How a Plano legislator’s remarks bred strict sex offender laws

Recent research has challenged long-held assumptions that convicted sex offenders are very likely to commit new sex crimes and questioned how those assumptions were reached in the first place. Prior to that, though, one Texas legislator’s words were particularly influential on sex offender laws across the country. (Italics added for clarity.)

July 1997: State Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, a former schoolteacher and proponent of the state’s strict 1995 Ashley’s Laws for sex offenders, attends a conference in Bellevue, Wash., about sex offender registries. She begins her speech by noting that “putting the modern sex offender into the traditional criminal justice system is usually as successful as keeping a snake in a shoebox.” Full Article


How a dubious statistic convinced U.S. courts to approve of indefinite detention [Opinion]

Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  19. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

my god this issue has to be brought before the courts there is no justification for these laws and no rational basis based on the lowest recidivism rates. this lady should be barred from holding any public office and possibly even prosecuted or some kind of legal sanctions for providing false testimony to further her personal’s time this goes to SCOTUS…..

This article posted before actually gives better and more detailed reasons behind the mis-information used in Smith V Doe:

It has both the Plano senator remarks and the fake 80% recidivism explanation.

Maybe if start a government petition and get the needed 100,000 signatures within 30 days they will at least give us some official statement regarding the issue. Tough to get that many though, even with almost 850k of us.

Any state registry is Enron type tactics sham.
Inflate info, manufacture info, deceptive info was criminal for Enron officials onto the public.
What’s the difference when government officials are doing the same with registered..?
The public is getting Enroned .

With all these stats that identify how the registry abuses the lowest re-offense rate of criminals, I doubt nothing will change.

If the courts are lazy enough not to do proper research, then they won’t lift a finger to fix their own mistakes.

This article just saddened my day when you look at the macro aspect – nothing can be done to reverse it and it remains as fact in the judicial system b/c it’s been cited often, especially in the Supreme Court.