Talk of banning persons forced to register as sex offenders from bars
Every day we scan news headlines, appellate court decisions and legislative filings to learn about current events impacting people on the registry. During our daily perusal, we came across this article, which questioned whether persons forced to register as sex offenders should be barred from entering places which serve alcohol. The supposition for the story was that Brock Turner (a Stanford student who sexually assaulted an intoxicated fellow student) was seen at a bar recently. Since he was convicted of sexually assaulting a drunk female, should anyone with a sex offense ever be allowed in a bar again?
The title of the opinion piece was “Brock Turner spotted at Dayton bars, should sex offenders be forced to identify themselves?” and my initial thought was, ‘wow, this is a very long stretch’! I mean, so much of the fear mongering has been focused on schools, parks, playgrounds and such, here’s a location that almost by definition is a place where children CAN NOT congregate. When presenting the question of whether people on the registry should be allowed in bars, this writer’s opinion was “the answer to this question is a resounding no. In an ideal world, people like Brock Turner would be prevented from entering alcohol-serving establishments.”
Whoa! Not just a “no” but a “resounding” no. Really? It seems like a very, very broad generalization, especially when I would venture to say that the circumstances of Turner’s case are not common to the overwhelming majority of the people on the registry. However, the danger is so many laws are passed in the wake of rare but highly publicized occurrences that they fail to consider the sanction is completely unrelated to most that it applies to or that such a law would not have prevented the crime for which it is being enacted (Turner and the victim were at a party in a fraternity house and Turner was not on any registry).
This idea naturally begs the question, why don’t they ban anyone with a DUI from ever entering an establishment that serves alcohol? Or for that matter anyone who committed any crime while intoxicated? That would certainly save more lives than banning registrants. It also begs the question, if you ban registrants from establishments that serve alcohol, what restaurants will be left to dine in? Chuck E Cheese?
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
At sentencing, the judge ordered me to stay away from places where children frequently congregate. He didn’t mention bars because he wanted to appear tough on sex offenders by keeping me and others away from kids. Well, kids don’t frequently congregate in bars. I go to bars and often sit quietly by myself consuming only non-alcoholic drinks and listen to some live music as a brief escape from reality of the living Hell my life has become. No bars, no problem. I’ll just find another happy place to hang out, like a theme park!
I believe there was also a big push for this in possibly Atlanta, Georgia or elsewhere in Florida when a female bartender was murdered by person forced to register. Her boyfriend was pushing for some sort of legislation against PFRs.
Pass the Stop Brock Turner From Re-Offending Act
This measure will definitely prevent Brock Turner from ever committing a crime.
‘Make sex offenders do their drinking at home!”
This really speaks to the heart of the issue with the registry. they want to label everyone on it as the same with a blanket Ban. which in the legal system makes no sense. in a court of Law the determination of punishment, ie. time, restitution, probation or other is decided because of the circumstances of the crime. so it is not a one size fits all system. but here we are, an easy target because we are on the registry they feel like they can control our lives and force us to not be a part of society. This one size fits all banning makes no sense. and correct what about those convicted of a drug or alcohol related crime should they also be banned, of course not because they aren’t on a list that can be viewed by the public and attached a scarlet letter for all to see. The DMV should not be allowed to label your driver license with such a mark. this will only cause more problems and create fear mongering in the public, because they don’t have any idea of the circumstances of your situation, and if you are even a threat. Should an alcoholic have a Mark on his or her license? no, or any other convicted person. NO. this is very scary that people think like this
You beat me to it. I was just going to say that it would make more sense to ban someone convicted of a DUI than someone who has a conviction for a sex crime.
Allowing alcoholics into a bar, but not registered persons is akin to handing a lighter to an arsonist.
That’s how we know how vindictive, stupid, and ineffective registries are. I always thought that the probation requirement of avoiding alcohol as stupid. Are DUI probationers told to stay away from places where children congregate or porn? Hell, bars and similar are the places where kids aren’t suppose to be!