OR: Our View – Stop keeping Oregonians in the dark about sex offenders

Registered sex offenders in Oregon recently got a reminder that the state is keeping an eye on them. Law enforcement agencies conducted the latest in a series of checks on the whereabouts of high-risk offenders. It ended in 15 arrests in Lane County. Unfortunately, the operation also highlighted a serious flaw in the public reporting system that enables tens of thousands of moderate and low-risk offenders to remain in the shadows. Full Article

(Free Registration may be required)

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.  
 

8 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

One step forward:
Leaving Tier 1 & Tier 2 offenders out of public record because they were very low risk.

Two steps back:
Bring back Tier 1 & Tier 2 to the public anyway! People need to know useless but damaging information!

Increase the numbers! Perpetuate the fear!

Everyone should comment on the article. You only need a Google account or some other means.

It doesn’t list the “crimes” the registrants were arrested for so I think we can safely assume they were for non-compliance. If they were a re-offense you can be sure it would have said. so the people were fine in the public, just sick to death of the registry oppression. I notice the article was desperate for a serious criminal offense to be cited so they listed the non-registry person was arrested for attempted murder. At least they did say he wasn’t a person on the registry. But I guess not enough registrants are offending so they have to start pulling people from other crime stats to make the article induce a sufficient amount of fear..