Should there be a Sex Offender Registry?

[American Imperial State]

Sex offender registry should include all sexual deviants.

[Wallenburg]

Sex offender registry should include all sexual deviants.

Ooh, "deviants"! This is going to be interesting!

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Sex offender registry should include all sexual deviants.

Define "all sexual deviants".

[MERIZoC]

Sex offender registry should include all sexual deviants.

Define "all sexual deviants".

Gays, probably.

[Luziyca]

Sex offender registry should include all sexual deviants.

Define "all sexual deviants".

Anyone who is not a straight-edge, probably (i.e. not straight and not edgy).

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

Why do we really need anything more than criminal background checks for the purpose of making sure that the information is out there?

What's really all that different between sex offender registries and access to public records that include criminal backgrounds? We have both in place in the US, and in the information age, it's really easy to pull together and correlate things if you need to know.

There are basically three features.

(1) Extra police tracking.
(2) Public notification.
(3) Assortment of patchwork restrictions on, for example, where sex offenders are permitted to live.

At the average registry size, in fact, we find that a
notification regime (not including the distinct effects of a registration system) increases the
number of sex offenses by more than 0.3 offenses per 10,000 people, or 3 percent. These results
suggest that notification may serve as a deterrent to unregistered individuals, but registered
offenders subject to notification may commit more crime, perhaps because of social and financial
costs associated with the public release of their personal information.

I've already granted that misuse can most likely lead to more crimes, if you'd read, so the quote there? I've no problem with it. As for my answer to the rest, it's probably because not everyone on public record is a potential threat, under the terms that I laid out earlier. I wouldn't have any problem with there being two lists - violent/dangerous/predatorial offenders, and the other folk who are not likely a danger to other people. Whatever the case, people have a right to know if there is a potential danger to themselves or their family in their vicinity. And public record searches aren't always simple, nor is the general populace all that well-informed on how to utilize them, I'd wager.

The basis is our current system is flawed, whether you agree with there being an easily-accessible list that people can reference to know about these kinds of folks in their areas. And yes, I do realize there's a bit of a slippery slope in there, given how lists of gun owners have been used inappropriately, and other sorts of problems as you've pointed out below. As I said, I'm in support of it as a general information tool, so long as the current system is improved, and punishment for abuse of it is enforced.

The deleterious effects of the patchwork restrictions are well-documented (leading to sex offenders dropping off the grid, living under bridges, et cetera). Extra police tracking doesn't necessarily have a deleterious effect (although it can get expensive) and looks to be helpful - just as you would expect from any investment by police into keeping track of potential criminals.

Can public notification serve as a deterrent? Yes. Does it help prevent recidivism - its supposed purpose? No. The only visible result of trying to mandate crowd-sourcing recidivism prevention is the persecution of offenders, leading ultimately to more, rather than less, recidivism.

Can offender registries be made sane and successfully restricted to only the most dangerous offenders, while excluding those with a low baseline risk of reoffense? I seriously doubt it. Can a public notification process that goes above and beyond normal public access to public records ever be anything but cruel and unusual punishment? I seriously doubt that as well.

The same forces that lead to teenagers sexting (or for that matter having sex with each other) being treated as a serious criminal offense also push them towards being put on sex offender registries. Sex offender registries will not become sane unless the treatment of all minor criminal offenses remotely related to sex becomes sane.

Well, just because there are problems, or there is not currently a perfect solution, does it mean we do nothing in favor of wringing our hands and bemoaning the fact that we live in an imperfect world with a good number of folks who detract from the overall experience rather than add to it? Doubt all you like, we have enough repeat offenders and a 'justice' system that is failing the public as is, that I think it's worth doing /something/ about rather than nothing.

For what it's worth, there's nothing that I'm aware of that prevents individual citizens from regularly browsing public records, and taking it upon themselves to alert folks to potential threats, so even then, your arguments for protecting the criminals falls a little flat. It's simply more difficult to achieve coverage, but not impossible.

[Neutraligon]

I think there should be, but only for those who do violent sexual crimes, or who actually rape people or attempt to rape a person.

[Shazbotdom]

Ummm.....There is already a National Sex Offender Registry Database for the United States and is operated by the United States Department of Justice.

Cough.....

[MERIZoC]

Ummm.....There is already a National Sex Offender Registry Database for the United States and is operated by the United States Department of Justice.

Cough.....

We all know...

[The Nihilistic view]

Yes, the facts around the case should be open as well. I don't think all sex crimes should be lumped together.

[The Alexanderians]

Why should anyone be subjected to that? Especially if they're reformed? This stuff never goes away and it can be tacked on for the smallest of things like peeing in public. Shame tactics are bad enough but why would you make a persistent one? No we should have them registered only when they are still a danger to others.

[Shazbotdom]

Why should anyone be subjected to that? Especially if they're reformed? This stuff never goes away and it can be tacked on for the smallest of things like peeing in public. Shame tactics are bad enough but why would you make a persistent one? No we should have them registered only when they are still a danger to others.

So parents shouldn't be able to know if John Smith, known pedophile and convicted child rapist, moved into their neighborhood, or right next door to them? Honestly, there are very few cases of someone being reformed, and having the list available for public viewing so people CAN protect their children and themselves is needed in today's society.

And if you don't agree with it, then talk to the families of people who were raped and murdered before the list was made public.

[The Alexanderians]

Why should anyone be subjected to that? Especially if they're reformed? This stuff never goes away and it can be tacked on for the smallest of things like peeing in public. Shame tactics are bad enough but why would you make a persistent one? No we should have them registered only when they are still a danger to others.

So parents shouldn't be able to know if John Smith, known pedophile and convicted child rapist, moved into their neighborhood, or right next door to them? Honestly, there are very few cases of someone being reformed, and having the list available for public viewing so people CAN protect their children and themselves is needed in today's society.

And if you don't agree with it, then talk to the families of people who were raped and murdered before the list was made public.

Because one's mistake should not continue to haunt someone especially when it comes to public ridicule. Knowing that minor offenses can place you on the list highlights this even more. If they are deemed no longer a danger than they shouldn't be on the list.

[Scarlet Tides]

I feel like it would be moot if we actually rehabbed those that can be, didn't throw arbitrary prudish shit on people (peed in public? took a pic of yourself as a minor and texted it to your SO? time to get the label!) and kept re-offenders the fuck in prison.