ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (6/12 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Click here to sign up now for ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18
Download a PDF of the schedule


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

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • 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.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • 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.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please do not solicit funds
  • If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  • All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
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.  
Notify of
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.

To anonymous

Too late, I’ve already given up on people, not worth the effort of trying to convince anyone of anything anymore, it is what it is, cause the damage has been done. All that’s left is to do the same to them!

Hi Rick & anonymous,

Although, I am not disagreeing with your statements. Here is my quandary, I do see some light on these risk levels especially, if it allows people to either petition or get off registry by expiration of time. Does this help alleviate some distress to both of you by any chance.

How about this one just a quick example. I live in one state and no requirement and another still has me on. Talk about issues. So I changed my name and applied for new DL and I do not get hits off NCIC when getting pulled over. SO I am hoping maybe the 2nd largest state with the 2nd largest registrants will come up with risk levels and start that way.

Thank you

No, it wouldn’t relieve my distress!

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 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….

To abolistheregistry

In new York they won’t allow an RC to change their name, they passed a law years ago. They covered all the bases, lol. No hiding, haha.

Luckily I don’t live in new York. 🙂

“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!

Well put Rick…..nice write up

Bottom line, the public wants to see and likes to see varying degrees so people are not all grouped together when it comes to what’s the perceived seriousness of offenses. “Well, so and so did this which is not nearly as bad as so and so over here; therefore, they should not be lumped together.” It is the legal machinations that no one ever realizes because they don’t want to take the time to understand it. That requires thinking, which no one wants to do anymore.

Going by offense only, you are going by the definition of the offense and its respective label only. That’s where the arbitrary length of years related to offense comes in; there is no standard I know of that says it has to be 5, 15, 25 years or life to be effective. That is why usually a life sentence for a single murder is not really life. It is a feel good number for the public, “If they are put away for so long, they will be better at the end.” Those are feel good measures with no data to back them.

Go by risk of repeating the same, that takes analysis, which costs time and money to complete. Additionally, it goes by assumptions through data gathering and analysis. In statistics, there are data outliers, those they are not within the main group(s), which is usually the third sigma group on the bell curve (maybe second sigma too depending on the first sigma’s population). That would be the 3-9.9% (depending on the study referenced) of the family, friends, etc who are not known by the victim in a stranger danger crime. This is the group everyone seems to fall in when they are notified they could be in the larger percentage of potential family, friends, etc when it comes to being known by the victim. The NIMBY (Not in my backyard) type of thinking.

It takes thinking for realization to happen, which thinking is something people rarely want to do anymore. Critical thinking skills are not taught well and people don’t want to do it. It makes their heads hurt.

The difference in the two is how they’ll determine your tier. You could have one cp or two second touch/kiss and because your score met a certain threshold on a test, you get life. You can scoff at that but none of you have asked for specific numbers on who is likely to get bumped up from tier 1 or 2 to 3. As for the laws lumping everyone, they could distinguish between the crimes, if they wanted to. They dont., because they want another regulatory scheme that’ll give them more power.

Everyone is speculating without anything in writing…not what I’d call critical thinking.

If you,, know how they will differentiate in OH, then put it out there for the rest to understand and show critical thinking. If you know how the regulatory scheme will happen based upon your critical thinking, then show it. Tell us how the numbers work out and the bumping of people. Show the critical thinking the rest is obviously missing here.

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.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x