Families of SOs Community Group
WE HAVE MOVED!!! ............................. ............................... ......................... ............................ ............................. .......................... HERE: http://support-for-families.boards.net ............. ................ ............... ................ ............................... .................Please create a profile...
we all know that there are countless websites out there that if you pay them you can search any name or criminal record. and some are free.
but with the other thread talking about registries, just for the heck of it i googled "Public Criminal Registries".
this article is one of the things i got back....
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/21/us/21registry.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
the woman who pushed this? Ms. Rosenberg the mother of a girl murdered. in her opinion, "if even one murder is prevented by notifying the public it is worth it". now damn.... where have we heard that before???
totally loved when Mr. Logan from FL State U noted that once passed, the laws were difficult to remove because politicians did not want to seem to diminish the suffering of victims. Instead, they are added “like Christmas ornaments on a tree, year after year.”
yep, so true, the SO laws and the registries are over burdened and over 'decorated'.
but with the other thread talking about registries, just for the heck of it i googled "Public Criminal Registries".
this article is one of the things i got back....
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/21/us/21registry.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
the woman who pushed this? Ms. Rosenberg the mother of a girl murdered. in her opinion, "if even one murder is prevented by notifying the public it is worth it". now damn.... where have we heard that before???
totally loved when Mr. Logan from FL State U noted that once passed, the laws were difficult to remove because politicians did not want to seem to diminish the suffering of victims. Instead, they are added “like Christmas ornaments on a tree, year after year.”
yep, so true, the SO laws and the registries are over burdened and over 'decorated'.
The sex offender registry is too popular with the public, as they think the registry keeps them safe and too popular with the politicians because they can pander to the "tough on crime" folks and use the registries as a platform to keep getting re-elected.
In my opinion, what we should do is attempt to modify or abolish some of the laws or restrictions that have spawned from the registry-----residency restrictions, buffer zones, prohibiting registrants from entering parks or playgrounds, the sex offender designation on the driver's license, etc.
These restrictions are the major reasons registrants and families struggle to survive, NOT the registry itself.
If the only requirement for the registrant was to be on the registry and check in with local law enforcement as required---with NO restrictions such as residency restrictions and these other restrictions----the registry would be much easier to tolerate.
These are all restrictions that are a result of the registry. Since we are unlikely to get rid of the registry in one giant step, we should try to chip away at these restrictions to make life easier for all the registrants.
I still do not think the registries are Constitutional and I will always fight for the total abolition of the registries, but it is the laws which originate from the registries that make life miserable for the registrant and his family.
rewdiazepam
It's "common knowledge" that SOs repeat their offenses so we need a registry to protect the public. I obviously vehemently disagree with statement and can show you numerous academic articles that would disagree as well. Perception equals reality in this case. There is no way that politicians are going to let the golden goose get away. It is the one thing both democrats and republicans can agree upon for the most part.
The courts are also loathe to stop something like this unless it really falls below the floor board of our rights. The onus is on us to prove that to he courts, legislators get the benefit of the doubt from the court systems. As such I agree with Rew and love what RSOL of California is doing. They are chipping away at the untenable draconian measures that makes the registry rough to live on. It should also be noted these measures have not been found to make the public safer, so it is by definition additional punishment.
http://tinyurl.com/mqxh74a
I don't mind being on the registry per se but hate the quarterly reminder of a marked police car in my driveway. In Alabama I heard they must use an unmarked car with plain clothes officers. I have good neighbors but so far as I know they don't know I'm on the registry. My PO told me he's received only 1 call inquiring about me since I've lived here....
when they lump *everyone all together into one registry it has gone to far. registries should be reserved for violent and repeat offenders.
NO ONE should care have to know that 'jason streaked across a football field when he was 17', that 'uncle jake had a few beers and mooned a boat load of collage students because they were throwing beer cans at him while he was fishing', that robert had to P so damn bad that he went into the bushes and got caught by the local busy body, that ryan and cheryl aged 15 and 17 had consensual sex or that the neighbor down the street like to garden in the buff. there's so many things that are 'normal' everyday things that can land you on the registry and when that happens, it's gone to far!
but i am glad that she is speaking out against cyber bullying!! we can all hope that it breaches the dams and blockages in lot of ears and opens some eyes!!!
I absolutely and positively agree with you 100%.
The registry must go as it is unconstitutional and unfair to both the registrants and his family.
BUT
I am pragmatic and realistic, and it is unrealistic to believe the entire registry will be brought down all at once unless there is some kind of landmark court decision, and one is not even on the horizon.
Until then, we can still chip away at the restrictions, even at the state level.
Make no mistake----I want the registry gone for good for all.
rewdiazepam
I don't see my suggestion as a compromise. I am not saying "we can have the registry and it is OK IF all the restrictions are removed." What I am saying is "we need to whittle down the restrictions UNTIL we can get the registry abolished."
We have two choices at the present time, particularly since the registry is not going away soon----1) We can keep the registry---which we will anyway---and whittle down the restrictions to make it more tolerable, or 2) we can keep the registry with all the restrictions.
Which do you prefer? Yes, I prefer getting rid of the damn thing, but that is not an option right now as it is not realistic.
So, which one would you prefer? Number one or Number two?
You said, ". I was told a long time ago that when someone uses the word "BUT" disregard everything that they said prior."
You can disregard my entire post if you want, but that does not change the fact that the registry is not going away any time soon. That is just my opinion.
If you know of a way to convince all the politicians to stop passing all these restrictions and abolish something that is a sure fire way to get them re-elected---the "tough on crime" mantra and the sex offender registry-----while also convincing the general public that the registry is worthless, then I would like to hear your proposal.
I realize your frustration with the registry. I, too, am frustrated, but it is just unrealistic to believe we can do anything to abolish the entire registry in the near future.
Of course, we will keep trying and make a fanatical effort to get rid of the registry, but until we do so, we need to chip away at the restrictions.
If you have some ideas, please present them. The board here likes new ideas and we all learn from each other. Nobody knows everything here and I am always willing to learn.
rewdiazepam
BTW, The Hopeful, welcome to the board. We need you.
I also agree with Echo, that people on the registry are all different. RSOs have varying levels of recidivism and to put them all on one list the general public thinks they are all equally dangerous. My problem with your statement echo is while it is true you can get on the registry for such things as urinating in public or streaking at a football game, I believe it is not wise to use this as an example of the folly of the registry. The first reason of the 800,000 offenders how many are on the registry for the more benign reasons? Not many, and when our opponents see us commenting on this it looks like we are trying to say there are a lot of people on the registry for these benign reasons. It looks like we are trying to minimize.
Why not use examples that are more similar to the actual registry. If we used these examples and backed it up with research I think people will take us more seriously. For example with contact crimes, someone with multiple victims versus one victim, or opposite sex victims versus same sex, or adolescence versus adult, or familial or non-familial. All of these factors apply to the overall 800,000 offenders much more so than yrinating in public or streaking.
i honestly have no problem with violent and repeat offenders being on a registry, but i also feel that the registry should be private for LEOs only. and then again the really bad or dangerous offenders may never breath 'free' air again on the outside.
by time they get done creating all their damn registries there are going to be more freaking people in law enforcement keeping track of registered citizens than there will be people who are not registered.
it will probably create a whole new sector of employment opportunities. a new industry with custom education needed which will me expanded vo-tech schools or collages. then comes the job classifications with official titles and ranks.
The State must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure the curtailment of almost any curtailment of liberty, and almost any deprivation...
This passage was put into the reprint of Mein kampf volume 2(1926) in the 1943 edition, however, Hitler never wrote or said this.(Just a little history, I'm a history freak on that era).