« When will SCOTUS address Booker retroactivity? | Main | Intriguing state-federal drug sentencing realities »

May 16, 2007

Another indication residency restrictions imperil public safety

Thanks to Corrections Sentencing, I saw this news article from Oklahoma in which state law enforcement types are advocating against sex offender residency restrictions because they drive sex offenders underground.  Here are the basics:

A law that was intended to restrict where sex offenders live is driving them underground, Tulsa police say their records show. About two years ago, the number of sex offenders registered in Tulsa peaked at 540.  Now, Tulsa has 372 offenders registered, said Sgt. Gary Stansill, supervisor of the Police Department's Sex Crimes Unit.

May 16, 2007 at 05:05 PM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e200d83551052469e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Another indication residency restrictions imperil public safety:

» Residency Restrictions in Oklahoma from Sex Crimes
Via Sentencing Law Policy and Corrections Sentencing, we get an article about the residency restrictions debate in Oklahoma:With 90 percent of the city off-limits, fewer offenders are registering their residences.A law that was intended to restrict whe... [Read More]

Tracked on May 16, 2007 7:55:36 PM

Comments

The key, I think, is to separate the wheat from the chaff. I wonder of some academic types could create a model registration statute for states.

There are scarce resources. They need to be used wisely.

Posted by: federalist | May 16, 2007 10:42:29 PM

The "academic types" have been attempting to do so for more than a dozen years, only to be told their research and evidence are irrelevant or, when that doesn't work, accused of loving pedophiles. The latter strategy is a tad difficult to employ, however, when organizations such as the Jacob Wetterling Foundation call residency restrictions an utter waste of resources, or when the UK's Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children urges its government AGAINST implementing a US-style Megan's Law because it undermines its very intent.

New Jersey recently completed the first phase of a federally-funded study wherein researchers (including DOC) concluded Megan's Law was ineffective. Within days, the AG released guidelines to implement the Walsh Act, which greatly expands Megan's Law, demands retroactive application, and further stretches available resources.

Blanket residency and proximity restrictions are based on silliness. The first assumes a registrant must be of greatest danger to the school children at night--when the children aren't at the school. The second would require an astronomical amount of law enforcement personnel to acheive compliance. And since more sex offenses are committed on school grounds by teachers than registrants...

Posted by: Ilah | May 21, 2007 1:06:53 AM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB