What Is The Legislative Purpose Of The Registry

Empirical research has repeatedly proven that community notification is ineffective at increasing community safety, but rather it excels at increasing collateral and direct damage to former offenders and their families, which is increasing daily as citizens use the sex offender websites as hit lists for vigilante actions against offenders , their families, friends and employers. These vigilante actions range from bullying, vandalism, harassment, assaults and even murder. Also legislators are increasingly abusing their power by creating laws, which often violate the Constitution, that are based not on empirical research or sound logic but on emotion, opinion, hysteria and what is popular and most likely to get them reelected. This further adds to the harm done to these former offenders and their families.

I believe it’s time to look at the real problem, the registry itself. If there was no registry then there would be no community notification and no collateral damage. So what exactly is the reason for the registry in the first place besides a bigoted hatred towards a specific group of people? People that I might add have already repaid their debt to society through punishment handed down by the judicial system. If the registry where truly about public safety, rather than hatred and vengeance towards this specific group, then wouldn’t all dangerous criminals be on some sort of registry?

If you look at at the laws, the legislature gives us  insight into their reasoning for the registry’s existence. For example, if you look at the findings of the Nebraska Legislature listed under statute 29-4002 they state the following:

“The  Legislature  finds  that sex offenders present a high risk to commit repeat offenses. The Legislature further finds that efforts of law enforcement agencies to protect their communities, conduct investigations, and quickly apprehend sex offenders are impaired by the lack of  available  information about individuals  who have pleaded guilty to or have been found guilty of sex offenses and who live, work, or  attend school  in their  jurisdiction.    The Legislature further finds that state policy should assist efforts of local law enforcement agencies to protect their communities by requiring sex offenders to  register with  local  law enforcement  agencies  as  provided  by the Sex Offender Registration Act.”

So the first thing that we should look at is listed in the very first line of their justification for having the registry. That is their belief that, “sex offenders present a high risk to commit repeat offenses”. While the statement may be factual about sex offenders in general it is not true for people who have already been convicted of sex offenses. Once a person is caught and convicted their likelihood of being involved in another sex crime is beyond being extremely small. In the recent Nebraska study that looked at all people involved in sex crimes in Nebraska the re-offense rate was 6/10 of 1% per year. That is the lowest re-offense rate for any criminal class. So the legislature’s justification for having people register if they’ve been convicted or found guilty of a sex crime just vanished.

The second reason they provide as rationale for implementing the registry is, “that efforts of law enforcement agencies to protect their communities, conduct investigations, and quickly apprehend sex offenders are impaired by the lack of  available  information about individuals”.

Has having a registry in any way brought about the conviction of a person on the registry for a new sex crime? To date the answer is no. If a person who is on the registry has been convicted of a new sex crime it was most likely brought about by ordinary police work, and the use of all the high-tech gadgets that law-enforcement has at their disposal rather than the registry playing any part in securing a conviction.

So having people on a registry does not aid law enforcement. Especially when you consider that of all new sex crimes 99.973% are committed by people not on the registry. ( table from NCJ 198251 Exhibit 6F Data from: Recidivism of Sex Offenders Released from Prison in 1994, DOJ:OJP, BJS Report NCJ198281)  This means that in the United States over a three-year period people on the registry were possibly responsible for less then0.027% or 27/1000 of 1% of new sex crimes. So why is law enforcement wasting the resources to run a standalone registry that actually serves no purpose. Not to mention the thousands of hours wasted each year doing compliance checks.

What it comes down to is that the legislature’s reasons for even having the registry are based on falsehoods, lies and misconceptions that were presented to them by vengeful self centered bigots who’s only goal was to seek more punishment to heap on people who have already paid their debt to society.  We as Americans have seen this type of bigoted hysteria before directed at and against what were considered  undesirable groups of people whether it was the hysteria and prejudice directed at individuals because of their political beliefs ( during the McCarthy era), or because of race and color, religious beliefs, or personal choices of lifestyle. It makes no difference what group is targeted or the justifications, when our government uses myths, lies and hysteria to force a agenda on that disfavored group True Americans should stand up united and make it clear that we the people will not tolerate stripping ANYONE of the civil and human rights afforded to them by our Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

9 comments for “What Is The Legislative Purpose Of The Registry

  1. Donald Slaton
    September 29, 2017 at 11:09 pm

    Well I myself think that this is like what we would call slavery! I my self only read about this :”blacks at the back of the bus” , “ only whites are allowed” that sort of thing so what are we the new racial statement now?
    I myself was convicted of a Sex misconduct charge a class c felony. Basicly the girl gave consent but was not old enough to do so, now in Jewish custom they are allowed to have sex with a non Jew a gential which we are called who is of the age of thirteen, now is this right? But hey we can’t pick on the Jews ohh no! Nor can we pick on the blacks either. So history is just finding a new social media to slave against, now if I recall my history we all came from Europe and all of our forefathers were criminals of the crown, just because we didn’t like their taxation, but hey they were allowed to do what they wanted. The federal government says they allow the states to make their own laws on the registry, as long as they follow certain guidelines, but if you see they are violating this and you reach out to the smart office they just say their isn’t anything they can do about it. Now I myself had a ten year registry and it is done and the state I was convicted in sent a paper saying it was finished , but I moved to South Carolina and they told me the only thing I had to do was register and they told the sheriff office the same thing but when I got there they said it was a lifetime state. So I stayed for awhile and moved to Florida well Florida said if I could get my original state where I got convicted at to provide me with the ten year registry that they would consider removing me. Well I did. But sc kept me on there’s basically saying I got convicted there. But I didn’t and now I am stuck doing this for life cause the state I did get convicted in say that if I come back that I would be under the state I live in ,rules of the registry, now I ask is this basically charging me over and over for a crime that I committed when i did it wasn’t on the list to register but they say they can do what they want. But federal government says we can’t help you, what happen to “United States” are we not supposed to be united?

  2. Becky
    September 30, 2017 at 8:23 pm

    Unfortunately, each state has it’s own laws about almost everything. I think the words about united, under God, with liberty and justice for all is an illusion that we were taught to believe when we were children. Sadly.

    About the registry. To hear the media tell it, sex offenders hide behind every tree and nobody is safe. It fuels the imagination, produces fear and hate and destroys common sense. Then when the law of the land gives support to torture of the hated, the haters come out of the woodwork and they aren’t paying attention to common sense because their minds are challenged, their lights have all gone out!

    It’s hard to listen to common sense when a person is so full of fear and hate and that dear friends, is what we are up against.

    Reference to torture of the hated: is all about denial of the basics in life all the way around. Housing, food, medical care, privacy, liberty to go places such as school and parks, jobs, family unity, travel and anything else that has to do with stability.

    • Donald Slaton
      October 1, 2017 at 3:23 pm

      Well true about each state has ther own laws but it say that if you get convicted in one state and move to another then the state you got convicted in overseas the stare you move to. In short they are making these laws as they go there is no one who is stopping this Post facto “ basically convicting you over and over agin for the same crime

  3. Will Bassler
    October 1, 2017 at 5:33 pm

    I’d been trying to wrap my head around this for a while to produce something useful . Maybe if I share what I’ve come up with so far. Somebody else will point out the flaws, and maybe give me a better direction

    First of all if a person is convicted in one state and serves time in another state’s prison (this is in this uncommon as it sounds during my time in prison in Oregon. I had inmates who were convicted in Idaho, Washington, Alaska, and one who was convicted in New Mexico for a federal crime, who had been transferred to the Oregon prison to complete his last few months) so let’s say that the Legislature in state one said that the maximum determinant sentence for crime A was five years , and the judge in that state gave the inmates five years eligible for parole after three, which meant two years of parole but state number two where the inmate is transferred into for the same crime, has a maximum determinant sentence of 10 years . It’s quite obvious that legislature in that state wanted a person to do 10 years quite obviously he cannot be retryed in state number two , but if he is released from prison in the state number two, the parole and probation board would try to make his probation instead of two years into seven years . But they would not be able to do it because the court order from another state bar them from doing that, that is full faith and credit.

    Now, if a person is sentenced to X. amount of parole or probation. Let’s say 10 years and they transfer their parole or probation to another state that requires either a twenty-year prole of probation or lifetime by all rights the full faith and credit should kick in and required the second state to honor the length of time from the convicting state again full faith and credit

    Now another things kicks in, and that’s the federal leniency rule. What that amounts to is, if there is a choice between two punishments. The court is required to give the lesser of the two punishments . Some people think this relates the ex post facto clause. But it doesn’t let say a crime was committed in 1990. But the person wasn’t caught and convicted until 1995 at the time of the crime in 1990. The sentence was 10 years, but at the time of the sentencing. The penalty had been reduced to five years the court has to use the five years. Even though the penalty at the time of the crime was longer . The ex post facto clause kicks in when it is the opposite. When in 1990 the sentence would’ve been five years and in 95 it would’ve been 10 years This also affects people that are on parole and probation. Some states, probation is only allowed to be x number of years long and legally cannot be beyond that. And if you move into one of those states than your probation and parole time should be lessened.

    The legislative act that was in effect at the time of the crime and the place of the crime should be the controlling factor . Rather it is prison/Jail time parole or probation or time on the registry unless you move to a state that has lesser standards, and then the lesser standards come into play because the leniency rule should kick in.

    Full Faith and Credit Clause & separation of powers

    Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

    The first section requires states to extend “full faith and credit” to the public acts, records and court proceedings of other states. Congress may regulate the manner in which proof of such acts, records or proceedings may be admitted.

    In Mills v. Duryee, 1t1 U.S. (7 Cranch) 481 (1813), the United States Supreme Court ruled that the merits of a case, as settled by courts of one state, must be recognized by the courts of other states; state courts may not reopen cases which have been conclusively decided by the courts of another state. Later, Chief Justice John Marshall suggested that the judgment of one state court must be recognized by other states’ courts as final. However, in McElmoyle v. Cohen, 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 312 (1839), the court heard a case where one party obtained a judgment in South Carolina and sought to enforce it in Georgia, which had a statute of limitations that barred actions on judgments after a certain amount of time had passed since the judgment was entered. The court upheld Georgia’s refusal to enforce the South Carolina judgment. The court found that out-of-state judgments are subject to the procedural law of the states where they are enforced, not withstanding any priority accorded in the states in which they are issued.

    The Full Faith and Credit Clause—Article IV, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitution—provides that the various states must recognize legislative acts, public records, and judicial decisions of the other states within the United States. It states that “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the *public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.” The statute that implements the clause, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1738, further specifies that “a state’s preclusion rules should control matters originally litigated in that state.” The Full Faith and Credit Clause ensures that judicial decisions rendered by the courts in one state are recognized and honored in every other state. It also prevents parties from moving to another state to escape enforcement of a judgment or to relitigate a controversy already decided elsewhere, a practice known as forum shopping.
    full faith and credit n. the provision in Article IV, Section 1 of the U. S. Constitution which states: “Full faith and credit shall be given in each State to the public acts, records and judicial proceedings of every other state.” Thus, a judgment in a lawsuit or a criminal conviction rendered in one state shall be recognized and enforced in any other state, so long as the original judgment was reached by due process of law. Each state has a process for obtaining an enforceable judgment based on a “foreign” (out-of-state) judgment.
    *public acts an act or statute affecting matters of public concern. Of such statutes the courts take judicial notice

    Violation of separation of powers There is also a fundamental constitutional problem with officials of one sovereign imposing a penalty, either civil or criminal, based in whole or in part on the actions of officials of another sovereign. It is a violation of federalism and the separation of powers. Each branch and level of government is accountable solely to its own electors, and may not delegate authority to officials of another branch or level. In Lewis, what happens if the federal government convicts and sentences someone of the offence of carrying a firearm, on the basis of a conviction of a felony in a state court, and then the state offense is pardoned or overturned on appeal? It simply does not work, constitutional ly, for the decisions of a state court to determine whether an act is a federal crime. That applies not only to state criminal proceedings, but to things like protective orders, competency hearings and commitment orders, indictments, arrests, issuance of licenses or permits, or any other official action
    There are ways to fight and stop these registration laws. Americans must come to realize how onerous these laws are. That they are insidiously taking away in very small bits and pieces everyones rights guaranteed under the Constitution. Rights people have fought, bled and died for. If you believe in this country and what it stands for, the time is now to Stop this madness and bring back all americans rights before this country turns into another Nazi Germany.

    • Phys Ed
      October 19, 2017 at 10:35 pm

      This is for Will Bassler –

      We spoke a couple of years ago, not long after I was released from a federal prison sentence of eight years duration. You’ve done a great job of exploring the states’ situation vis-à-vis ex-offenders, length of time on the registry and so on.
      But you must be aware that everybody convicted and sentenced now at the federal level is subjected to lifetime supervision and lifetime probation, overseen by the United States Probation Office.
      And this even for non-violent, non-contact offenses. On the face of it, an ex-offender does not actually have to serve all of that time – if they allow themselves to be steamrolled by the corrupt sex offender “treatment” industry, whereby any sex offense is conflated automatically with mental illness.
      All I was ever asked in prison by any psychologist, and I was shunted around to four federal prisons In different states, was whether I wanted to hurt myself or anybody else. I knew that I had no paraphilias, nor any mental illness, and that I was wrongfully convicted to begin with. I would’ve fought it from the get-go, but it would’ve been a two front war as I was also fighting a life-threatening situation from a physical illness, and was also burdened with a public defender– a woman – who colluded and collaborated a little too closely with the prosecution– also a woman, as was the judge. I was under a lot of psychological pressure, almost a ringer for what some poor devil endured in the days of the Spanish Inquisition.
      We are all of us ( ex – offenders) these days standing in the same historical spot As Dred Scott did in 1857. Most federal and state courts are telling us as Roger B Tany, chief justice of the Supreme Court at that time told poor old Dred Scott that he had no rights that anyone was bound to respect, and consigned him back to a life of slavery.
      I am currently in the position of Frederick Douglass, because after six months of enduring the nonsense of a sex offender “treatment group”for all of us were fleeced of our money big time. I escaped. I simply got tired of the necessity of driving 70 miles round-trip every week to attend a group farce where we were all constantly reminded that we were just pieces of sh**by their condescending treatment of us – and for which we were forced to pay $35 each time for an hour and 1/2 listening to them tell us so in so many words. These people were not even doctors of psychology and I saw no practical skills demonstrated of the psychological skills they were purported to have. Another circumstance of that treatment was to continually be taking lie detector tests at $360 a shot, which even if you passed, you had to take on a regular schedule for “maintenance” purposes… Oh, and all of this had to be in CASH.
      I told them what I thought of their “treatment” 10 minutes into the last session I attended, and didn’t leave until at least I got back the money for that session. Now of course I am persona non grata with my probation office in central Illinois, especially when I filed immediately with my Sentencing Court. in Florida to take advantage of the one year stipulation that an ex offender can do this after one year of being out of prison. (of course it was denied, and I have filed a notice of appeal)
      I had been falsely convicted on two counts of child porn – the first on attempted receipt ( which I was guilty of, but as a professional writer I felt I needed the particular material I tried to order) and the second count was actual possession, which was completely false because all of that came from perfectly legal sites on the web that advertised everyone was 18 or older. my Lady public defender convinced me at the time that the judge I was in front of could declare that the girls were under age.
      The plea agreement was that I was offered called for eight years in prison, and that if I signed it I had no rights of appeal, but that both the defense and the prosecution would both move the court to dismiss the second count. My public defender told me that I was in front of a hanging judge – a young female with young children, who would sentence me otherwise if I insisted on trial to a 30 year term.
      I cannot afford $500 an hour suits to go in and argue my invalid plea on the basis of medical evidence ( I was on OxyContin and hydrocodone for my rule 11 B change of plea hearing. No one undergoing such a procedure should be held for final accountability on it, because you cannot possibly appreciate what you are being asked to give up by entering a guilty plea. I was abysmally ignorant of actual juridical and judicial procedures and had no idea what I was in for because I was recovering from an operation that had literally cut me in half just a few weeks before. Anyone undergoing such a hearing who has never before been in trouble with the law should be granted Non-Compis Mentis status right off the bat.
      My whole indictment should have been thrown out on constitutional grounds– just based on the separation of powers principle– because it was pure entrapment on the part of the post office who had no interest in this at all from a congressionally mandated authoritative viewpoint. they themselves broke a dozen laws by mailing the advertisement offering the material that they did.
      If I had had the money to hire my own “dream team”, the whole thing would’ve been tossed out at arraignment than I would’ve walked free.
      In spite of all the above I still believe in the Pledge of Allegiance that we all had to recite as children standing by our desks in the morning every day during the school year.I wouldn’t change a word of it except I would add just for little words at the end of the liberty and justice line. I would haven’t read “with liberty and justice for all – who can afford it.”
      Because if you can’t afford it, you ain’t gonna get it, and like Dred Scott you might as well walk away saying what he probably did “Us nigguhs ain’t ever gonna be free..”

  4. Becky
    October 1, 2017 at 7:00 pm

    I am not sure that the laws haven’t created another Nazi Germany. But I wonder, what would help us now, if it actually has, or in the future, if it will??

    • Tim Lawver
      October 5, 2017 at 4:21 pm

      Like I said,

      The purpose of the registries was to impose affirmative disability and restraint.

      BTW, The original idea for such a regime came directly out of Harvard U. Some pinhead Prof wrote a paper titled
      Duty by guilt. I e- mailed the dude after I read it and called him out.

      • Stay outraged
        October 6, 2017 at 3:01 pm

        Actually, Paul Kramer was the original architect behind Megan’s Law.

  5. Tim L.
    October 5, 2017 at 3:16 pm

    The database’s purpose is to impose affirmative disability and restraints( to put bars around places) where some felons may go.

Comments are closed.