find sex offenders in YOUR neighbourhood!

[raedyn]

http://www.meganslaw.ca.gov/
California now has an online serachable database of sex offenders, searchable by city, zip code, county, etc. There's a map interface, too. Zoom in, and see little icons that tell you the location of registered sex offenders, and schools. Click on one of those little icons, and you'll see pictures, addresses, descriptions of their crimes, scars, and aliases.

a list of states that have similar services:
http://www.sexoffender.com/state.html

So, is it an important and useful tool for citizens, or an awful intrusion of privacy to the offenders? What is the benefit/usefulness of you knowing your neighbour is a convicted sex offender? What harm could this do to people - who have already served their complete term - that are attempting to not repeat their previous mistakes? What protections should offenders be given from vigilantes who might attack them or their homes and their families? Does this give people a false sense of security - because there are numerous non-registered or non-convicted or non-reported sex offenders and the 'danger' could really be anyone in your neighbourhood.

 

[kenpo tiger]

Raedyn,

The offenders gave up all rights, including that to privacy, when they committed the crimes. The registry is useful if used correctly. One of my friends is making herself crazy looking at it for fear her five year old might be harmed. Personally, I think I'd like to know whether there are any offenders in my area. I don't know that I'd want to know specifically where they are. Smacks of them controlling my life. KT

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Just an FYI: We have a sticky in the Horror Stories forum for offender intel.
Victims Resources and Information
It seems to cover alot of areas, not sure if that link is in there.

 

[Deuce]

I think if the public wants to know where known sex offenders are located, they should have the option to look it up. I'm not sure that it would make a huge difference in the amount of repeat offences, but if the registry prevents one, it's definetly worth it.

As far as privacy issues are concerned, I agree that they lost that privilage when they commited the crime.

 

[raedyn]

As far as privacy issues are concerned, I agree that they lost that privilage when they commited the crime.

Okay. That's one point of view. I'm not sure if I agree or not. Some of these people have committed very scary crimes. But not all of them. Did you know "indecent exposure" is a "sex crime"? That would include the flashers in the park, but it would also include the drunken 19 year old stumbling home from the campus bar that pulls out his weiner to take a piss on a tree and the wrong person witnesses this and reports it. So, tell me Deuce, have you ever pissed in public? Should you have to register as a sex offender and have your name address and photograph on a readily available searchable database for the rest of your life?

 

[Feisty Mouse]

interesting topic, raedyn.

For some *kinds* of sex offenders, I would like the database to be up - especially for predatory crimes, such as rapists, child molesters, etc. For "indecent exposure" - no, I don't think that is *dangerous* enough to post someone's name and address on there.

For Indiana, our state page lists:

The Indiana Code defines a sex and violent offender as: </SPAN>




1. An individual who has been convicted of any of the following offenses:

• • Rape (IC 35-42-4-1)
    Criminal Deviate Conduct (IC 35-42-4-2)
    Child Molesting (IC 35-42-4-3)
    Child Exploitation (IC 35-42-4-4b)
    Vicarious Sexual Gratification (IC 35-42-4-5)
    Child Solicitation (IC 35-42-4-6)
    Child Seduction (IC 35-42-4-7)
    Sexual Misconduct with a Minor as a Class A, B, or C felony (IC 35-42-4-9)
    Incest (IC 35-46-1-3)
    Sexual Battery (IC 35-42-4-8)
    Kidnapping, if the victim is less than 18 (IC 35-42-3-2)
    Criminal Confinement, if the victim is less than 18 (IC 35-42-3-3);

2. An individual who has been convicted of attempting to commit or conspiring to commit any of the above-listed offenses;

3. An individual who has been convicted of a crime, convicted of attempting to commit a crime, or convicted of conspiring to commit a crime under the laws of another state or in a military court that is substantially equivalent to any of the above-listed offenses; or 4. A child who is at least 14 years of age and is on probation or parole or is discharged from a facility by the department of correction, discharged from a secure private facility, or discharged from a juvenile detention facility as a result of being adjudicated as a delinquent child for an act that would be an offense listed above if committed by an adult (see IC 31-37-1-1 to -2) and is found by a court to be likely to repeat an act that would be an offense listed above if committed by an adult (see IC 31-37-19-5 (b)(1)).

"vicarious sexual gratification" is puzzling to me - I'm not sure exactly what that entails - but otherwise, these are all crimes that seem pretty harmful - except for "criminal deviate conduct" - again, I'm unclear on this.

Of course, then we have to ponder the minority of people convicted for these crimes who were, in fact, innocent.

 

[Tgace]

MEGAN'S LAW

In 1995, a convicted child molester was arrested for the murder and rape of 7-year-old Megan Kanka in a New Jersey suburb. The offender lived across the street from the Kanka residence. However, law enforcement was prohibited from disclosing the presence of this child molester because release of this information was prohibited. The laws have been changed to permit the release of this type of information to the public. In remembrance of Megan Kanka, President Clinton signed into law “Megan’s Law” on May 8, 1996. The California State Legislature signed California’s version of Megan’s Law and put it into effect on September 25, 1996.This law was implemented to allow potential victims to protect themselves and allow parents to protect their children.

 

[kenpo tiger]

interesting topic, raedyn.

For some *kinds* of sex offenders, I would like the database to be up - especially for predatory crimes, such as rapists, child molesters, etc. For "indecent exposure" - no, I don't think that is *dangerous* enough to post someone's name and address on there.

For Indiana, our state page lists:


"vicarious sexual gratification" is puzzling to me - I'm not sure exactly what that entails - but otherwise, these are all crimes that seem pretty harmful - except for "criminal deviate conduct" - again, I'm unclear on this.

Of course, then we have to ponder the minority of people convicted for these crimes who were, in fact, innocent.

Feisty, I think that "vicarious sexual gratification" may cover Peeping Toms.

Raedyn, Deuce was agreeing with me, I think. I stated that I thought they lost their rights when they committed the crimes.

As to the person who's convicted because of publicly exposing himself, I would hope that people seeking information about that particular crime would take the time to see that it was a victimless crime, so to speak. Problem is that there are broader brushstrokes than need be sometimes. KT

 

[Ping898]

I have to admit I feel on the fence with this one (and admittedly I have no kids so maybe I would feel differently if I did)

On the one hand I feel that yeah some of these people are various sick and dangerous and it is a good idea to know who might be spending time with you or your kids. Especially if you have someone like a serial rapist living in the area.
But on the other hand I think of those boys who at 16 had sex with their 14 year old girl friends, mom and dad of the girl find out and bring charges against the boy cause she was under a certain age. Now I don't think 14 year olds should be having sex, but the sex was consenual and now the boy fo the rest of his life has to register as a sex offender. It has happened before and will happen again.
I also wonder if this will really be the end of it, I kind of feel like next it'll murders who will have to register, then car thieves, etc down the line and it leave people with no incentive to better themselves. Sometimes people do make a mistake. They get involved with the wrong people and something happens and people's lives are forever changed. But after making that mistake they use the time they've served to change and I feel like in some ways this list doesn't give people the chance to change. You get people who become obsessive or overzealous and try to drive these people out of their community, make it someone else's "problem". I don't think that helps society, I think it hurts it and if someone is working to make sure they never do it again and get driven away they see nothing worth changing for and revert to old ways. After all if everyone assumes you are already doing it, why not just go and do so?
Some people will never change and yeah especially keeping track of the offenders who go after kids I think is important, but I guess I wonder if in keeping track of nearly everyone we are loosing more than we are gaining. What's next? Round them all up and ship them off to internment camps?
I don't know what the right answer is, but I am not sure if this is it. Besides it is so easy for them not to register and my understanding is many of the most violent or screwed up ones don't. The list is only as good as it is maintained.

 

[raedyn]

So if you look up on the registry and you see the person across the street from you had been convicted of say... child molestation what would you do differently? If you looked up on the registry and saw there were no convicted and registered offenders on your block what would you do differently?

What about the fact that there WILL be people in your area that have committed or will commit these crimes but have not been convicted? Just because you can say someone living in house A B and C have a record, doesn't mean people living in house D E and F are safe.

If I searched my area and found there were people nearby on the list, I think it would just serve to make me hysterically paranoid. There are bad people out there, sure. But I don't see how knowing who some of them are can really help me protect my daughter or myself. Maybe there's something I'm missing. How do you feel it would help you?

 

[Deuce]

Okay. That's one point of view. I'm not sure if I agree or not. Some of these people have committed very scary crimes. But not all of them. Did you know "indecent exposure" is a "sex crime"? That would include the flashers in the park, but it would also include the drunken 19 year old stumbling home from the campus bar that pulls out his weiner to take a piss on a tree and the wrong person witnesses this and reports it. So, tell me Deuce, have you ever pissed in public? Should you have to register as a sex offender and have your name address and photograph on a readily available searchable database for the rest of your life?

NO! I have never urinated in public! Ok i'm lying, but if I got caught, and was put on the registry, do you think people who see it will consider me a threat to society? I still wouldn't like the idea of being posted though, and maybe there should be a standard for who is deemed a dangerous sex offender.

 

[kenpo tiger]

So if you look up on the registry and you see the person across the street from you had been convicted of say... child molestation what would you do differently? If you looked up on the registry and saw there were no convicted and registered offenders on your block what would you do differently?

What about the fact that there WILL be people in your area that have committed or will commit these crimes but have not been convicted? Just because you can say someone living in house A B and C have a record, doesn't mean people living in house D E and F are safe.

If I searched my area and found there were people nearby on the list, I think it would just serve to make me hysterically paranoid. There are bad people out there, sure. But I don't see how knowing who some of them are can really help me protect my daughter or myself. Maybe there's something I'm missing. How do you feel it would help you?

It would help in that I'd probably be more aware of people wandering the neighborhood -- there are very few who do who aren't attached to a dog. I do not have small children, nor do I have daughters, but I think this falls under the heading of knowing one's environment. We're taught in martial arts to be aware of who and what is around you, aren't we? I wouldn't lose any sleep over it, though.

 

[Tgace]

Would you leave your child alone in the front yard palying when you know the neighbor is a child rapist?? Ride up and down the sidewalk past his house on her bicycle??

 

[raedyn]

Would you leave your child alone in the front yard palying when you know the neighbor is a child rapist?? Ride up and down the sidewalk past his house on her bicycle??

Should I be doing that if the neighbour doesn't show up on the list? What if he's never been convicted. You know there are criminals that have committed crimes but there isn't enough evidence to convict or they've got a good lawyer or whatever. Those people aren't going to show up on that list. And it's not like a rapist ONLY rapes the neighbours kids. It's not like my kid couldn't be hurt by someone at church who doesn't live nearby or someone that lives near her friends house, or someone not from the neighbourhood who drives through and grabs her....

 

[Deuce]

In my opinion, there is a small chance that the registry would be directly related to the prevention of a sexual offense being commited. But I do think it may help people realize that known sex offenders may be living in their area. Knowing this information may help parents to be more conscious about their children's safety and to realize that their neighborhood may not be as safe as they once thought.

I personally think that being too paranoid is beter then being too careless, when it comes to personal safety.

As I mentioned before, if one sexual offense is prevented due to the registry, there should be no discussion as to whether or not it is right or if it should be made public.

 

[Tgace]

In my profession, its sometimes a "no win" situation...release the names and you are infringing on rights, dont and you are not protecting the public. IMHO, if the subjects are a risk, why let them out in the first place, I guess thats just me....

 

[TonyM.]

I take these lists with a grain of salt. Most child molesters don't get caught. When I was a correctional officer working in the sex offenders unit, only three of the sixteen residents where in for rape, one was a seventeen year old that was dating a fifteen year old for a year until her dad decided he didn't like him and had him prosecuted for carnal knowledge. The kid got three years. Twelve of the sixteen were flashers.

 

[Kreth]

Unfortunately, in our modern society, the "rights of the accused" often outweigh the rights of the victim(s). Groups like the ACLU, while they have done much good, have also contributed to this unfortunate fact. I'd hate to see the rights of a convicted child rapist infringed upon, even though (for example) sodomizing a 12 yo at knifepoint doesn't exactly fit my definition of respecting her rights...

Jeff

 

[Spud]

Was browsing through our local registry earlier in the year. My jaw hit the floor when I saw that one of the people on the list in my town had the same name (very distinct, unusual name) as my instructor.

Fortunately, the mug shot and age didn't match. Nonethless I'd expect that Sensei isn't really comfortable sharing the name and city as a registered offender.

 

[modarnis]

Okay. That's one point of view. I'm not sure if I agree or not. Some of these people have committed very scary crimes. But not all of them. Did you know "indecent exposure" is a "sex crime"? That would include the flashers in the park, but it would also include the drunken 19 year old stumbling home from the campus bar that pulls out his weiner to take a piss on a tree and the wrong person witnesses this and reports it. So, tell me Deuce, have you ever pissed in public? Should you have to register as a sex offender and have your name address and photograph on a readily available searchable database for the rest of your life?

That's why there are prosecutors and defense attorneys and judges. As a prosecutor, my job is to seperate the drunk college kid pissing from the serial "waver" preying upon women in the park and getting off on their reaction. The waver should be compelled to register since that type of behavior is indicative of serious sexual deviance.

I had a recent case where a guy with his pants around his ankles pulled up along side a woman, tooted his horn and then proceeded to chase after her for 5 or six highway exits all the while pleasuring himself and attemting to keep next to her and garner her attention.

Boo Hoo that he has to register for 10 years. Actions have consequences