BY MIKE CETERA
Are we all safer knowing where sex offenders live, or is mandated registration just another way for us to give people a scarlet letter?
Put another way, are we better off knowing where former priest Mark Campobello goes when he is released from prison on Wednesday? If you'll recall, Campobello pleaded guilty to sexually abusing two young women while they were enrolled at local Catholic schools. He is required to register as a sex offender.
A new article in the New England Journal on Criminal and Civil Confinement makes the argument that lawmakers throughout the country jumped on the registration band wagon without examining what registration actually accomplishes.
We don't know exactly what registration does to help us, the article appears to argue.
While researchers have not yet provided conclusive evidence of the anti-thereputic effects of community notification, a considerable body of evidence highlights that notification affects various lifestyle considerations shown to lessen the chances of recidivism (e.g. employment, steady residence, and social relationships)......One of the most striking features of the nation's modern rush to embrace registration and notification is the utter disregard of empiricism.
Go here to find Illinois' searchable sex offender registration Web site.
I've always felt sex offender registration laws tend to do little more than punish people -- many of them reprehensible -- a second time for their crimes. If we want them to keep "paying" for what they did, why don't we just keep them in prison longer?
Hey Mike,
You a parent? If not, you will never understand. I you are it is almost uncomprensible that you would not want to know this information. Sex offenders are NEVER considered cured. As a parent I study the faces of those that live in my area and am thankful the government also feels that families should have this vital information. Your off the mark on this one.
CETERA RESPONDS:
I am a parent. Knowing that Johnny Pervert lives around the block doesn't make my kid any more or less safe. I assume everyone is a bad person until proven otherwise.
However, the heart of your response is what I was trying to get at. If sex offenders are "NEVER considered cured" -- and I think that's far too sweeping a generalization when you look at just who must register as a sex offender -- why do we let them out at all? If we think they're dangerous, and therefore must be monitored by a virtual lynch mob, what are we doing messing around with laws that let them be "free," but constantly surveilled? Let's just throw away the key.
You're free to assume that everyone out there is a grave risk unless/until proven otherwise, but the fact is if some reprobate lives around the corner from me, I want to know.
That said, there needs to be some distinction between a serial pedophile who preys on young children, a predator who seeks contact with pubescent males, and a 19 year old guy who gets arrested for having sex with his 17 year old girlfriend. Of these three, one does not pose a danger to society at large. If the 19 year old is forever required to register as a sex offender, then the meaning of registration is diluted.
Drake, I agree 100% with what you are saying! The registration requirements need to be changed a bit. Just because a parent finds out his 17 year old daughter is pregnant with her 19 year old boyfriend's kid and he doesn't like her boyfriend, doesn't mean he should be able to ruin this 19 year olds whole life. Thats not fair.
But on the other hand, if there is a true sex offender living down the street from me, I want to know so I can keep an eye out. and true sex offenders are never cured. It has been proven several times. Pedophiles will always be pedophiles, ect.
I understand the point you are trying to make Mike, but imagine if you found out the good looking professional guy from across the street is a convicted pedophile. Good information to have, no?
My sister moved into a new house and did indeed discover that the good looking professional was a pedophile. One day I was babysitting her kids and her 10 year old daughter convinced me to have a lemonade stand. The gentleman in question sat on his porch at a very peaceful distance during our little business adventure. At one point, I ran in the house for some more ice and by the time I got back outside he was buying lemonade. If I hadn't known the situation I would have thought nothing about my sister's new neighbor coming to buy lemonade. However, armed with the information I knew and understood that I needed to stand next to my niece in this situation.
Your point of "if they are dangerous why release them in the first place?" is interesting. I guess I think that we generally need to give people an opportunity to prove they are healed but to do it cautiously by limiting their interactions with potential victims. One way to limit the interactions to potential victims is to publicize the information.