KS: Can Registries Cover Too Many Crimes? Kansas Legislation Suggests A Rollback

Junkie logic brought an addict to the doorsteps of a Topeka woman once convicted of selling cocaine.

The addict was looking to buy, and Kansas’ online database of criminal offenders has a handy geographic search tool that lets users pull up the names, crimes and addresses of people who live within a few miles of their homes.

It’s meant to boost public safety, but the Kansas Sentencing Commission says other consequences come with publishing the past transgressions of nearly 20,000 Kansans. 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

All these registries supposedly boost public safety, yet crime rates are the same, if not larger. And the only crime registrants commit are registry violations.

By that logic, it’s getting to the point where it would be easier to create a registry of people who have never committed an offense at all and assume those not on it are a threat.

Obviously this is too stringent, and this is a bastardization of the Constitution, but at least the non-sex offenders have the option of moving out of state and going registration-free.

This is how I see it, the more fear you generate in the population, the increased demand for more to be put on registries. Once everyone is afraid of everyone else, the politician can enact almost any law targeting anyone if it appears to lessen that fear. It only increases It. It is a downward positive feedback loop. It is like addiction in individuals. The drug losing its effectiveness because of overuse only results in desire for more and more of the drug. I fear this is one symptom of communal mental illness. I really regret having children. They are going to be there when this country hits bottom. Hopefully enough of them get wise fast, before the Stazi can’t be removed.

“They use it to see who in the neighborhood is creating a hazard for their child.”

^Really….? News flash: there’s no such THING as a “safe” neighborhood. Look at all those ScArY map pins on that boogeyman app won’t prevent squat! It’s not a forecast or a “known” landmine map for a potential safety threat.

All it does is give the illusion of control and the illusion of normalcy over a child’s safety! It’s a shameful gimmick politicians employ to garner votes from worrywart parents.

Actually, it’s the houses that DON’T have maps pins that should warrant concern.

Good I hope all these damn registries backfire on them. They are suing them to find others who have or use drugs. Love it. Put some gang bangers on there too so that they can all find each other. This country is going to have major issues violating the constitution by registering individuals like a car or cattle. It isn’t right and it goes against what this country was founded on.

The two parties are made very nervous by the advent of social media. Does it not strike users of this site ODD the the USA has only two D&R. Social media is a serious threat to the two parties.
1. The development of a new party is made very viable and likely.
2. A third party, and/or forth would force he first two to concede some of the power and money derived from the US tax pie.
3. A canon/ agenda developed by a alternate new party may seriously dilute both D&R’s membership numbers.
4. Viable and active alternate parties would seriously dilute the establishment’s
ability to gerrymander.
5. In an America with multiparty landscape will siphon campaign donations from the established parties, forcing the big money extremists that thrive in the current landscape to the margins.
6. Active alternate parties would also decrease the likelihood that back room deals could be struck outside of the public’s awareness.

With God’s speed may this come to pass.

“The agency wants to delete nearly a quarter of the public registry — the more than 4,500 people on it convicted of drug offenses — and in doing so, prevent dozens per year from landing back in prison for violating Kansas’ long and involved list of registry rules.

“Fifteen years is a long time,” Schultz said. “We are already penalizing these individuals.” ”

Oh, but 15 years isn’t long enough for ex-sex offenders …… those with recidivism rates far lower than the other registrant crimes???

Nope, make EVERYONE’s criminal backgrounds easily available online WITH requirements to REGISTER and WITH criminal punishments if they don’t. I want to see jay-walkers, sidewalk spitters, DUI drivers, B & E, petty thieves …… I want to be able to see EVERYONE’S crimes… forever!!!  And I want to see everyone who ever f#ks up get punished FOREVER – just like us!!!

Only when everyone has a son, brother, uncle, friend or neighbor on the Registries will we start getting broader public support for elimination of Registries.
Until then, we can win our lawsuits (if we’re very lucky), but legislatures will simply recreate the Registries, narrowly skirting any judicial rulings. 😡

So people in Kansas use the registry to try and find drug dealers? Maybe they should start a retail establishment registry to boost economic activity in the state.