 percent increase in the time residential properties spend on the market.
- Two-thirds of law enforcement surveyed, felt labor expenditure in managing the registry had become an issue of concern.
- Vigilantism
- 44 percent of registered sexual offenders reported experiencing threats or harassment by neighbors
- around 20 percent experienced threats or harassment in general.
- 16 percent of offenders reported that their family members or other cohabitants had been harassed, attacked or had property
damaged as a result of their registration. - 8 percent experiencing physical attacks
- 14 percent reporting some form of property damage.
The link to the complete study is below:
ti_what_impact_do_public_sex_offender_registries_have_on_community_safety_220518
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
One word bullet point. Vigilantism ! The fact that a bullet point for registry fail can be surmised to a single word, and that said word echoes more fail on those imposing registry truly speaks volumes.
Maybe we should forward the link to this post to every state and federal legislator and every candidate. Armed with real information and facts we might knock some sense into some way overpaid heads.
Logic – would you like to spearhead this project?
Would never work in the god forsaken state of Fl, hate to be negative but man it’s a fact this state is jacked on SOs
The SOR is like a wooden lightening rod. The Elect are sure a lightening rod is needed; they know a wooden one is useless but they lack the intentional fortitude to speak the truth about a wooden lightening rod; no one is willing to take the wooden rod down because that would make things unsafe which would defeat the purpose of having a wooden lightening rod.
The solution…well of course…more wooden lightening rods that will protect us and neutralize lightening. That will fix the problem
This story has no end
Well it will when we’re dead. Which is apparently what they want.
Ok, if laws have to have a rational bases to be enforceable under the 14th amendment, section one, why hasn’t, in a court of equity, these laws been challenged in the u.s. courts? The more I read about this, the more I am concern with organizations that say they are doing something to solve this problem are truly not doing anything. There is a substantive due process issue here. People are being require to do things to promote public safety without good cause that public safety is being enhanced
Not sure what you mean. These laws have been challenged on the 14th Amendment in most Federal Circuits. Even in the SCOTUS (Connecticut Dept. of Public Safety v. Doe).
Where are you finding this issue has not been challenged?
Carr v. Conn says that due process issue were not decided at a substitutive level.
Remember Jim crow laws were overturned because they stigamzed people with out good cause.
Mark Coren – yes but it took a while – also SCOTUS upheld the Jim Crow laws in Plessy VS Ferguson (they said separate but equal was fine – you know like it is not punishment) – it took 50 more years for the decision to be over turned – but it was.
Ok so if people are being marginalized without just cause we are to believe that should wait. I think not. The road map was outlined in the synder case. The 6th circuit said the Michigan law was punishment, stigmatized and did not meet the substantive due process standards. Most of the decisions that were made were before this data was available. The supreme court used data in a non peer review journal psychology today to make its decision in the smith case. The data has since been shown to be invalid. A fraud!!! With all these study showing what they are showing maybe it is time to, on the basis that the law does not have a rational basis, as was stated by the 6th curciut, to challenge them again on the grounds that they voilate section 1 of the 14th amendment. Remember Brown v Topeka says that it is unconstitutional to stigmatized people without good cause. So all these study say there is no good cause. Since these regulations are civil they need to be challenged on there inequities.
Totally confused with that!?