In “America’s Unjust Sex Laws” the economist editorial presents on August 6, 2009 an old but horrific story of Megan Kanka’s rape and murder; and the efforts of her grieving parents to avoid that repeated convicted sex offenders move into a new neighborhood unsuspected which lead into “Megan’s law”. The Economist states “America’s sex-offender laws are the strictest of any rich democracy.” (pp. 654) They present evidence that rapists and child-molesters information after convicted are loaded on the sex-offenders registry, which after the Adam Walsh Act of 2006 requires and obligates all states to make this registry public. This registry can include as much as the offender’s name, known addresses, and photographs. Furthermore, they present …show more content…
They present three arguments that challenge the current laws and how the punishment is equal for all crimes regardless if they are small or serious offenses. The evidence presented demonstrates the weakness that we continue to see in today’s laws, the severity of the punishment regardless of the level of risk and repetition and what our local police must over come when enforcing these laws. It also fails to provide a logical solution to the problem because the solution should not be the lawmaker’s decision alone. It is imperative that as a society we maintain and provide guidelines to our lawmakers and how often these laws should be viewed and rewritten. We should provide the opportunity to include law enforcement, surviving victims, parents and when possible sex offenders on any law changes, so we can explore different scenarios before we implement the cost and resources. We need to utilize our free resources to the fullest and our best consultants are usually those with field, in-country or with previous experience, so we should not be quick to dismiss the potential that convicted sex offender can provide to these discussions when this a matter that affect us all. We are all entitled to second chance in life and we provide this opportunity to many other convicted criminals, so why not utilize the sex offenders in something more constructive that can provide them with an opportunity to contribute as part of our
The sex offender’s registry plays on parent’s emotional instincts to protect their children instead of really protect them. It gives parents a false sense of protection. The regis...
The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 was established because an American boy was abducted form a Florida shopping mall and was later found murdered. The act was signed into law by George W. Bush on July 27, 2006. This act is established to protect children from sexual exploitation and violent crime to prevent child abuse and child pornography to promote internet safety. This act is also known as the sex offender registration and notification act. It was established with the intention to strengthen laws related to child sexual predators. This law was instructed for each state and/or territory to apply criteria’s for posting offenders data on the internet.
In 1994, twice-convicted sex offender Jesse Timmendequas raped and murdered Megan Kanka, a seven-year old girl who lived across the street. In reaction to this emotionally-charged crime, Megan's home state of New Jersey ratified a community notification bill - dubbed "Megan's Law" - just three months later. This fall, a national version of the law went into effect, mandating that all fifty states notify citizens in writing of the presence of convicted sex offenders within their communities. Certainly, society has a responsibility to protect children from sex offenders, and many feel that Megan's Law is the best course of action. However, others feel that it is an unwarranted intrusion into the rights to privacy of individuals who have already paid their debts to society.
In the event that a prisoner (particularly a sex offender) does complete rehabilitation, he carries with him a stigma upon reentering society. People often fear living near a prior drug addict or convicted murderer and the sensational media hype surrounding released felons can ruin a newly released convict’s life before it beings. What with resident notifications, media scare tactics and general concern for safety, a sex offender’s ability to readapt into society is severely hindered (554). This warrants life-skills rehabilitation applied to him useless, as he will be unable to even attempt to make the right decision regarding further crime opportunities.
As the system came in contact with younger and younger individuals in the sex trade, it was merely a matter of discussion, not action. It was through advocacy efforts, lobbying, and educational propagation that the message was reaching law enforcement officers, juvenile probation officers, and judges entrusted with upholding justice (Musto, 2013). Various community partners have been sought after to be trained and educated on minor sex trafficking that there was never a choice to enter the sex trade, rather an involuntary act of coercion by a traffickers (Musto, 2013). When the shift occurred from punitive to rehabilitative hope was planted for all those children still out in the sex trade fighting for their lives would not have to fear a juvenile
Introduction The United States of America has always supported freedom and privacy for its citizens. More importantly, the United States values the safety of its citizens at a much higher level. Every year, more laws are implemented in an attempt to deter general or specific criminal behaviors or prevent recidivism among those who have already committed crimes. One of the most heinous crimes that still occurs very often in the United States is sexual offenses against children. Currently, there are over 700,000 registered sex offenders and 265,000 sex offenders who are under correctional supervision.
Many resources go into the prevention and management of sex offenders. However, very few effective programs exist that decrease the likelihood of reoffending. Through the use of meta-analyses, Seto and Lalumiere (2010) evaluated multiple studies that examined sex offenders. Emphasis was put on etiological explanations in the hopes of identifying factors associated with sex offending. Seto and Lalumiere’s (2010) findings help in creating effective programs to decrease recidivism rates.
The acceptance that the court system often treats female offenders differently than male offenders is an accurate statement; however, it comes with many caveats. Generally, the public views women as nurturers, motherly and incapable of harming a child. Research indicates that female sex offenders capable of committing such acts have serious psychiatric and psychological problems. In comparison, research indicates male sex offenders are more callous, more antisocial, and promiscuous, involved in the criminal justice system, and have more victims (Miccio-Fenseca, 2012, slide 7). The consensus is that men commit their acts for sexual pleasure while women commit their acts due to psychiatric and psychological problems. Law enforcement, juries, and judges tend to empathize more when there are additional mitigating factors such as emotional or psychological problems. Due to these mitigating factors, it appears treatment of female sex offenders is more lenient than male if their crimes are similar in nature. Research by Miccio-Fenseca (2012) indicates that in comparison to their male counterparts, “female sex offenders rarely use force or violence far less than often…rarely use threats of violence to silence victims…rarely use threats o...
Ever since the bill for having a Canadian Sex Offender Registry was passed, in December of 2004, it has been a heated debate in many boardrooms across the country. On the one hand, there are the defence attorneys deeming it slightly mentally damaging and unnecessary for their client(s). On the other side of the coin, there are the individuals claiming it to be a great idea if used in the correct manner. A sex offender registry is only useful when used correctly, with updated and accurate profiles, while remaining conscious of charter rights.
Sex offender legislation has been encouraged and written to protect the community and the people at large against recidivism and or to help with the reintegration of those released from prison. Nevertheless, a big question has occurred as to if the tough laws created help the community especially to prevent recidivism or make the situation even worse than it already is. Sex offenders are categorized into three levels for example in the case of the state of Massachusetts; in level one the person is not considered dangerous, and chances of him repeating a sexual offense are low thus his details are not made available to the public (Robbers, 2009). In level two chances of reoccurrence are average thus public have access to this level offenders through local police departments in level three risk of reoffense is high, and a substantial public safety interest is served to protect the public from such individuals.
In the United States, as a condition of parole, sex offenders are typically required to register with law enforcement officials when released from prison. These officials notify the public of the offender’s release back into society and provide them with information such as the offenders address, and other personal information. Research indicates the notification system can have an adverse effect on the offender’s life, casting doubt on what the laws intended to protect the public. This paper will explore the background of sex offender registries, the relationship between the sex offender notifications and registration laws, and higher rates of recidivism in the United States. Introduction Sex offender legislation has become a controversial topic in the recent years.
Salter, Anna C. (2004). Predators: pedophiles, rapists, & other sex offenders: Who they are and how they operate, and how we can protect ourselves and our children. New York, NY: Basic Books.
In today’s society, juveniles that commit a sexual assault have become the subject of society. It’s become a problem in the United States due to the rise of sexual offenses committed by juveniles. The general public attitude towards sex offenders appears to be highly negative (Valliant, Furac, & Antonowicz, 1994). The public reactions in the past years have shaped policy on legal approaches to managing sexual offenses. The policies have included severe sentencing laws, sex offender registry, and civil commitment as a sexually violent predator (Quinn, Forsyth, & Mullen-Quinn, 2004). This is despite recidivism data suggesting that a relatively small group of juvenile offenders commit repeat sexual assaults after a response to their sexual offending (Righthand &Welch, 2004).
The lack of opportunities to secure housing and employment and loss of family and friend support are all consequences of community notification. More than one third of registrants surveyed in a study reported they had lost a job, been denied a place to live and been harassed and treated rudely in public as a result of public knowledge of sex offender registers. Offenders are more likely to be driven underground when they are unable to secure employment or a place to live due to their status on the sex offender register. Employers are less likely to employ a sex offender due to fear of losing business from an informed public. These issues on top of the stress of being released from prison and trying
Sex offenders have been a serious problem for our legal system at all levels, not to mention those who have been their victims. There are 43,000 inmates in prison for sexual offenses while each year in this country over 510,000 children are sexually assaulted(Oakes 99). The latter statistic, in its context, does not convey the severity of the situation. Each year 510,000 children have their childhood's destroyed, possibly on more than one occasion, and are faced with dealing with the assault for the rest of their lives. Sadly, many of those assaults are perpetrated by people who have already been through the correctional system only to victimize again. Sex offenders, as a class of criminals, are nine times more likely to repeat their crimes(Oakes 99). This presents a