OK: Some law enforcement worry new, stricter law will discourage sex offenders from registering

A new law that further tightens restrictions on where sex offenders can live has some law enforcement agencies concerned it will discourage people from registering as offenders.

The law, which went into effect on Nov. 1, added home daycares to the list of locations sex offenders cannot live near. Prior to that, state law already prohibited offenders from living near child-friendly areas, ordering them to live 2,000 feet from public and private schools, churches, playgrounds, parks or daycare centers. The law did not apply to home daycares, of which Oklahoma has more than 1,500.

Some law enforcement and critics say the restrictive laws are counterproductive. Full Article

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

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

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. 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.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. 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.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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.  
 

10 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

“If I put you in a room with 30 rattlesnakes, do you want me to leave the light on so you’ll know where they’re at or turn it off, where you don’t know where they’re at,” Adams said. “And all these restrictive laws have actually done that.”

Oh, that’s predictably cute, but I can play the fear mongering semantics game as well.

> If Megan’s Law didn’t exist. Children in America would NOT be less safe.

Oh and, What you don’t know can’t hurt you. =)

“They won’t change it,” he said. “It’s a death sentence to get re-elected, and they have told me this straight up: ‘We agree, but I’m not going to put my name on a bill because I want to get re-elected, and if I do, my opponent is going to say I’m soft on sex offenders.’”

> This is political cowardice that we’ve had to put up with for decades now. Their silence is complicit! They DON’T care about US. They only pander to issues of public opinion that get them VOTES. They only thing you’ll get from lawmakers is feigned concern, manufactured empathy, willful ignorance, and dismissive indifference! They’re the actual monsters they think WE are. Lawmakers are fear parasites stoking unwarranted fear exclusively for cheap votes.

“Some law enforcement worry new, stricter law will discourage sex offenders from registering.” Wow, do you really think so? They have some real high level thinkers on this one.

So are we to presume that the number of sex offenses in Tulsa by those previously convicted of sex offenses but not registered will significantly increase since this bill passed? I’d like to revisit this story in 6 months or so to see if it does.

Emailed the following to the story’s author:

Ms. McClung,

The impression I get from Sgt. Adams was that he was concerned that there will be an increase in new sex offenses committed by those previously convicted for sex offenses, but not registered due to the passage of a new law further restricting where sex offender registrants can reside.

I find that very hard to believe. There are scores of data that show sex offender registrants are the least likely recidivists (other than murderers). There are scores of data that show that when the very small number of registrants that do recidivate sexually, the new offense has nothing to do with where they live or work.

If you can and are willing, I’d like you to revisit this story in 6 months or so, to see if Sgt Adams’ fears are founded.

So I did not even think about how stricter laws also encourage people to not register. So there is another reason that the laws are counter productive and takes resources away from higher risk offenders. The registries are irrational for low risk offenders and for protecting the public…Just as In re Taylor CA.