Every single state has a list. A list where people who have committed sexual offences are required to have their names, address, photo identification and in some states, they have to have their vehicle registered. This sex offender registry is unethical. Many people who are put on the list shouldn’t even be on it in the first place. Twelve years ago a fifteen year old girl posted nude photos of herself on the internet and was charged of manufacturing and dissmeinationg child poronography. She was charged as an adult and in 2012 had registration for life (Pittman 34). This is just one of the many stories where young teenagers are required to put their name among the same list of people who raped children. Most registry’s don’t specify the crime committed. All sex offenders are set on the same list of offenders who have committed much larger crimes such as people who have committed multiply offenses of rape or kidnappings. Even if the offender did a much smaller crime such as urinating in public or streaking on their college campus (Pittman).
Due
…show more content…
The registration was intended to help police get an idea of who the usual suspects were, however there isn't a registry for any other crimes such as drug dealers, burglars, thieves, murderers, or arsonists (Bunte). People who commit those types of crimes have a much higher recidivism rate than sex offenders, who actually have the lowest rate out of any crime. Adult sex offenders have a recidivism rate of 13% while all other crimes have an average of 45% (Pittman).
Our constitution states that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Sex offenders are put on a list assuming once they are guilty of that crime they are forever to be punished because they are suspected to commit the crime again. Once a person has served the time of their crime is it fair for society to humility them to the rest of their
The sex offender’s registry plays on parent’s emotional instincts to protect their children instead of really protect them. It gives parents a false sense of protection. The regis...
The following research will display an overview of the process in Texas on how sex offenders are registered along with the notifications that are followed after registration. Texas, as many other states, has a procedure which requires sex offenders to register with the local law enforcement agencies at the time of their discharge. In addition to registration, they must also comply with further probation regulations. Research has concluded that there are four basic phases of registration and notification. Beginning with offender notified, following the offender registration and community notified and ending with public notification
Like I mentioned earlier, recidivism is the tendency of a released inmate to recommit a crime they originally committed. According to Increased Surveillance of Sex Offenders: Impacts on Recidivism, Lisa Taylor explains that recidivism “Is of great concern to the public, especially given the numerous high-profile, violent assault cases by repeat offenders.” (Taylor) Many people in the public wouldn’t want to even come out of their homes knowing that there are free prisoners roaming around the streets, ready to recommit the crime that brought them to jail. According to Christopher Zoukis, an incarcerated writer at FCC Petersburg, “49.3% of inmates who have been released from federal prison are re-arrested for committing the same crime they committed
The United States of America has always supported freedom and privacy for its citizens. More importantly, the United States values the safety of its citizens at a much higher level. Every year more laws are implemented in an attempt to deter general or specific criminal behaviors or prevent recidivism among those who have already committed crimes. One of the most heinous crimes that still occurs very often in the United States is sex offenses against children. Currently, there are over 700,000 registered sex offenders and 265,000 sex offenders who are under correctional supervision. It is estimated that approximately 3% of the offenders who are currently incarcerated will likely commit another sex-related crime upon release (Park & Lee, 2013, p. 26). There are several laws that have been in place regarding sex offenses for decades, including Megan’s Law which was enacted in 1996.
It is typically thought that sex offenders are the type of individual that needs to be tried in our courts and then sentenced because there is really no hope for an individual that harms the most innocent of our society. But there just may be an exception to this way of thinking. Juveniles who at one point themselves may have been victims, and as they have grown into adolescence not knowing why they are thinking the way they are, turn around and abuse others. Then what happens is that these adolescents once found out, are then tried in our courts as adults because in the mind of the court they are committing an adult crime. But there are alternatives for these juveniles that are being placed in our court system. Because at this stage in their development they are more receptive to treatment options and there are treatments available with valid research to substantiate them. Our judicial system just needs to recognize these options in order to try to lessen the amount of trauma inflicted on these already potentially traumatized individuals.
When it comes to crimes some criminals tend to serve longer or short sentencing due to what kind of crime was committed. Also, it depends on how the person acts and what type of judge the criminal come across. However; when it comes to criminals like drug dealers and pedophiles ( sex offenders) their sentencing are different and very absurd. In the state of South Carolina, drug dealer should not serve long sentences than Pedophiles (sex offenders)? Due to the numerous crimes like the pedophiles tends to get off easily with two years in jail, house arrest and register on the sex offender list. While the dealers sit in the cell for over 10 years with no parole or probation. In the state of South Carolina they need to fix the charges due to legalization
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.
There have been numerous laws enacted in response to sexual offender crime. Do these laws really work to help minimize re-offending, or do they give the public a false sense of security and cause recidivism? In several studies, researchers found no evidence of sexual offender registries being effective in increasing public safety. Some studies have found that requiring sex offenders to register with law enforcement may significantly reduce chances of recidivism. However, the research also found that making registry information available to the public may back fire and lead to higher levels of overall sex crimes Background A sex offender is a person, male or female who has been convicted of a sex crime.
Merriam Webster defines a sex offender as “a person who has been convicted of a crime involving sex.” (Sex Offender) This definition hits the nail on the head, but there is still the question of why would a person even commit the crimes that would classify them as a sex offender. The answer to this would possibly be that they do not choose. Some people are simply born with more inappropriate tendencies in their mind and if coupled with sexual abuse as a child from a parent or some other adult, then one would have a very scarred person that would eventually start committing heinous acts as well. Statistically, child sex offenders deceive and entice there victims into compliance instead of using physical force or violence to achieve their intentions. (Megan’s Law) This means that not only are they mentally ill, but they can also be very smart and manipulative, which is
The government made the registry with good intentions but it has backfired and only created more victims and more discrimination overall, and that is why it should be abolished. The citizens that are on the sex offender registry have already been punished for their crimes and have dealt with the consequences of their actions, there is no reason that they should continue to be punished for the rest of their lives.
In today’s society, juveniles that commit a sexual assault have become the subject of society. It’s become a problem in the United States due to the rise of sexual offenses committed by juveniles. The general public attitude towards sex offenders appears to be highly negative (Valliant, Furac, & Antonowicz, 1994). The public reactions in the past years have shaped policy on legal approaches to managing sexual offenses. The policies have included severe sentencing laws, sex offender registry, and civil commitment as a sexually violent predator (Quinn, Forsyth, & Mullen-Quinn, 2004). This is despite recidivism data suggesting that a relatively small group of juvenile offenders commit repeat sexual assaults after a response to their sexual offending (Righthand &Welch, 2004).
However, there is not enough research to prove that community notification prevents reoffending. Registers can only deter and trace already convicted sex offenders. However, research on reoffending patterns of sex offenders suggest that most sex offenders have not previously been convicted and released, so registration cannot protect the community from the majority of sex offenders. A Department of Justice study in the United States suggested that sex-offenders have a recidivism rate of 3-5% within the first three years after release. A New Zealand Department of Corrections study in 2008 revealed that over a 15-year period, 73% of sex offenders had not been charged or convicted for further sexual offending. International studies suggest that sex offender recidivate less than drug, property and burglary offenders. Ideas perpetuated in the media argue that sex offenders are different, they cannot be cured and they have high recidivism rates, however these conclusions are based on sensationalised media reporting on high profile attacks. One of the main purposes of a sex offender register is to reduce recidivism, however these studies and more show that sex offender recidivism is not as high a rate as it is perceived to
That’s why people argue that the sex offender registry does more harm than good. They paint a picture of these people that’s sometimes not accurate. When people see an offenders name on the list automatically they change the way they view you as a person. For example, Ed Gordon was a man convicted of a sex crime because he was 30 years old dating a young teen that was half his age. He was charged with statutory rape.
of Sex Offenders Via the Internet. The John Marshal Journal of Computer and Information Law
Before the registry was enacted, sex offenders who lived in their neighborhood victimized adults and children and no one knew about their prior criminal history. In very public cases, it was brought to light that children were being abducted, violently sexually assaulted, and finally brutally murdered by sex offenders that should have been registered. Those children could have been kept safe and may still be alive today if the public knew the information about their attackers. Also the surviving victims of sexual abuse endure life long suffering in both mental and physical symptoms. In my opinion I think that families should have unlimited access to the personal information of the registered sex offenders regardless of the privacy rights of those sex offenders. I will discuss both the sex offender’s rights as well as the right to