OH: Proposed sex offender registry changes would be based on risk

Eight years after Ohio tightened its sex offender registration laws to comply with federal standards, a state committee is considering changes that could make it easier for sex offenders to get off the registry if they no longer are a threat to society. Full Article

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

As positive as I want to believe the intent of the article is, this is so literally straight out of Orwell’s 1984, it’s beyond frightening. And to top it all of, nobody really gives a shit. We could all be lined up and shot tomorrow and the general public probably wouldn’t bat an eye…. The words I would use to express my disdain for the current climate would be wasted on this crowd, as I’m certain the sentiment is already shared in full measure.

It saddens me that we are still so primitive a species that we see fit to indefinitely call public attention to someone’s worst mistakes, and hold firm that belief that those mistakes must define a person for life, and also hold firm that belief that the victims of abuse are incapable of healing without the indefinite humiliation and punishment of their abuser. Such a neanderthalic perspective is inappropriate, unhealthy and unproductive.

A better, more evolved alternative would be to forgive those that have made such mistakes and allocate additional resources toward education and prevention, both to those who have already offended, and to the general populace, who are, statistically speaking, almost two thousand times more likely to commit an offense.

It continues to be my hope that communication and fact-based legislation will be our emancipator. It is, perhaps, a fool’s hope, but giving up on that would mean letting go of the last bit of faith I have in humankind.

Care to elaborate on the full details of name changes? Costs, how to go about it and so on? That’s one of the reasons I started abolishtheregistry.com. That info and info like it could help a lot of people. I plan on changing my name when this ness is over. Another year! If they don’t stick it to me by then….

“repeat offenses if already a Tier II or Tier III classification.”

What does Ohio call repeat offenses? Multiple charges from the same arrest? If that’s true, can you imagine how many tier 2’s will be given life under this? What you”advocates” need to be doing is come to us first before you give pats on the back. We may not be legal eagles but we aren’t brain dead either.

I see their committee has everyone BUT our side in it…red flag.. Sure the reporter asked an advocate for the article but where’s our representation on the committee.

Hi abolishtheregistery,

Basically the state I live in will allow you to apply for marriage license and change names regardless if male or female any first middle or last I would talk offline always slightly nervous to discuss strategy online. If convicted after 2000 than must notify state to let them know if they want to oppose it last year 78 people applied for license and every one made it through the name change who was convicted after 2000 All I said was there rules and no laws being broken

So they want to go from an offense based approach to a risk based approach or hybrid incorporating both systems. I see no legal difference between the two. Clearly the length of the registration is indicative of the risk, and the risk is indicative of the length of registration. Of course they will say it isn’t? So let’s ask them why one person is given 15 years of registration vs 25 years of registration. Well the person given 15 years committed a statutory offense and the person given the 25 year sentence committed forcible rape. Therefore, it is rationally connected that a person committing a non violent offense is entitled to a shorter term of registration. Makes sense?

Oh you mean there is less risk that the statutory offender will commit another crime within 15 years as opposed to the forceable rapist within 25? No, we mean it is a lesser offense, therefore, a shorter term of registration is in order. Let me ask you this question, what is the purpose of the registry? Isn’t it’s purpose to provide the public with information about an offender and the danger or risk they pose? Yes, but we don’t make that distinction, we base it solely on the offense. Wait a minute, are you claiming the state imposed the registry upon an offender solely because of the offense. Yes, yes I am! Then can it be inferred that you are adding an additional term of supervision upon them in connection with the offense? Umm, umm, No. Then what is it’s purpose? To make the information available, sir. But isn’t it already available through the doc conviction website? Yes, but not to the same degree. Oh, so you are simply saying the information is placed on two websites to insure it’s availability? Yes, yes sir I am. Well, I’ve heard a lot of poppycock stories in my lifetime but this one is really unique. How so Sir? #@_$#@&, are you kidding me, you want me to accept this cock and bull nonsense, and apply a regulatory scheme to what is clearly an additional term of supervision because you say you need two websites to disseminate and distribute the information. Yes sir. Get out of this court, and in the meantime consider yourself in contempt of this court. But your honor? Good day, sir.

This is real law!

A possible motivator here for the State of Ohio is the Michigan loss of their appeal at 6th Circuit.
6th Circuit consists of MI, OH, KY, TN.
Of these four states: MI, OH, and TN is boasted by DOJ SMART as AWA compliant.
AWA mandated conviction based tiers, tossing aside risk based tiering and swelled registries as much as 500% initially in some states until lawsuits caused reductions
This could lead to a push back against AWA, let’s hope more court rulings splitting with 6th circuit becomes a trend.