Sexual Relationships 
Sexual Health 
I'm NOT a sex offender, just a citizen that sees a problem with a certain law, the sex offender registry is pointless how does it help anyone? If they are going to reoffend they are going to reoffend no list is going to stop that.
How does the sex offender registry protect society and children?
In a nutshell, it doesn't.
The sex offender registry protects no one, and takes rights away from tax paying citizens who have paid their debt to society as defined by the courts. People can say what they want about the registry not being punitive, but in reality it is punitive. A person on the registry cannot work, cannot live in most areas, cannot use the internet, cannot travel without notifying the police in person and in writing, cannot have an email address unless they register it with the police in person and in writing, have to register anywhere they are located for more than 3 days consecutively, or visits more than 6 times in a 6 month period, is not allowed into any public parks or pools, cannot attend schools, cannot obtain a visa for travel, must register phone numbers in person and writing to the police, and must register any changes of any of the above in person and in writing, and the list goes on, along with ignorant and angry citizens taking vigilante violence against these ex-offenders who have paid for their crimes. What happens if the registered EX-sex offenders fail to abide by any of the above? 15 years to life in prison.
Okay, okay, okay.... What are the benefits of having the registry? None. When a person is charged with a sex offense the police take DNA samples, photographs and fingerprints and put them in a nice little file. Now, it is proven that less than 6% of the registered EX-offenders will commit a new sex crime; in fact, people who commit a sex offense have the second lowest recidivism rate. The lowest being murder. This is the same now with the registry as it was 25 years ago before the registry. More than 80% of all sex offenses are committed by people who are not on the registry. Not one sex offense was averted by the registry.
I heard one reporter make a statement that a sex offender is like an alcoholic... once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic. Once a sex offender, always a sex offender. That is the most absurd statement I have ever heard. Unless your definition of an alcoholic includes a person who takes one drink and never touches alcohol again.
Two examples of how a person who had previously committed a sex offense gets arrested for a new sex crime. First we will take an ex-offender from 25 years ago, before the registry. He knows that the police has that little file with all his goodies in it, so to avoid being an automatic suspect, he drives an hour away, roughly 60 miles from where he lives, and then commits the crime. The victim then calls the police. The police will perform the obvious tests, first by asking if the victim knew the suspect or if the victim got a good look at the suspect or saw any identifying marks. If yes, the police look through their little files and show them to the victim. When the victim sees the suspect, the police go and arrest the suspect. If the victim didn't see anything, they continue to a rape kit and get DNA samples. If a DNA sample is found, the police look back into their little files until they find a match, and then go and arrest the suspect. If no DNA sample is found, the suspect gets away with it.
Now the same scenario from today with the ex-offender who is on the registry. He knows that the police have that little file with all his goodies in it, and he knows he is on the registry, so to avoid being an automatic suspect; he drives an hour away, roughly 60 miles from where he lives, and then commits the crime. The victim then calls the police. The police will perform the obvious tests, first by asking if the victim knew the suspect or if the victim got a good look at the suspect or saw any identifying marks. If yes, the police look through their little files and show them to the victim. When the victim sees the suspect, the police go and arrest the suspect. If the victim didn't see anything, they continue to a rape kit and get DNA samples. If a DNA sample is found, the police look back into their little files until they find a match, and then go and arrest the suspect. If no DNA sample is found, the suspect gets away with it.
Did the registry save this victim from having the crime committed against them? No. Did the registry help this victim identify the suspect? No, the little file did.
The registry doesn't work. Never has, and never will. If all these ex-offenders are so dangerous, why didn't the judge or court sentence the ex-offender to more time? They give excuses like they don't have room, or cost too much money to keep them locked up. But the truth of it is, it is much, much cheaper to keep the less than 6% of the ex-offenders who are actually dangerous locked up, than it is to put all 100% on a registry that is so blatantly unconstitutional and ineffective.
Here are some facts. ALL people who commint a sex offense have their DNA on file. If a person decides to re-offend, the registry is not going to change that. The registry protects no one. An example would be that the very few people on the sex offender registry that did re-offend was not stopped from offending. They were not caught because they were recognized on the public shaming system. They were caught because of DNA or mugshots of offenders on file.
Regardless of it's intent, the registry offers real punishment for the sole purpose that someone may commit a crime, and that IS unconstitutional... No matter how you try to justify it. Government is praying on the fear and hate of the people to fuel their goals. Something that happened not all that long ago in Germany to thier Jewish citizens. And I'm not saying being Jewish is a crime, just showing how another government used these tactics.
Another straight out lie is that the registry is to help protect our children... And like I stated above, the registry protects no one. If the registry truly is civil and not punitive, then it can be applied retroactivily to anyone. And if the goal is to protect our citizens and children, then there should be a national DWI/DUI registry.
Sex offenses vs alcohol traffic Deaths in 2009
Forcible rapes for 2009 = 88,097(Charged not convicted)
DEATHs from alcohol related traffic offenses = 10,839 (This is excluding those maimed and injured) - 181 of those DEATHS were children 0 to 14 years of age, and of those 181, about 92 of those children were in the car of the drunk driver. Another 1.4 million drivers were arrested for drunk driving, which each could have resulted in injury and Death. And another 147 million people admitted to drinking and driving.
recidivism for related crime: Sex offenses roughly 5%(The majority of this 5% had multiple charges and were strangers to the victim
DUI/DWI nearly 60%
Then you would hear the people who drink say things like:
You only drove while under the influence one time? You don't consider yourself an alcoholic?
Sounds the same as 95% of the 'Sex Offenders' on the registry. If they have paid their debt to society, then society should stop punishing them more and more. They are no longer Sex offenders. They are citizens of the United States, who should have their rights protected. But unfortunately society as a whole is hateful and ignorant. Only when you talk to these people who have committed the sex offense can you get the feel of who they are. Not to judge by a label. Not to neglect them work. Not to make them and their families endure hell on earth. The courts know who the dangerous people are, but they choose to ignore that. If a Judge gives a person probabtion for a sex offense, how dangerous does that judge believe that person to be? If the judge really thought that person was a threat to society, he would have sentenced him or her to prison, in some cases life without parole.
Most Helpful Guy