November 11, 2010
Are residency restrictions a main reason 100,000 sex offenders are off the grid?
The question in the title of this post is prompted by this new story, which is headlined "Authorities lose track of 100,000 sex offenders." Here are the basics:
Thousands of convicted sex offenders are evading state and federal authorities, congregating in regions thought to have lax enforcement, slipping back and forth to Mexico or disregarding laws on reporting their whereabouts.
As authorities stitch together a national system for overseeing America's 700,000 convicted sex offenders, they face a sobering challenge: locating the estimated 100,000 sex offenders who aren't saying where they are.
State and local authorities, working with the U.S. Marshals Service, are conducting sex offender sweeps, checking old addresses and hunting down the missing. Officials say the offenders often are found where they have been all along — authorities have just fallen behind on paperwork. But sometimes not....
The federal agency has supplemented state and local authorities nationwide by arresting 11,853 sex offenders through last May for registration infractions, such as failing to register, or for moving without notifying authorities, according to agency data.
November 11, 2010 at 10:13 AM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Are residency restrictions a main reason 100,000 sex offenders are off the grid?:
too many sex offenders
Posted by: claudio giusti, italia | Nov 11, 2010 11:54:55 AM
I think the problem is over-inclusiveness of the law. If everyone has to register and report, there simply isn't the manpower to adequately supervise anyone.
Posted by: Ala JD | Nov 11, 2010 12:24:58 PM
There certainly are a lot of folks who purposely "evade" the supervision system. But we also should understand that we are talking about a population of people who often are not exactly high-functioning intellectually and who have minimum support systems, and that these people are asked to comply with a byzantine arrangement of overlapping regulations, often administered in an ad hoc way by local sheriffs whose primary skill sets are in investigation and apprehension, not supervision or administering regulations. In other words, even if you want to observe the law, it can be difficult to figure out how to do it -- especially when you are living under an overpass...
Posted by: anon | Nov 11, 2010 1:01:11 PM
horse shit! they have no CLUE how many are missing since the registry's themselve are so innacurate as to be beyond belief. i have a friend who is listed at least THREE TIMES on florida's registry.
so many states like the idiots in New York that require people who were on the registry there to also report to them EVEN AFTER leaving the state...so basically being counted in BOTH STATES. Plus most states have lowered the time required to register so there is no way to know how many of that 100,000 are just people who went and visted a state for 24-48hrs and HAVE NEVER BEEN BACK and the state govt was just TOO DAMN STUPID to auto remove the ones who came in and said i've here for a vacation for 2-3 days then i'll be leaving and going home.
Considering the DOCUMENTED evidence that EVERY govt program is both full of corruption and inaccurate data just why would ANYONE thing this one would be PERFECT.
Posted by: rodsmith | Nov 11, 2010 2:00:05 PM
Yep and too many people who think there is no difference between sex offenders, claudio. If this kind of manhunt was limited to who has actually done something worth keeping track of, like rapists and child molestors, then there would be a lot less than 100,000 they are looking for on the registry.. most who are actually dangerous are still in jail, and meanwhile it benefits politicians to make anyone convicted of any sex crime the worst of the worst. Your response shows you are the same and dont fully understand the issue, otherwise you would have made a distinction yourself.
Posted by: tbucket | Nov 11, 2010 2:03:50 PM
I am an attorney who has challenged sex offender statutes in the past. One of the problems is certainly over inclusiveness--Illinois, for example. still lists many people as "sex offender" when their crime is killing a juvenile--even if there are no sexual overtones at all.
A second problem is that the reporting requirements are often impossible to comply with for homeless people--and there are more homeless "sex offenders" because of the restrictions.
Of course, the real problem is that there is ZERO data to support having a registry in the first place!
Posted by: Alan Mills | Nov 11, 2010 6:26:51 PM
I've had some spare time, so was searching through the "memos" and "proposals from commissions" on facts that pertain to my state's budget for 2012. We have no money, people need to read the numbers for themselves. We don't have enough money to continue food programs, or emergency medical programs. We don't have enough to keep on paying cops. The states are falling apart. When you get way down the list of priorities, and the commissions come to "sex offender registry," they just scoff and say, "we are going to have to do away with this registry." Experts are well aware, the registry has no correlation with protecting children. It is a political football which politicians used to get votes from fearful parents who don't have time to read the facts. Every fact that I have found proves that the sex registry is counter productive, and it takes away money from programs which are productive in this time of crisis.
Posted by: DLJ | Nov 11, 2010 8:24:44 PM
This is an act to monitor the movement of these sex offenders. Tracking down their last area visited.This is an important issue to take care of by the authorities. Having such offenders around can raise the fear of other people to become victims. This is a touching story. Thanks a lot for sharing it.
Posted by: baby rocking horse | Nov 12, 2010 1:49:12 AM
...Because as we all know, Fear from neighbors trumps indivdual constitutional rights.
Posted by: tbucket | Nov 12, 2010 12:21:21 PM
how true tbucket! I'm STILL trying to find the wording on the Constution that says the Public has a RIGHT to know what i'm doing or ANYONE is doing for that matter.
Of course i also think we need a constutional amendment for "Freedom FROM the Press" if your not doing something that is not illegal.
Posted by: rodsmith | Nov 12, 2010 10:35:07 PM
We (the private citizen's of the United States) should be able to sue in civil court for the problems the politician's create. If we were allowed to sue them, they would be more careful in what laws they craft. There would be no more of this political football for votes, as they would then be held accountable like the rest of America!
Posted by: Book38 | Nov 12, 2010 11:40:28 PM
works for me book38 of course we could cut out a lot of it if we'd just start with the prosecutors.
Posted by: rodsmith | Nov 14, 2010 1:26:00 PM
Look… here I am I have tried out things in the same manner as you described and guess what!!! I have been successful in taking up the challenge and fulfilling the endeavor finally!!! There cannot be anything better than this.
Posted by: Tadalis | Dec 21, 2010 1:45:13 AM
I'm a registered sex offender in Orange County California. My conviction was a misdemeanor not involving a child over 12 years ago. If I wasn't a parent I too would probably go off grid. The difference being I have many skills that would keep me undetectable and sense I'm real good at survival, change to my looks (I'm a hairstylist) and many other skills and add to that food acquisition I would do just fine.
In truth any involved parent that is a registered sex offender has in some way violated the sex offender registry at one time or another just by the nature of being a parent and what that position calls for. It would be crazy funny if it wasn't so serious!
Posted by: Robert Curtis | Jun 7, 2013 2:26:54 AM