Are Sex Offender Registries Unconstitutional?

[Delta4Embassy]

Once you are charged with a child sex offense, nobody cares. Look at this teacher:

Fairfax teacher Sean Lanigan still suffering from false molestation allegations - The Washington Post

Guy was falsely accused, spent months in prison, looked at 40 years, was found not guilty. Years later, he is STILL trying to repair his reputation. Does anyone give a damn? Hell no. I can tell the OP has never met anyone or knows anyone falsely accused of a sex crime. He most certainly has never been falsely accused himself. Let one kid claim he fondled her and I can promise his little macho ass will be tamed in a split second.

You miscredited a Disir post with me above, the "that situation needs to be taken into account" was her, not me. Please correct.

 

[airplanemechanic]

I didn't miscredit anyone.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Post 71 was her original statement, but in your post 72 you put me as the source of the sentence when it was in fact Disir.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Acknowledge it, correct it, move on. Not a big deal.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Ok that doesn't change anything I said.

So why don't you really care about kids? You know what they say about people who target sex offenders, they feel inadequate in other parts of their lives. 171000 kids were injured in car wrecks in 2011. Last year 4400 kids were injured by carnival rides. You want to protect kids, then protect kids. But don't lie about sex offenders under the veil of "protecting kids" because you're not protecting anyone and at the same time you're misinforming the public so they aren't protecting their kids against what really is a danger to them.

The center for sex offender management says you're wrong on all accounts:

CSOM Publications

They say:

It is noteworthy that recidivism rates for sex offenders are lower than for the general criminal population.

Here is an interesting statistic: 85% of new sex offenses are by people not on the registry. This means that people NOT on the registry are statistically 6 times more likely to molest a child than the people ON the registry. This, of course, means the registry isn't worth anything.

There has also been a slight decrease recently in the number of sexual crimes of all types. That's good news.

Of course "lock them up and throw away the key" sounds good, but we simply don't have the facilities to house everyone if we wanted to. We have 2.1 million people incarcerated right now across the entire country in all jails, prisons and halfway houses. We have almost 800,000 sex offenders. There is no room for them and no money to pay to house them so something else must be done.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Ok that doesn't change anything I said.

So why don't you really care about kids? You know what they say about people who target sex offenders, they feel inadequate in other parts of their lives. 171000 kids were injured in car wrecks in 2011. Last year 4400 kids were injured by carnival rides. You want to protect kids, then protect kids. But don't lie about sex offenders under the veil of "protecting kids" because you're not protecting anyone and at the same time you're misinforming the public so they aren't protecting their kids against what really is a danger to them.

The center for sex offender management says you're wrong on all accounts:

CSOM Publications

They say:

It is noteworthy that recidivism rates for sex offenders are lower than for the general criminal population.

Here is an interesting statistic: 85% of new sex offenses are by people not on the registry. This means that people NOT on the registry are statistically 6 times more likely to molest a child than the people ON the registry. This, of course, means the registry isn't worth anything.

There has also been a slight decrease recently in the number of sexual crimes of all types. That's good news.

Of course "lock them up and throw away the key" sounds good, but we simply don't have the facilities to house everyone if we wanted to. We have 2.1 million people incarcerated right now across the entire country in all jails, prisons and halfway houses. We have almost 800,000 sex offenders. There is no room for them and no money to pay to house them so something else must be done.

I don't do independent research. If the 90% stat is objectively wrong, it's the source I got it from who's wrong, not me. Differences in figures though are often do to different parameters. Th e90% stat specifies over the offender's lifetime. Most of the smaller percentages are only out to a max of about a dozen years.

 

[airplanemechanic]

That stat isn't accurate. You need to do more research. Learn where they got that number from. Someone could claim to have touched someone and they go into the stat.

For someone who is a so called expert, only taking your info from one source is very dangerous. How many studies and sources have I posted? At least a half dozen, if not a full dozen. You sourced one bias website that exists to "protect the children."

Ten Myths About Sex Offenders Reform Sex Offender Laws Inc.

Contrary to widespread public opinion, once-caught sex offenders have a very low recidivism rate. With or without treatment, more than 87% of the once-caught do not commit another sex crime. With treatment, the likelihood of re-offending is even lower.

In contrast, according to the 2004 U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics study, 69% of all other types of criminals go back to prison, and they do so within five years. Over a longer period of time, other FBI statistics show, about 74% of all other types of offenders return to prison.

So why chase down a group of people on a list that have an 87% chance of not reoffending?

Why do they only go back 5 years? Because you compare apples to apples. If you do ALL CRIMES back 5 years then it's fair. If you look at one offense for 5 years and sex offenders for life, that's not apples to apples comparisons.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

That stat isn't accurate. You need to do more research. Learn where they got that number from. Someone could claim to have touched someone and they go into the stat.

For someone who is a so called expert, only taking your info from one source is very dangerous. How many studies and sources have I posted? At least a half dozen, if not a full dozen. You sourced one bias website that exists to "protect the children."

I got the source from an arbitrary site I could get googling for a few minutes. For me and many others we don't need a peer-reviewed source to convince us most child sexual abusers reoffend over their lfietimes.

 

[airplanemechanic]

No, you need peer reviewed articles to prove that they don't.

And if you're not interested in learning the real truth and protecting children from real, rather than perceived dangers, then by all means let me know.

 

[saveliberty]

A far as I'm concerned, it is basically a term of their probation period, which is life due to the nature of their behavior. Why is this a concern of yours Delta? Are you on a list?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

A far as I'm concerned, it is basically a term of their probation period, which is life due to the nature of their behavior. Why is this a concern of yours Delta? Are you on a list?

Was a news article. If news agencies, law enforcement and others who write about this sort of thing makes them suspect then we have a problem.

 

[airplanemechanic]

A far as I'm concerned, it is basically a term of their probation period, which is life due to the nature of their behavior.

But thats just it, it's not part of probation. They are on that list for decades after they get off probation. Why would anyone care? I don't know, misinformation about almost a million people should be corrected, should it not?

So to answer the OP's question, no, SO registries are absolutely unconstitutional. At least not the registry part, but definitely the rules that they have to abide by for it.

News agencies report on this stuff because of ratings. Don't get your info from them.

 

[saveliberty]

Interesting how frequently an offender violates the rules. Usually they are residing in a school zone without registering their address.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

A far as I'm concerned, it is basically a term of their probation period, which is life due to the nature of their behavior.

But thats just it, it's not part of probation. They are on that list for decades after they get off probation. Why would anyone care? I don't know, misinformation about almost a million people should be corrected, should it not?

So to answer the OP's question, no, SO registries are absolutely unconstitutional. At least not the registry part, but definitely the rules that they have to abide by for it.

No 'kinda agree' option alas. That there are registries says it's constitutional. Seems like it shouldn't be though. And the restrictions placed on sex offenders also seems unconsitutional, like osme kind of violation of double jeopardy but absent the trial part altogether.

Was a thing on CNN guess it was a while back about homeless sex offenders because in that area were requirements of not living within how ever many feet of places kids congregate like schools, playgrounds, etc. But all the housing fell within that range so homelessness is the only option. Therein lies the problem with the system. In at least that area.

 

[Moonglow]

Some violent and sexual offenses have further penalties after you get out of prison. Namely controlling where you can live, where you can work, etc. Seems like a violation of due process to impose what amounts to a sentence after you've served your prison one. If you wanna control where a child rapist can live why not just keep them in prison instead? Ultimate in control and perfectly constitutional.

ACLU says offender registry unconstitutional CJOnline.com

ACLU says offender registry unconstitutional
Registry includes sex offenders, people convicted of certain violent crimes
Posted: August 12, 2014

I prefer we mark them, like with castration...

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Some violent and sexual offenses have further penalties after you get out of prison. Namely controlling where you can live, where you can work, etc. Seems like a violation of due process to impose what amounts to a sentence after you've served your prison one. If you wanna control where a child rapist can live why not just keep them in prison instead? Ultimate in control and perfectly constitutional.

ACLU says offender registry unconstitutional CJOnline.com

ACLU says offender registry unconstitutional
Registry includes sex offenders, people convicted of certain violent crimes
Posted: August 12, 2014

I prefer we mark them, like with castration...

Physical castration gets my support, not chemical. That's just a pill we trust they'll take. Not reliable for obvious reasons.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Physical castration gets my support, not chemical. That's just a pill we trust they'll take. Not reliable for obvious reasons.

Why support that? The offense is committed between their ears, not between their legs. That's been proven. Because sex offender therapy isn't between their legs, but rather focuses on between their ears.

You think removing their penis will stop them from being attracted to children? Would removing yours stop you from being attracted to women?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Physical castration gets my support, not chemical. That's just a pill we trust they'll take. Not reliable for obvious reasons.

Why support that? The offense is committed between their ears, not between their legs. That's been proven. Because sex offender therapy isn't between their legs, but rather focuses on between their ears.

You think removing their penis will stop them from being attracted to children? Would removing yours stop you from being attracted to women?

Castration doesn't remove the penis. How would you urinate? It's removing the testicals or damaging them so they don't work any more. Absent testosterone, you're absent sexual desire. At least in men.

 

[Moonglow]

Physical castration gets my support, not chemical. That's just a pill we trust they'll take. Not reliable for obvious reasons.

Why support that? The offense is committed between their ears, not between their legs. That's been proven. Because sex offender therapy isn't between their legs, but rather focuses on between their ears.

You think removing their penis will stop them from being attracted to children? Would removing yours stop you from being attracted to women?

Castration involves the balls....

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Not foolproof, but better than therapy. As voluntary, non-offending eunuchs demonstrate, though physically castrated when they develop relationships they just inject testosterone for a short-term functionality.