Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act
Essay on Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act
Essays on sex offender laws
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Mary Babb was in her SUV last year when her estranged husband slammed into her with his pickup truck. The crash overturned Babb’s vehicle and left her suspended upside-down by her seat belt. As she hung there helplessly, Thomas Babb fired two rounds from a shotgun, killing his wife in front of horrified witnesses outside the office where she worked. Babb had filed for divorce and moved out just before her death. She changed jobs and obtained a court order protecting her from her husband. But he kept following her. According to her family, she did everything the law provided her, and it wasn’t enough. These are just two examples of convicted offenders and that sometimes the law is just not enough. In 1995, Iowa passed the Iowa Sex Offender Registry Law. Any person convicted of a criminal offense against a minor with a sexual element, an aggravated offense with a sexual element, a sexually violent offense, or any other relevant offense in Iowa, or in any other state, or in any federal, military, tribal, or foreign court, must register as a sex offender. As of August 1st 2005, there were 6,004 people on the sex offender registry. A person who is required to register as a sex offender and whose underlying criminal offense was committed against a minor is prohibited from residing within 2,000 feet of the real property comprising a public or non-public elementary or secondary school or a child care facility. A sex offender who resides within 2,000 feet of a public or non-public school or child care facility commits an aggravated misdemeanor. BUT, an offender who had an established residence prior to July 1, 2002, resides within 2,000 feet of a newly established school or child care facility does not violate the restriction (Iowa - A Taliban State). So, you could have a twice convicted sex offender living next to you and your family. What good is the law then? Since this new law came into effect, registered sex offenders have became less and less. Not because they’re not committing the crimes, but because they’re not registering. Out of the 6,000 offenders in Iowa, over 500 of them are listed as “unconfirmed whereabouts.” It has forced many of the offenders to become homeless, or sleeping in their cars or trucks (Davey). National surveys have shown that about one-fourth of all sex offenders who are on the streets have moved, failed to report new addresses to police and eluded detection.
In 1994, twice-convicted sex offender Jesse Timmendequas raped and murdered Megan Kanka, a seven-year old girl who lived across the street. In reaction to this emotionally-charged crime, Megan's home state of New Jersey ratified a community notification bill - dubbed "Megan's Law" - just three months later. This fall, a national version of the law went into effect, mandating that all fifty states notify citizens in writing of the presence of convicted sex offenders within their communities. Certainly, society has a responsibility to protect children from sex offenders, and many feel that Megan's Law is the best course of action. However, others feel that it is an unwarranted intrusion into the rights to privacy of individuals who have already paid their debts to society.
In the event that a prisoner (particularly a sex offender) does complete rehabilitation, he carries with him a stigma upon reentering society. People often fear living near a prior drug addict or convicted murderer and the sensational media hype surrounding released felons can ruin a newly released convict’s life before it beings. What with resident notifications, media scare tactics and general concern for safety, a sex offender’s ability to readapt into society is severely hindered (554). This warrants life-skills rehabilitation applied to him useless, as he will be unable to even attempt to make the right decision regarding further crime opportunities.
14. George A. Chidi Jr., Qualcomm turns Cell Phones into GPS Systems. 16 Jan 2002. < http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,80085,00.asp>
It is estimated that approximately 3% of the offenders who are currently incarcerated will likely commit another sexual-related crime upon release (Park & Lee, 2013, p. 26). There are several laws that have been in place regarding sexual offenses for decades, including Megan’s Law, which was enacted in 1996. The federal Megan’s Law establishes three specific conditions. The first condition required information from state sex offender registries to be distributed publicly so that all community citizens have access to it. The second condition requires any information collected by registration programs within the state to be released for any reason given that it is allowed under the state law.
The acceptance that the court system often treats female offenders differently than male offenders is an accurate statement; however, it comes with many caveats. Generally, the public views women as nurturers, motherly and incapable of harming a child. Research indicates that female sex offenders capable of committing such acts have serious psychiatric and psychological problems. In comparison, research indicates male sex offenders are more callous, more antisocial, and promiscuous, involved in the criminal justice system, and have more victims (Miccio-Fenseca, 2012, slide 7). The consensus is that men commit their acts for sexual pleasure while women commit their acts due to psychiatric and psychological problems. Law enforcement, juries, and judges tend to empathize more when there are additional mitigating factors such as emotional or psychological problems. Due to these mitigating factors, it appears treatment of female sex offenders is more lenient than male if their crimes are similar in nature. Research by Miccio-Fenseca (2012) indicates that in comparison to their male counterparts, “female sex offenders rarely use force or violence far less than often…rarely use threats of violence to silence victims…rarely use threats o...
When a parent hold his/her child for the first, one of the things a parent does is make a silent promise to this child that they do whatever they can to protect this life they have in their hands. Unfortunately, there comes a time, when a parents cans no longer able to be around to protect their children 24 hours a day. This is the time parents have to dreaded talk almost like taking away a part of their children’s innocents because they have to discuss about the “bad people” in the world. How sometimes these people are not stranger but someone who maybe someone they have come trust and love. This is evident ever time you turn on the TV, there is news report discussing the molestation of a child by a teacher, coach or even a priest. One of the ways law enforcements try to keep our children safe was by enacting the Meagan’s Law. Meagan’s Law was created after a 7 year old girl, named Meagan Kanka, who was lured away by a neighbor with a promise of puppy inside his house, where he suffocated and strangled her. Her body was stuff into a toy chest and dumped in a near by park. Meagan’s killer was a two-timed sex offender living with other sex offenders he met in prison, right across the street. This incident caused the federal government mandate all sex offender to register their location with police and their information to be made public and placed onto sex offender registry. On the surface, the sex offender registry seems like the perfect solution needed to protect our children, but with closer examination, the sex offender registry falls short.
Ever since the bill for having a Canadian Sex Offender Registry was passed, in December of 2004, it has been a heated debate in many boardrooms across the country. On the one hand, there are the defence attorneys deeming it slightly mentally damaging and unnecessary for their client(s). On the other side of the coin, there are the individuals claiming it to be a great idea if used in the correct manner. A sex offender registry is only useful when used correctly, with updated and accurate profiles, while remaining conscious of charter rights.
Sex offender legislation has been encouraged and written to protect the community and the people at large against recidivism and or to help with the reintegration of those released from prison. Nevertheless, a big question has occurred as to if the tough laws created help the community especially to prevent recidivism or make the situation even worse than it already is. Sex offenders are categorized into three levels for example in the case of the state of Massachusetts; in level one the person is not considered dangerous, and chances of him repeating a sexual offense are low thus his details are not made available to the public (Robbers, 2009). In level two chances of reoccurrence are average thus public have access to this level offenders through local police departments in level three risk of reoffense is high, and a substantial public safety interest is served to protect the public from such individuals.
Sex offenders have trouble reintegrating into society and are often harassed by those who become aware of their status. The sex offender management tool restricts where the offender can live and sets boundaries of how close they can be to children. Research has shown most of these restrictions are viewed as more of a stress to the offender and it is not clear how the public is ensured.
Police being able to search your phone without is warrant is a violation of privacy and the fourth amendment. This is an ongoing issue that is currently in the Supreme Court and state courts, which have split opinions on the issue. The courts are having a lot of trouble grasping what to compare a cell phone to as far as searching it. A big case that they are comparing searching cell phones to is over 40 years old and it involves a police officer searching through a cigarette box and finding drugs. A judge in the 9th circuit against warrantless search debunked the cigarette box comparison by saying phones are more like a suitcase, except the suitcase contains everything that you have ever traveled with in your entire life, then some. Though that is a better view on the situation, it is still a very narrow view on what personal data really is. Who cares if the police can search your phone? Well when they do, they will learn more about you then you ever knew about yourself. Do you really want a stranger knowing everything about your personal life, it would almost be like living in a glass house with no doors and bright lights on all night (KOPAN, 2013).
Although they may be out of jail, they cannot be considered free. They are unable to make their own decisions: where they can work, where they can live, and how they can live their lives are all under control of the government. These people look the same as everyone else, but underneath the mask, lay a title they cannot shake. These people are sex offenders. A sex offender is defined as anyone who has committed a sexual crime. These crimes range from serious crimes, like rape, to minor offenses, such as urinating in public, or under age consensual sex. All sex offenders are placed on the registry and are required to follow a careful protocol. Registered sex offenders are paired with a Community Corrections Officer (CCO) who oversees and supervises the offender's actions. Many restrictions are placed on the offender, and although the laws can vary from state to state, there are some basic restrictions that apply to every offender. Some of these restrictions include: a sex offender cannot move without the permission and approval of their CCO, they can only live and work in certain areas, they cannot own any firearms, their personal computers are monitored and controlled by their CCO (many websites are blocked, including pornographic content), they are not allowed to take or consume any mind altering substances such as drugs or even alcohol, and they are required to get regular counseling (“Rules”). Currently there are 747,408 registered sex offenders in the United States. Some states such as Delaware and Oregon have a higher concentration of sex offenders (500 per 100,000) where as Pennsylvania has the lowest concentration of sex offenders (94 per 100,000) (“Sex Offender Statistics”). Due to the inefficiencies ...
Most offenders and parolees return to their families and friends in their old neighborhoods and communities which are more often than not the same areas that got them in trouble in the first place. These areas are quite possibly the target of a previous hot spot policing detail, possibly leading to an individual’s incarceration. While I am not trying to say the return of one individual to a specific area will cause a spike in criminal activity and an immediate hot spot detail, I do want to stress that hot spot policing techniques and studies have not shown any sign of correcting criminal behavior in an offender or high crime area for a long period of time. Hot spot policing is used as a quick response to citizen complaints. Law enforcement
Martin, R. (1996). Pursuing Public Protection Through Mandatory Community Notification of Convicted Sex Offenders: The Trials and Tribulations of Megan's Law. The Boston Public Interest Law Journal, Vol. 6, Issue 29
Over the past few years, technology has grown to be the driving force in human productivity and efficiency. Technology has been incorporated into our everyday lives to help us perform daily activities and bridge long distance communication. Although technology has brought us many advantages, it has also created quite few ethical issues along the way. Some of the biggest ethical issues technology has created revolve around cell phones. These issues include cell phone tracking and using the cell phone to cheat. Cell phone privacy can be compromised in many situations regarding phone call tracking and messaging. Cell phone use is also starting to be abused by students and other test takers to cheat on tests. Even if the person has good moral standards, sometimes the right decision to make is not always clear.
Since surveillance cameras have been invented for security reasons at shopping malls and stores they have also been place in public areas such as stoplights, parking lots, hallways, bus stops, and more.