« "Gov. Brownback starts faith-based program for parolees" | Main | Does Casey Anthony case really "show Florida's death-penalty system is broken"? »

June 26, 2011

"Sex Offender Registration and Notification Laws at Home and Abroad: Is an International Megan’s Law Good Policy?"

The title of this post is the title of this new piece by Christopher King available via SSRN. Here is the abstract:

Comparative reviews of sex offender laws at the foreign level have been rare; discussions at the international level are nonexistent. This article seeks to address these needs in the following ways.  First, federal, US sex offender laws are reviewed.  Countries with sex offender registration and/or notification laws are then identified and their sex offender schemes compared (with a focus on registration, community notification, retroactive application, and/or international travel reporting).  Next, the International Megan’s Law proposal that has recently been surfacing in Congress is discussed and critiqued. Finally, an alternative, more cost-effective proposal is offered.

June 26, 2011 at 10:37 AM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "Sex Offender Registration and Notification Laws at Home and Abroad: Is an International Megan’s Law Good Policy?":


This a paper shuffling solution to child abduction, abuse, and murder.

The best prevention of child abuse is the patriarchal family. So slowing the bastardy train run by the feminist lawyer would be the best. Even if the father of the house is himself a criminal, the child has less chance of being abused, and a greater chance of being protected than if the father is absent.

Repeat violent sex offenders should be executed after 3 convictions. This would reduce abuse by attrition. Megan's murderer should have been gone years before he killed her. Megan's fatal mistake? She opened the door when it rang. How would sex registration have saved her life? Instead, the predator has the full protection of the feminist lawyer. Only if the neighbors killed the predator before he killed Megan, would a registry make a difference.

This scheme is in bad faith. It is known to be ineffective. Yet, lawyer and government worker sinecures, those are doing well. They are stealing tax money without any evidence or justification.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Jun 26, 2011 11:34:04 AM

"Finally, an alternative, more cost-effective proposal is offered."

Could not download the paper. Saw only the abstract.

Suggestions for authors. Put all the information in the abstract. If you have an alternative, specify it in the abstract. Do not make people search for it in an unavailable article.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Jun 26, 2011 11:47:10 AM

i'm with you SC except for one thing!

"Repeat violent sex offenders should be executed after 3 convictions."

needs to be TWO convictions.

first conviction. should include mandatory theropy. no release from that without successful completion.

SECOND conviction. DEATH! obviously theropy didnt' work. time to remove them and move on with life!

of couse i'm also talking about a 2nd VIOLENT SEX CRIME convictin. not being 5 min's late for a probation meeting or forgetting to update an address that hasnt' changed in a decade! which is what most of them are getting hit for now and what is accounting for most of the so-called re-offences!

Posted by: rodsmith | Jun 26, 2011 12:08:40 PM

Lets get our facts straight. A patriarchal family doesn't protect children from sexual abuse as over 90% of contact offenses against children happen in the home and/or with somebody known to them. Considering the overwhelming majority of convicted sexual abusers are male, an atomic family is not a logical protector of children.

However, the sex offender registry is also not a valid protector of children. With few exceptions, famous abduction cases like Jaycee Dugard and Adam Walsh would not have been prevented because of public notification of a sex offender's residence (they were abducted away from the victim's and offender's home).

Identifying the problem which creates a society that produces sexual abusers the way America does is more important for prevention that the notion of just murdering an entire subset of society based on the acts of isolated monsters.

Using this as a venue to defend atomic families reveals a bias for the Abrahamic definition of 'family'. Ironically these are the very same set of values that create a sexually repressed society, starting with the Puritans, which breed serial killers and sexual abuses at reported rates well above the average western society.

Finally, the issue of repeat offenders: statistically over 90% of sexual offenses are committed by first-time offenders. Recidivism rates for sexual offenders committing another sex crime is just under 5%, the lowest of any crime category besides homicide.

The number of children killed in car accidents cause by drunk drivers, however, far outweighs the number of children killed by sexual predators. In 2008, the NHTSA reported almost 13,000 total deaths by drunk drivers (including children). Contrast that to a 2002 statistic (from the CDC and the American Journal of Psychiatry) that showed that 40 children were killed nationwide in the commission of a sex crime, and you start to see a much larger threat to the safety of children.

However, SC and rodsmith do not suggest that repeat DUI offenders be killed in retaliation for their danger to the safety of children. Why is that? Normally, this is due to mis-education and emotional response to the heinous nature of sex crimes against children.

While I find sexual predators repulsive and will probably be accused of sympathizing with them for this post, truly trying to protect children in America seems to come in second behind vigilantism.

Posted by: Eric Matthews | Jun 26, 2011 2:40:11 PM


Posted by: Anonymous | Jun 26, 2011 2:53:43 PM

I got a better idea....

Let's just let the psychologists handle the sex offenders. They can coordinate with the probation or parole officers on the offenders progress. It's the way things were done in the past and therapy was paid for by the offender. Probation and Parole Officers were paid or by the state. The police were never involved unless there was a new crime or were called in to assist a probation/parole officer enforcing a "Violation of Probation/Parole" order.

It didn't cost the state any OUTLANDISH fees, we did not have to increase the states budget to hire MORE PO's. Last but not least, people who peed on a bush were charged with a misdemeanor, find and went home.

If we would have left well enough alone, we would not have spent all this money and consequently due to bad laws, made our streets much more unsafe. No friends. The registry does not do a damn thing except cost the tax payers money.

Oh yeah...I forgot....it gets No Talent Politician's elected/re-elected !!!!

Posted by: Book38 | Jun 26, 2011 3:01:33 PM

Eric: When you say most abuse takes place in the family, you shouldn't call having your bottom pinched, abuse, unless you are a feminist on a witch hunt. I am referring to the rate of child murder, about 100 times higher in bastards than in children with their natural father in the home, even if the father is himself a violent criminal.

Drunk driving is another place where 123D would save lives. If you stop all cars in the afternoon, 10% of drivers are over the legal limit. So blood alcohol is not the cause of crashes. Those people are not causing crashes. They tend to drive more slowly. Slow driving is a standard hint of intoxication to a state trooper. It is the aggressive, selfish driver, the one with antisocial personality disorder that causes the crashes. If all are gone before age 18, the rate of crashes will also drop.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Jun 26, 2011 3:52:09 PM

Supremacy Claus: I didn't say bottom pinching was child sexual abuse. I am referring to actual studies which show that almost 93% of sexual assaults of children are perpetrated by somebody known to the victim, and [Wonderlich, S.A., et al., pubished in American Journal of Public Health 1996; Jones and Finkelhor, Child Abuse & Neglect, 1999] and 90% of perpetrators of sexual offenses against minors were male. [Child Abuse & Neglect, supra].

Further, as many of half of sexual offenses against minors happen by family members. Put these numbers together and you find a pattern which shows that having men involved in nuclear families makes little difference in perpetration of minor sexual abuse.

These statistics and others corroborating this can be found at the Crimes against Children Research Center.

"I am referring to the rate of child murder, about 100 times higher in bastards than in children with their natural father in the home, even if the father is himself a violent criminal."

I have no idea where you get this statistic, or even if it is even remotely real. Assuming, arguendo, that such a statistic is valid, there is no correlation that this number is statistically related to child sexual abuse and murder in any identifiable way. Such a citation is unfounded in arguments pertaining to child homicide in conjunction with sexual abuse laws.

Posted by: Eric Matthews | Jun 26, 2011 6:14:13 PM

I think it would be better to read the laws of different countries and socities that what they say about sex.

Posted by: UAE Laws | Jun 26, 2011 6:48:58 PM

Eric: The Wonderlich article is about bulimic girls, about 2% of the population. They had a rate of 24% of sexual molestation, close to the standard assumption of 20% in the general population. No perpetrators were specified, for example step fathers versus natural fathers.

From Civitas report on Fatherless Children:

Are at greater risk of suffering physical, emotional, or sexual abuse.

According to data from the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC), young people are five times more likely to have experienced physical abuse and emotional maltreatment if they grew up in a lone-parent family, compared with children in two-birth-parent families.53
All studies of child-abuse victims which look at family type identify the step-family as representing the highest risk to children54 – with the risk of fatal abuse being 100 times higher than in twobiological- parent families according to international from 1976.55 However, the use of the term step-father has become problematic, as, whilst it used to refer to men who were married to women with children by other men, it is now used to describe any man in the household, whether married to the mother or not. An NSPCC study of 1988 which separated married step-fathers from unmarried cohabiting men found that married step-fathers were less likely to abuse: ‘for nonnatal fathers marriage appears to be associated with a greater commitment to the father role’.56
Analysis of 35 cases of fatal abuse which were the subject of public inquiries between 1968 and 1987 showed a risk for children living with their mother and an unrelated man which was over 70 times higher than it would have been for a child with two married biological parents.57


53 Cawson, P. (2002), Child Maltreatment in the Family, London: NSPCC.

54 For example, see Strang, H. (1996), ‘Children as victims of homicide’, Trends and Issues in Criminal Justice 53, Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.

55 Daly, M. and Wilson, M. (1988), Homicide, New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

56Gordon, M. and Creighton, S. (1988), ‘Natal and nonnatal fathers as sexual abusers in the United Kingdom: A Comparative Analysis’, Journal of Marriage and the Family 50, pp. 99–105.

57 Whelan, R. (1994), Broken Homes and Battered Children, Oxford: Family Education Trust.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Jun 26, 2011 8:55:50 PM

An International Megan's Law would demonstrate the last remnant of rationality in our Federal Government which means it is time for Jefferson's comment that the blood of patriots needs to be shed periodally to keep liberty and freedom in the forefront. All politicians who would support this law should be registered on the dumb legislator registry.

How do you reconcile legal definitions across countries. The Age of Consent in Mexico is 12 years old, in Spain it is 13 years old, in many European countries it is 14 years old.

The penalties for sex offenders (however you define them) need to be differentiated with those that occur to individuals over the typical and historical age of sexual maturation (13-14 years), with those under this age.

In the US, making out, (not necessarily my definition of sex) between someone older than 17 with someone 16 and younger can make you a tier three offender and treated like a leper for the rest of your life.

Is this our proud American Justice System? If it is, count me out! I find the continued torture of individuals who have served their sentences distasteful. Feminism is an easy vote for liberals, but dumb for the country.

We are broke because we are lazy and stupid and elect people who make the most undeliverable promises.

An International Megan's Law would just establish us beyond all reasonable doubt as a Fascist State trying to establish Jim Crow laws in a new form.

Oh wait, we are already doing that with the Adam Walsh Act. Never mind.

Posted by: albeed | Jun 26, 2011 11:31:22 PM

lol albeed!

"How do you reconcile legal definitions across countries. The Age of Consent in Mexico is 12 years old, in Spain it is 13 years old, in many European countries it is 14 years old."

we dont' need to! we are ALREADY arresting, haveing trials and CONVICTING people HERE for what they did in other countries WHERE IT WAS PERFECTLY LEGAL!

where you been?

Posted by: rodsmith | Jun 27, 2011 12:27:12 AM

"...Fascist State trying to establish Jim Crow laws in a new form."

Feminism of 2011 is the KKK of 1911. Same business plan, to plunder productive people for lawyer enrichment, including the defense bar.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Jun 27, 2011 6:03:25 AM

albeed: I would like to propose that people who are the moral side of the U.S. Civil War of Registered Citizens never dignify the immoral, criminal side by supporting their propaganda, lies, or crimes. Therefore, a person should never say "Adam Walsh Act" or "AWA". Instead, a more accurate name should be used consistently and without exception.

I have always used "POSAWA". While I feel that is completely accurate, it does lack creativity. Whatever term a person chooses to use, "AWA" is the term used by the criminal terrorists.

Posted by: FRegistryTerrorists | Jun 27, 2011 1:50:40 PM


I concur with your opinion that we should not legitimize stupidity and soccer Moms.

I will hereafter refer to the subject legislation as the POSAWA.

Where is Bill?

Oh, I see he is defending his conservative views at C&C that you cannot beat a dead horse enough, i.e., we libertarians do not perform enough risk/benefit analyses.

I realize that he cherry picks his cases as to demonstrate his ability to erect "straw men" and knock them down. However, he is just following the wish of legislators who are his god, not mine.

That worked as good at Nurenburg as it will eventually here, if we are still around.

BTW Bill:

I am still waiting for your definitive studies that demonstrate that incarcerating more people longer was the primary reason for the decline in crimes from 1980 to the present. I gave you this challenge about 2 months ago but have not received a response.

Rodsmith: Where have I been? Trying to understand the lack of intelligence provided in a public school indoctrination, er, education.

Posted by: albeed | Jun 27, 2011 11:29:40 PM


"Rodsmith: Where have I been? Trying to understand the lack of intelligence provided in a public school indoctrination, er, education."

GOOD GOD! that's about as hopeless case as the american sex offender law regime!

Posted by: rodsmith | Jun 28, 2011 11:34:19 AM

This manuscript has been reposted for anyone who is interested (with the clearer-abstract feedback--hopefully--incorporated):


Posted by: CK | Sep 5, 2011 11:02:19 AM

now they have made it legal to take dna cultures of people that are arrested, next they will want to have dna on record from birth. another right taken away says local news media, i agree. maybe we could get dna of babies still in the womb, after all they do come out naked, i am sure that law makers will find a way to register babies as sex offenders when they come out of the womb. after all, the 3 year old who started to pee in his own yard is being considered for registration until he is 35 yrs old, and his parents were fined $ 2,500.00. welcome to america.

Posted by: jim mcnulty | Jun 4, 2013 10:18:40 PM

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