A new bill making its way through the Missouri House is seeking to track some of the state’s most dangerous sex offenders when moving between counties.
Sponsored by Missouri Rep. Randy Pietzman of Troy, Missouri, House Bill No. 2653 would require offenders who have been convicted of first-degree child molestation to wear an electronic monitoring device.
“I come from a district that is kind of plagued with sex offenders,” Pietzman said. “I was looking for some kind of an avenue to bring attention to it.” Full Article
Thought maybe some of you guy’s would like to see what is going on in Missouri, it never ends!
http://www.newspressnow.com/news/local_news/bill-aims-to-track-sex-offenders-when-moving/article_fc89f421-d5a8-5535-983b-92febc32cc26.html?fbclid=IwAR3vSpAJXvChTqJOWIhZEzMIf8F6h0SKNbuRoMnT3kFIGum7S_hk9ZrkFSQ
“The hope is that by tracking their movement and adding additional penalties, the bill will deter those from fleeing.”
—–
These chuckleheads NEVER learn, do they? This has been beat down more than once as a 4th Amdt. violation. THIS is the frustration with how things go for us legally. The next doofus is always coming along, walking in the same footsteps of the previous one. Reminds me of something a comedian once said, “you can’t make anything idiot-proof because nature keeps making better idiots.” Bingo.
As for the fleeing part, there’s a quick answer: drop the whole charade of registration. You’re only needlessly losing track of them because you’re needlessly watching them.
This is just another clown legislator looking to make a name for himself. Absconding and failure to report/update is already an offense; MRS 589.425. Does he have actual evidence that moving registrants don’t register in their new residences or just a handful of anecdotes and “just suppose…”?
Does this guy seriously think he’s closing a loophole? He wants ID before the move. Like what, a driver’s license? How then is the registrant expected to effect the move?
The bill is predicated on the state auditor’s claim that Missouri lost track of 1200 registrants (without mentioning the source for that contention), a figure disputed by the Sheriff’s association. And all for, as AJ pointed out above, to continue needless tracking.
This will likely pass and also survive challenges since it is narrowly tailored to those that failed to register again after a move and only for 2 years. It is useless and a waste of time though.
I see a better challenge in the fact their place of employment is marked on a map. Quashing a person’s right to work should get a higher level of scrutiny and in spite of connecticut dps v doe 2003 should trigger due process. Procedural due process does not require a fundamental right like substantive does, and this could even rise to the level of fundamental or at least intermediate scrutiny. Texas did away with their posting of workplaces years ago and they dont backtrack on much.
An update on this bill. It has passed the Missouri House and is now sent to the Senate. It has also changed some, two amendments have been made. Here is the link to the bill text: https://house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills191/hlrbillspdf/0138H.01P.pdf