http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com

Nothing like using sex offenders as your scapegoat to look like you are actually doing something. If it weren't for them, you'd probably not have a job.

What about upholding the Constitution, which you took an oath of office to do so? Was that a lie?

First, let me get this out. I am totally against ANY form of abuse to any human being. And I believe anyone who murders another human being should be in prison for the rest of their life (until they die). I do not believe in the death penalty for anyone. Also, I believe that once a person has been in and out of prison and has served their probation and parole, done everything required of them, and what was signed on the "contract" when they took the plea, none of this should be required of them, none of it. The state cannot tear up a contract like this, which they are basically doing, it's unconstitutional. Many people, if they had known they would be faced with all this, they would have NOT taken a plea deal. And the courts are very aware of this and this is why they made it retroactive; thus violating ex-post facto laws! They should be allowed to get on with their life as if nothing happened. I'm not saying for it to be removed from their record, but, the crime should be removed from public view and background checks, they should not have any more restrictions, shaming, etc. If they commit another crime, then they face a lot more punishment, like everything else is treated.

When are we going to move away from being "TOUGH ON CRIME" and move to being "SMART ON CRIME?" If you locked every single sex offender up, at this moment, or killed every one of them, do you think the problem is over? No, more will follow.

I've heard many people say "If these laws protect one child, then they are worth it!" And at the same time, if millions are tortured, it's ok. Offenders are losing their homes, jobs, families, and children and cannot find new jobs or homes due to the insanity of these laws. The families are also made into outcasts for associating with or being related to an ex-offender and their own children are harassed and bullied at schools due to a family member being an ex-offender.

I know these laws are a sensitive issue, but as all issues, they must be discussed and we must come up with a valid solution that will work. The laws, as they exist now, DO NOT WORK! People are always saying they cause unintended consequences. These laws have been on the books for years now, so nothing is unintended anymore. When are we going to set aside fear, hate, rage and anger and come up with a real solution? History has proven that these feelings NEVER get good laws passed but only create bad ones that punish and torture many people. These knee-jerk reactions to a slim number of high-profile crimes, like Adam Walsh and Jessica Lunsford, MUST STOP!

When an ex-offender is forced to move from his/her home, thus having to sell it, cannot find another home within the law due to the residency "buffer" zones, get fired from their jobs due to being on the registry, cannot find a new job due to being on the registry, their husband/wife lose their jobs due to a significant other being on the registry, their children lose their friends and are harassed and bullied in school due to a family member being on the registry, thus destroying the children's lives, ex-offenders are forced into homelessness and to live under bridges, harassed by police, neighbors and probation/parole officers, have to wear "I'm a sex offender T-shirt" or have a neon green license plate on ALL their cars, have "sex offender" on their drivers license and forced to renew their licenses every year, forced from shelters during tornadoes or hurricanes, cannot give blood at some places due to being discriminated against for being on the sex offender registry, denied housing due to being on the registry, signs placed in their yards inviting harassment and ridicule from the neighbors, forced to move when the neighbors start picketing outside the ex-offenders home, the list is endless.

I THINK THIS IS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT, BEYOND THE EXTREME!

Mr. Kirk, have you found research that indicates this will make this city safer? If so please post that info because it will alleviate my fears to know there is sound evidence that such laws do not do more harm than good. It is so sad that people in positions like yours have chosen to use this issue to further their political careers without researching the issue. There is a reason that victim's rights groups oppose these kinds of things. Evidence clearly indicates they do not make anyone safer and, in fact, make our communities less safe. So are you taking this stand because you have not done the research and do not know that you are actually proposing something that will make our children less safe or have you done the research and don't really care about anything but sounding tough to further your own agenda?

There is research that shows how effective this technology is at preventing crime, however rather than point to that, let's look at one example here in our County. When crafting this ordinance at the County, law enforcement officials pointed to a case in the desert where a registered sex offender frequently visited a local park, taking pictures of the children as they played. Parents were scared but law enforcement couldn't do anything. Now they can.
I don't apologize for my work to protect our communities from criminals who prey upon the weakest of our society. For every person who is more concerned with the rights of these criminals, I meet 20 parents who thank me for increasing protections for their children. If this type of legislation offends you then perhaps San Bernardino County, and specifically Hesperia, isn't the place for you. I will continue working with local leaders to increase those protections. It isn't playing politics, it's good government.

For every person who protested Govenor George Wallace standing on the school house steps 'protecting' white children from being forced to go to school with negroe children, I have no doubt there were 20 parents applauding him for his efforts.

It doesn't mean they were right.

As a Viet Nam era veteran, I know I meant every word I repeated of the oath to defend the Constitution.

As a mother, I walked my children to the school bus every day. I watched them play in the park, I knew their friends parents. I protected my child as best I could.

Much to my horror, I found conviction rates are more important

Thanks so much for taking this on! It's about time those victim rights groups be told they're wrong. After all, groups like the Jacob Wetterling Foundation, the National Alliance Against Sexual Violence, the Coalition Against Sexual Assault are all against the kind of residency ordinance you want to enact! Did you know they even fought AGAINST residency laws up to the Ohio Supreme Court? Can you believe that?!?!

So, gee thanks for essentially telling all those who work with victims that when they say such a law won't prevent future victimization--when they point to evidence it'll INCREASE the risk of recidivism, fail to protect a single child, and rob resources from programs aimed to PREVENT victimization--thanks for telling those groups you don't care!

Mr, Kirk,
Please provide the evidence that indicates living restrictions enhance safety if you have it. You avoided the question. There is a huge difference between allowing an offender to take pictures of children in a park and restricting where he can live.

Sexual predators lose any rights whatsoever when they infringe upon others' rights and become PREDATORS. I sure as hell don't want a sex offender living next to my family. Further, research PROVES they have a 100% chance of doing it again.

If they are having a hard time finding a place to live, perhaps they should have thought of that before they BROKE the law and emotionally damaged and scarred an innocent child. What is up with people wanting more rights for criminals than victims? I can't even comprehend it.

Mr. Kirk - it is unfortunate that you refer to one case to suggest that Megan's Law/community notification are effective at preventing sexually-based crimes. It does indicate to me, that you have not done your reserach on this, otherwise, you would have referred to them. There are more than enough empirical studies to examining this ... and guess what ... there have been no significant reductions in sexual crimes or recidivism since the inception of these laws. I can talk to you all day about the effectiveness - or more precisely, the ineffectiveness of these laws, but that's because I understand the data from government agencies and PhD's. Your laws aren't working and in many states have resulted in both increased recidivism AND sexually-based crimes creating communities that are less safe than they were before legislators passed these emotionally-driven laws. Please do consider this as you work to proliferate legislation against 650,000 people who have served their time ... the USDOJ reported that 3.5% are at risk for recidivating. That does not, in my opinion, justify the billions of dollars being spent on these laws.

I, like many others here, would like to see the bona fide research everyone keeps bring up about these "Former" Sex Offenders being more dangerous and "PROVES they have a 100% chance of doing it again". Please, please post the studies and the supporting data.

Mr. Kirk avoids the issue by citing "One" case. I can cite hundreds where "Elected Officials" have been arrested and convicted of Sex Offenses. Mr. Kirk's line of thinking would therefore put him at risk of offending. But of course like Mark Foley, they are protected from a majority of these laws by the "Good olde Boy Network".

I have read every, yes every study and research paper out there and outside of the "Out Dated" and misquoted Harris Paper they all say the same thing, "Former Offenders, in general, are the least likely to commit another offense against a child."

Former Sex Offenders have clearly become the "scapegoats" of the America politicians much like they were in the 30's and 40's by the Nazi's. And just like the German populace, Americans are blindly following the political rederic and chest pounding while the real issues grow more out of control than ever. Did anyone here really understand what just happened in our Government last week over the Bank bailout? The public, including myself, made it clear we did not want Congress to do it and they didn't. But Bush threatened to invoke "Marshal Law" and suspend the Constitution allowing him to implement the "Bailout" without our consent so Congress bowed to his threat and our democrated Government Died. We now live in a Authoritarian country ruled by the "elite" few in power.

"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."
- H. L. Mencken

Which of us will be next?

First they came for the Communists and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me, but by that time, no one was left to speak up.
- Pastor Martin Niemoeller, Nazi Germany

If I may be so bold as to borrow your words SexOffenderIssues (see below) .... it is the information that results in an increased risk for recidivism. What incentive are these laws giving registered sex offenders to remain offense-free? If you push them out of one town, they'll go to another. If they're banished from the second town, they're off to another, and another, and another .... until eventually there is nowhere else for them to go, and then what? What rational mind would think that this kind of treatment is protecting people/children? I'll say it again, government data does tell us that most (more than 90%) new sexually-based offenses are committed by someone who is not on the registry or who has never been convicted of sex offense. How are these laws working to prevent those?

"When an ex-offender is forced to move from his/her home, thus having to sell it, cannot find another home within the law due to the residency "buffer" zones, get fired from their jobs due to being on the registry, cannot find a new job due to being on the registry, their husband/wife lose their jobs due to a significant other being on the registry, their children lose their friends and are harassed and bullied in school due to a family member being on the registry, thus destroying the children's lives, ex-offenders are forced into homelessness and to live under bridges, harassed by police, neighbors and probation/parole officers, have to wear "I'm a sex offender T-shirt" or have a neon green license plate on ALL their cars, have "sex offender" on their drivers license and forced to renew their licenses every year, forced from shelters during tornadoes or hurricanes, cannot give blood at some places due to being discriminated against for being on the sex offender registry, denied housing due to being on the registry, signs placed in their yards inviting harassment and ridicule from the neighbors, forced to move when the neighbors start picketing outside the ex-offenders home, the list is endless."

Is it fair that you've crafted legisltation against thousands of people because of what 1 did? There are 650,000 RSO's in the United States. Do you really think that they're all out there committing additional sex crimes and just not getting caught? I think it is imperative that you refer to the other studies, otherwise, it appears this legislation is a knee-jerk reaction to 1 isolated incident. That's equivalent to passing a law blocking all teenagers' access to the Internet because 1 used it to purchase alcohol online.

So Mr. Kirk,

When are you going to provide us the links to these so called "statistics?" And what are you going to do, that will protect the public, and also the rights of sex offenders, that is not the same old, same old?

Care to elaborate on your "plans?"

Or, are you just following the bandwagon, to further your own career, using sex offenders as your scapegoat for votes?

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm#recidivism

Recidivism

* Of the 272,111 persons released from prisons in 15 States in 1994, an estimated 67.5% were rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years, 46.9% were reconvicted, and 25.4% resentenced to prison for a new crime.

* The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 accounted for nearly 4,877,000 arrest charges over their recorded careers.

* Within 3 years of release, 2.5% of released rapists were rearrested for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were arrested for a new homicide.

* Sex offenders were less likely than non-sex offenders to be rearrested for any offense –– 43 percent of sex offenders versus 68 percent of non-sex offenders.

* Sex offenders were about four times more likely than non-sex offenders to be arrested for another sex crime after their discharge from prison –– 5.3 percent of sex offenders versus 1.3 percent of non-sex offenders.

Sex offenders

* On a given day in 1994 there were approximately 234,000 offenders convicted of rape or sexual assault under the care, custody, or control of corrections agencies; nearly 60% of these sex offenders are under conditional supervision in the community.

* The median age of the victims of imprisoned sexual assaulters was less than 13 years old; the median age of rape victims was about 22 years.

* An estimated 24% of those serving time for rape and 19% of those serving time for sexual assault had been on probation or parole at the time of the offense for which they were in State prison in 1991.

* Of the 9,691 male sex offenders released from prisons in 15 States in 1994, 5.3% were rearrested for a new sex crime within 3 years of release.

* Of released sex offenders who allegedly committed another sex crime, 40% perpetrated the new offense within a year or less from their prison discharge.

Child victimizers

* Approximately 4,300 child molesters were released from prisons in 15 States in 1994. An estimated 3.3% of these 4,300 were rearrested for another sex crime against a child within 3 years of release from prison.

* Among child molesters released from prison in 1994, 60% had been in prison for molesting a child 13 years old or younger.

* Offenders who had victimized a child were on average 5 years older than the violent offenders who had committed their crimes against adults. Nearly 25% of child victimizers were age 40 or older, but about 10% of the inmates with adult victims fell in that age range.

Thanks Smokin’Joe for the link. Let me put those percentages into numbers that better show what this Department of Justice study shows.

Smokin' Joe said:

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm#recidivism

Recidivism

* Of the 272,111 persons released from prisons in 15 States in 1994, an estimated 67.5% ( = 183,675 persons) were rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years, 46.9% (= 127,620 persons) is were reconvicted, and 25.4% (= 69,116 persons) resentenced to prison for a new crime.

* The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 accounted for nearly 4,877,000 arrest charges over their recorded careers.

* Within 3 years of release, 2.5% of released rapists (not all Sex Offenders are rapists) were rearrested for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were arrested for a new homicide.

* Sex offenders were less likely than non-sex offenders to be rearrested for any offense –– 43 percent of sex offenders (that = 4,167 persons) versus 68 percent of non-sex offenders (that = 178,446 persons). (This shows we are Registering the wrong people clearly.)

* Sex offenders were about four times more likely than non-sex offenders to be arrested for another sex crime after their discharge from prison –– 5.3 percent of sex offenders (that = 514 people) versus 1.3 percent of non-sex offenders (that = 3412 people). (So Non-Sex Offenders reoffend Sexually nearly 7 to 1 more than Registered Offenders. Again, seems we are Registering the wrong people.)

Sex offenders

* On a given day in 1994 there were approximately 234,000 offenders convicted of rape or sexual assault under the care, custody, or control of corrections agencies; nearly 60% of these sex offenders are under conditional supervision in the community.

* The median age of the victims of imprisoned sexual assaulters was less than 13 years old; the median age of rape victims was about 22 years.

* An estimated 24% of those serving time for rape and 19% of those serving time for sexual assault had been on probation or parole at the time of the offense for which they were in State prison in 1991. (Note they don’t tell you what they were on probation or parole for.)

* Of the 9,691 male sex offenders released from prisons in 15 States in 1994, 5.3% were rearrested for a new sex crime within 3 years of release.(that = 514 people) (So while 514 Sex Offenders were rearrested for a new Sex Offense, 3,412 Non-Sex Offenders were arrested for a Sex Offense. Why do we only pay attention to the 514 and ignore the 3,412?)

* Of released sex offenders who allegedly committed another sex crime, 40% perpetrated the new offense within a year or less from their prison discharge.(that = 206 people)

Child victimizers

* Approximately 4,300 child molesters were released from prisons in 15 States in 1994. An estimated 3.3% of these 4,300 (that = 142 people) were rearrested for another sex crime against a child within 3 years of release from prison.

* Among child molesters released from prison in 1994, 60% had been in prison for molesting a child 13 years old or younger.(that = 514 people)

* Offenders who had victimized a child were on average 5 years older than the violent offenders who had committed their crimes against adults. Nearly 25% of child victimizers were age 40 or older, but about 10% of the inmates with adult victims fell in that age range.