Sex Offenders Lists Are Like The TSA: For Show -- With A Lot Of Unintended Costs And Consequences
There's a story of a terrible situation up at Lenore Skenazy's site -- a woman whose mentally disabled son (a 30-year-old who functions as a 10-year-old) was coerced into exposing himself to a girl (by a neighbor who, it turned out, was molesting this young man).
The mentally disabled man was prosecuted and put on the sex offender registry -- and it's taken from him what little he has in life, like a job clearing tables and being able to live at home with both his parents. (He requires lifetime supervision and care. He cannot live alone and he is not going to be able to have a girlfriend or an adult relationship -- ever, his mother notes.)
In his mother's words:
His love was competing in Special Olympics. He played softball, soccer, bocce ball, bowling and golfing. He swam and competed in power lifting. He has many gold medals that he is so proud of. His social life was spending supervised time with his peers in special recreation activities, such as a movie or a dinner out or a game night.He learned to scuba diving through the Diveheart Organization, who teach diving to the disabled. He was so happy when he did his scuba diving. Due to registry rules and regulations, Adam is no longer able to participate in any of the above.
My son does not date. He will never marry or have children. He will never have a career. His life is with us, his parents. He cannot cook for himself or pay bills or even take a phone call. He has sensory issues. He cannot wear certain fabrics of clothes. He wet the bed until the age of 16 when he finally gained control. He needs help with his daily living. He had a small part-time job for 5 years hosting and cleaning tables at a restaurant. He was let go because of his conviction.
Meanwhile, though people think of the sex offender registry as something that protects the rest of us, as this Business Insider article notes, a person can be put on it for being a teen sexting his or her girlfriend or boyfriend, for public urination, and for consensual sex with another teen who's slightly older.
Human Rights Watch has a paper on the sex offender registration and related laws -- debunking a good many of the myths:
Unfortunately, our research reveals that sex offender registration, community notification, and residency restriction laws are ill-considered, poorly crafted, and may cause more harm than good:•The registration laws are overbroad in scope and overlong in duration, requiring people to register who pose no safety risk;•Under community notification laws, anyone anywhere can access online sex offender registries for purposes that may have nothing to do with public safety. Harassment of and violence against registrants have been the predictable result;
•In many cases, residency restrictions have the effect of banishing registrants from entire urban areas and forcing them to live far from their homes and families.
The evidence is overwhelming, as detailed in this report, that these laws cause great harm to the people subject to them. On the other hand, proponents of these laws are not able to point to convincing evidence of public safety gains from them.
Even assuming some public safety benefit, however, the laws can be reformed to reduce their adverse effects without compromising that benefit. Registration laws should be narrowed in scope and duration.
Publicly accessible online registries should be eliminated, and community notification should be accomplished solely by law enforcement officials. Blanket residency restrictions should be abolished.
Here's an example of a kid who ended up on the sex offender registry. He sound like a danger to you -- or a normal teenager?
Over-breadth of the Registration RequirementThe justifications offered for sex offender laws focus on sexually violent offenders. Yet people who have not committed violent or coercive offenses may nonetheless be required to register as sex offenders and be subject to community notification and residency restrictions. For example, in many states, people who urinate in public, teenagers who have consensual sex with each other, adults who sell sex to other adults, and kids who expose themselves as a prank are required to register as sex offenders.
Brandon M.'s case is an example. Brandon was a senior in high school when he met a 14-year-old girl on a church youth trip. With her parents' blessing, they began to date, and openly saw each other romantically for almost a year. When it was disclosed that consensual sexual contact had occurred, her parents pressed charges against Brandon and he was convicted of sexual assault and placed on the sex offender registry in his state. As a result, Brandon was fired from his job. He will be on the registry and publicly branded as a sex offender for the rest of his life. In his mother's words, "I break down in tears several times a week. I know there are violent sexual predators that need to be punished, but this seems like punishment far beyond reasonable for what my son did."[3]
The over-breadth in scope is matched by over-breadth in duration: the length of time during which a former offender must register and be included in online registries is set arbitrarily, based on the nature of the crime of conviction and not on any assessment of the likelihood that the former offender continues to pose a safety threat. Indeed, legislators are steadily increasing the duration of registration requirements: in 17 states, registration is now for life. Yet former sex offenders are less and less likely to reoffend the longer they live offense-free.
Unfortunately, only a few states require or permit periodic individualized assessments of the risk to the community a former offender may pose before requiring initial or continued registration and community notification.
Lives are being ruined -- needlessly. But this is the problem with laws that get put in place. You can see how few lawmakers (if any) would want to get behind reform.
This is a cause hackers should get behind by putting all politicians on the sex offender registry
lujlp at September 4, 2017 2:30 AM
Its not a coincidence that both of the persons you noted were males, as nearly all of the people placed of sex offenders lists are male.
Wfjag at September 4, 2017 5:18 AM
It's true -- the male thing, though I see a trickle of stories of girls being made to register for sexting pictures of themselves.
I took a women's studies class as a freshman at the University of Michigan, and the portrayals of men and "the patriarchy" (through the eyes of Dworkin, McKinnon, etc.) were just cartoonishly absurd. I saw that -- it was obvious. It led me to realize that I would not call myself a feminist -- ever -- because I believe in rights for all and justice for all. It's also pathetic, as a woman, to see yourself as a perma victim rather than figuring out how you can physically protect yourself (like by not getting so drunk you black out) -- and I'm not just talking about protecting oneself from rape. Walking across the campus or elsewhere while blotto puts you at risk for mugging or being run over by a car.
Amy Alkon at September 4, 2017 6:06 AM
In our town this has led to one trailer park where almost all of the sex offenders in town live. I understand that it is one of the few places far enough away from schools and churches. The place is shockingly run-down. I've been there in the course of my job working with students. The temperature range here is from about 17 degrees to 107 degrees. Many trailer houses don't have doors or windows. You see toddlers roaming the dirt roads. It looks like something that you would see in a third world country, not the US of A. I understand that people live there because they must die to the sex offender laws or because the landlord is understanding when people can't pay and he lets them stay anyway.
These laws don't keep sex offenders away from kids. They just keep them away from "our kids." Instead they were housed with the most vulnerable children.
Jen at September 4, 2017 8:17 AM
It sucks that he was molested, and I hope the molestor is on the list, but at the same time if he is unable to know that you do not expose yourself to little girls then he really should not be around kids. And if I were the reataurant owner that is a whole can of worms I would not want to have to deal with.
Nicolek at September 4, 2017 10:00 AM
Yes but....
None of the things that gets one on a sex offender list are particularly hard to avoid. It's often a red flag for deeper issues.
When I worked at LA Weight Loss we had a guy come in and apply to be a counselor. When he returned the application he explained to me that he got caught masturbating in his car but all he wanted to do in life was help women with low self esteem.
And so help me dog, he was getting off on making me uncomfortable.
It was truly disgusting and I couldn't wait to get to get home and take a silkwood shower.
SophieK at September 4, 2017 10:15 AM
"Silkwood shower" ☑
("What did you think we were working with... Puffed wheat?")
Crid at September 4, 2017 11:16 AM
Teens get on the list (or certainly in big trouble) for RECEIVING a sext from a girl (usually). There is no way to prevent something coming to your in box. People make a big joke out of abstinence and then schools give out birth control to teens technically under the minority age (say 18), but at the same time when there is a local panic or a parent gets upset the same teens that everyone just jokes about having sex can get on the register. Urinating in public is not nice but when one is really drunk is hard to avoid--hard to see why that is equivalent to rape to put you on a list for life, but it is. Streaking is oh so funny when 1000 college students do it, but in other circumstances can get you on the list. In some states, teens of an age that can legally marry (or an adult & a teen of that age), say 16, can get on the registry if caught before they marry. All of this just shows that these laws resulting from our strong puritan under current are legally incoherent.
I am much more worried about a murderer living next door, especially a gang banger.
cc at September 4, 2017 12:22 PM
No matter what happens, it could have been worse, much worse.
This happened last month in Murderland:
http://www.laprensa.hn/sucesos/1099911-410/enfermo_mental-asfixia-ni%C3%B1a-omonita-familiar
Sixclaws at September 4, 2017 2:19 PM
There are legal jurisdictions in these United States where you can legally fuck a 15 year old, but god help you if you get a blow job from her before she turns 18 or get pictures of her before 19 year old
lujlp at September 4, 2017 4:49 PM
I find it ironic, at this point in my life, that the Baby Boomers fought so hard to get rid of old irrational sex laws, just so they could pass a bunch of new ones.
Cousin Dave at September 5, 2017 7:50 AM
Yep Cousin Dave. Here comes the new boss just like the old boss. And it holds true for so many things. We fought to get the irrational organized religion out of our schools only to replace it with irrational disorganized religion. These things seem to be part of the human condition.
Ben at September 6, 2017 6:26 AM
Well said, NicoleK and SophieK.
And from what I understand, the OLD laws were ones restricting the rights of consenting ADULTS - indoors. Also, unmarried 13-year-olds used to be fair game for adults in some states. Why, I can't imagine. Thank goodness those laws were changed.
While the newer laws may well be inconsistent and complicated, it seems to me that if we can penalize 14-year-olds for driving alone without a license (not that I know what the usual penalty is in such a case), we can and should expect someone 16 or older to Google a list of state laws regarding underage sex before messing around. Society has better things to do than to protect adults and near-adults from the consequences of illegal behavior. (That is not to deny that plenty of penalties are too harsh.)
And when the younger party is under 17 and there's a four-year difference or more, that's usually statutory rape, IIRC. I dare anyone to stand up to a crowd of parents of middle-schoolers and say that's unfair. Parents are never going to change their minds as far as that goes - nation-wide, anyway. (Reminder: Such laws are mostly about what the PARENTS want, not what minors "want." In the same vein, 16-year-olds don't get to enlist even if the parents want that.)
lenona at September 7, 2017 3:15 PM
Well, here's a hint:
http://www.roadstersway.com/what-are-the-consequences-for-underage-driving-192.html
"Driving without a license is a Class 2 misdemeanor in some states, and it has a fine and/or jail time. Generally the fine is up to $500, and the jail time can be up to 6 months."
Granted, it's a little hard to imagine jailing a 14-year-old for 6 months just for that, but again, when it comes to statutory rape, we're usually talking about people old enough to vote anyway - if not even older.
lenona at September 10, 2017 4:45 PM
Leave a comment