If It Saves One Child

Original Article

07/02/2012

By Shelly Stow

It would be difficult today to find a person who had no idea what the sex offender registry is. It would be equally difficult to find someone with only a passing interest who didn’t feel that it is a good thing to have. It started in most states as a law enforcement tool identifying repeat, sexually violent child predators. It now has an estimated 700,000 names (PDF) on it and encompasses acts as varied as consensual teen sex, taking and sending a photo of one’s own breasts, and rape. And even though many with much more than a passing interest, including most research studies and experts in the field, are pronouncing the shaming roster to be an ineffective tool in fighting sexual crime, the battle cry of its supporters still resounds whenever the subject comes up: “If it saves one child…!”

“If it saves one child….” Even though we cannot know if “it” has, that statement is responsible for the abuse and even death of many children.

There is no actual evidence that the registry has saved even one child; however, we do know that many, many thousands have had their lives made a living hell because of it. These are the children of those on the registry, some of whom committed violent crimes, but many, even most, who did not. All on the registry, with their families, are subject to the whims of local and state restrictions including, but by no means limited to, severe restrictions on where they may live; denial of access to libraries, parks and beaches with their children; and restrictions barring the registered parent from often even being within a 1000 feet of the school his child attends. Very recently a woman took the picture of a registrant that she printed from the Internet to the school where the registrant’s five-year-old son was a kindergarten student; she showed it around, warning children about this man. His little boy stood and cried. The registry doesn’t differentiate. It doesn’t make it clear to people who threaten, harass, and do physical violence to registrants, their property, and their families whether daddy raped someone or whether he had sex with mommy before they were married when she was a year too young or whether he looked at an illegal image on a computer or whether he was innocent and falsely accused. And, sadly, most don’t really care. The perception is that everyone on the registry has committed a serious crime and that most if not all offended against children. And if they have children of their own who are harmed, as so many have been and so many more will be, it is just collateral damage because the registry might—MIGHT—save one child.

“If it saves one child….” Children themselves are registrants on sex offender registries. Nine years old is apparently the youngest at which children have been put on the registry (Delaware; Michigan). (1) Several states, including but not limited to Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Ohio, Michigan, and Texas, register children as sexual criminals at ages ten and eleven. By the time twelve is reached, it isn’t even a rarity. And the fifteen year old who is the child victim for having consensual sex with an eighteen year old partner becomes a predator and registered sex offender when his or her partner is fourteen. In Wisconsin last year a district attorney did everything he could, and bragged about it, to have a six year old prosecuted and targeted for sex offender registration for “playing doctor.”(2) Three year olds caught looking at and touching each other in a daycare bathroom were reported and investigated for “sexual fondling.”(3) Some of these children, after several years of being on the registry and treated as monsters, have committed suicide. The registry didn’t save any of these children; it destroyed them.

“If it saves one child….” Children do need saving. According to the Justice Dept. and the CMEC, many thousands are sexually abused and molested every year. We pour everything into the registry, millions of dollars and uncountable hours. State after state has voiced complaints about the cost of keeping up with the ever-increasing expenses and strain on limited manpower hours to satisfy the requirements of the registry. The federal government, knowing this, has offered huge financial incentives (bribes) to states to bring them into federal registry compliance. However, this is futile; the registry is not the answer. Children aren’t sexually abused and molested by nameless, faceless people on the registry. They are abused and molested by their family members and acquaintances, by those they know and trust and love, by those they see and interact with on a daily basis, often by those they live with. By the most conservative estimates, this is true for 94 out of every 100 children who are molested. The latest figures from the Justice Department's Bureau of Juvenile Justice show these startling facts: for sexual crime against a child six or under, 58.7% is committed by family members, 39.7% by family acquaintances, and 1.8% by strangers; the registered sex offenders who are in that stranger pool are so few that it is virtually incalculable. As the age of the child increases, the figures alter, but only a little. The risk to children ages 12-17 is 94.3% from family and acquaintances, 5.7% from strangers, and, again, the percentage of registered offenders in the stranger pool is minuscule. Keeping the focus on those on the registry keeps us from dealing with these facts. It keeps us looking in another direction, and it leaves us nothing in the way of resources with which to deal with it.

“If it saves one child,” isn’t good enough. Thousands, hundreds of thousands, need saving. When and how and with what will we save them?

• MI - Juveniles crowd Mich. sex offender registry
• DE - The Case for Modifying Juvenile Sex Offender Registry Requirements in Delaware (PDF)
• WI - Wisconsin DA says 6 year old is a sex offender for "playing doctor."
• WI - Six Year Old Wisconsin Boy Being Prosecuted For Playing Doctor, With A Five Year Old
• MO - State investigators looking into alleged fondling at pre-school

Shelly Stow is a member of Reform Sex Offender Laws [RSOL] and Texas Voices, the Texas affiliate of National RSOL.

Scarlet Letter

Original Article

06/22/2012

By Ann Sattley

It’s no secret that I’m against sex offender registries. In fact, it’s one of the more controversial stands I’ve taken.

As a libertarian, I oppose sex offender registries because they intrinsically restrict freedom while not actually doing anything to protect anyone.

As a Christian, I oppose sex offender registries because they intrinsically assume nobody can change. I obviously believe that people can change through the power of Jesus Christ.

As a regular person with common sense, I already know that most sex crimes occur by someone who knows the victim. I also realize, using my brain, that these registries serve to increase paranoia. Additionally, the crimes listed on the registry may not correspond to what we think they do. We hear legal terms like “criminal sexual conduct” and we have no idea about the corresponding offense. I also know that people have no tolerance for anyone suspected of a sexual crime. They presume guilt because they don’t want to upset the person who is alleging the crime (see Duke lacrosse scandal). I’m not saying that all people on the sex offender registry are innocent. But, I at least reserve the option that some of them are due to our societal perception of sex crimes. And, that’s not all. There are people on the registry who have committed a “crime,” but the definition of crime is too strict (as I often point out). Here’s Lenore Skenazy’s take on the issue:

There are now commercially available mobile phone apps that map out their addresses. Looking at a map with lots of red dots makes people terrified of their neighbourhoods. It also ruins the lives of many of the ‘red dots’ – a lot of whom are no threat to children at all. They may be a 19-year-old who had consensual sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend (that’s considered statutory rape), or a guy who was convicted for peeing in public. So what we need is a law that identifies where DANGEROUS people are living, not just anyone who ran afoul of our increasingly draconian — and sometimes ridiculous — sex offender laws. Policy must change, and that begins (once again) with a reality check! (Source)

Instead of our society implying the common sense reasoning that I have detailed above, we continue to get more and more totalitarian about sex offender registries. Today, I found out that Louisiana passed a law mandating that all registered sex offenders have to list their status on social networking websites! Nevermind the fact that the Louisiana sex offender registry is already online. That’s not good enough for us anymore! We need to see these people hanged.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the vast amassing of government for which it stands, one nation, under siege, with indignity and paranoia for all.

Shereen El-Feki: How to fight an epidemic of bad laws

This is a video about HIV, but replace "HIV" with "sex offender" and the same can be said for ex-sex offenders.

Video Description:
There is an epidemic of HIV, and with it an epidemic of bad laws -- laws that effectively criminalize being HIV positive. At the TEDxSummit in Doha, TED Fellow Shereen El-Feki gives a forceful argument that these laws, based in stigma, are actually helping the disease spread.

Shereen El Feki is a TEDGlobal Fellow who writes on health and social welfare issues in the Arab world.

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights


Video Link

NY - Ultra-Orthodox Jews Rally to Discuss Risks of Internet

Original Article

05/20/2012

By MICHAEL M. GRYNBAUM

It was an incongruous sight for a baseball stadium: tens of thousands of ultra-Orthodox Jewish men, all dressed in black suits and white shirts, filing through the gates of Citi Field on Sunday, wearing not blue-and-orange Mets caps but tall, big-brim black hats.

There was no ballgame scheduled, only a religious rally to discuss the dangers of the Internet.

More than 40,000 ultra-Orthodox Jews were expected to attend — a sellout in a season where the average attendance at a Mets game has been barely half that. The organizers had to rent Arthur Ashe Stadium nearby, which has 20,000 seats, to accommodate all the interested ticket buyers.

The organizers had allowed only men to buy tickets, in keeping with ultra-Orthodox tradition of separating the sexes. Viewing parties had been arranged in Orthodox neighborhoods of Brooklyn and New Jersey so that women could watch, too.

For the attendees, many of whom said they came at the instructions of their rabbis, it was a chance to hear about a moral topic considered gravely important in their community: the potential problems that can stem from access to pornography and other explicit content on the uncensored, often incendiary Web.

Inside the stadium, a dais was set up by the back wall of center field, where rabbis led the packed stadium in evening prayers and offered heated exhortations to avoid the “filth” that can be found on the Internet. English translations of the speeches appeared on a jumbo digital screen, beneath an enormous “Let’s Go Mets!” sign.

Still, many attendees readily conceded that the Internet played a big role in their lives.

Shlomo Cohen, 24, of Toronto, said he used the Internet for shopping, business and staying in touch with friends — “Everyone needs e-mail,” he said.

Mr. Cohen said he came to Citi Field on Sunday because the rally was a good way to remind his community to keep temptation at bay.

“Desires are out there,” Mr. Cohen said, adding that men could be particularly susceptible. “We have to learn how to control ourselves.”

For an event billed as taking aim at the Internet, signs of the digital age seemed to pop up everywhere.

On a No. 7 train headed toward the stadium, several men wearing the clothing of the ultra-Orthodox whipped out smartphones as soon as the subway emerged from the East River tunnel, poking at e-mail in-boxes and checking voice mail messages.

Several opponents of the rally gathered outside the stadium, including a crowd that stood by police barricades holding signs that read, “The Internet Is Not the Problem.”

Many of the protesters said they shared the religious beliefs of the attendees but wanted to show support for victims of child sexual abuse, some of whom in ultra-Orthodox communities have been discouraged from calling the police and have been shunned after the crimes against them were reported.

The rally in Citi Field on Sunday was sponsored by a rabbinical group, Ichud Hakehillos Letohar Hamachane, that is linked to a software company that sells Internet filtering software to Orthodox Jews. Those in attendance were handed fliers that advertised services like a “kosher GPS App” for iPhone and Android phones, which helps users locate synagogues and kosher restaurants.

Nat Levy, 25, who traveled from Lakewood, N.J., to attend, said he frequently surfed the Web at a cafe, overseen by a local rabbi, that filtered out certain types of online content and monitored which Web sites he visited.

He said he often used the Internet to deal with customers for his company. “You get to do business the same way,” he said. “I have unlimited access, but it’s done in a kosher manner.”

Eytan Kobre, a spokesman for the event, delivered a more intense message to reporters outside the stadium. “The siren song of the Internet entices us!” he pronounced in a booming voice. “It brings out the worst of us!”

Still, Mr. Kobre confirmed that the event would be broadcast live on the Internet, via a stream available to homes and synagogues in Orthodox communities around the New York area. He said the general public would not be able to gain access, but several unauthorized streams appeared soon after the rally began.

The rally was also a hot topic on many Twitter feeds on Sunday evening.

The gathering had the feel of a gigantic family reunion — or perhaps, given the single-sex attendance, the religious version of a scouts’ jamboree — but many guests had arrived with only a friend or two.

“It may look like a community because we all look the same,” said Mr. Cohen, of Toronto. “But I don’t know almost any of the people here.”

For some attendees, the dangers of the Internet seemed more in line with the usual complaints voiced by any New Yorker tethered to a BlackBerry or besieged with Twitter messages.

Raphael Hess, 29, of New Jersey, pointed at his LG phone and said he found peace in simply keeping its Internet connection turned off.

“Life is more pleasant without it sometimes,” he said with a shrug.

Video Link

CA - S.B. COUNTY: Halloween restrictions for sex offenders proposed

Original Article

In the entire history of this country, only one crime occurred on Halloween where a child was sexually assaulted by an UNKNOWN sex offender. It is also important to note that the parents were not with the child when it occurred. So if you are so freaked out on Halloween, why don't you be a parent and either go along with your child, or not celebrate the occasion in the first place!

05/22/2012

By IMRAN GHORI

San Bernardino County is considering prohibiting registered sex offenders from participating in Halloween activities, joining several other jurisdictions, including Riverside, that have approved similar measures.

The Board of Supervisors voted 4-0 on Tuesday, May 22, to have county counsel research the proposal and return with a proposed ordinance at a future meeting. Supervisor Janice Rutherford was absent.

Measures restricting what registered sex offenders can do on Halloween have become popular in recent years with Riverside County, Temecula, Hemet and Ontario passing ordinances.
- Just because something is popular doesn't mean it's right!

They include prohibitions against sex offenders passing out candy, decorating for the holiday, or turning on outdoor lights.

Supervisor Gary Ovitt, who proposed the idea, said he would like to see San Bernardino County consider similar measures.

“We want to make sure we’re proactive in making sure our children don’t go to the wrong door step,” Ovitt said.
- Once again Big Brother trying to step in and run your life for you.  Why don't we tell parents to be parents?

His proposal would also bar registered sdx offenders from taking part in Halloween activities outside their homes and from opening their doors to anyone but law enforcement on Halloween night.
- And this is probably for those who are on probation and/or parole only, not all ex-sex offenders.  And there is no law saying you must answer the door on any given day, so just because a police officer comes to your home, doesn't mean you have to answer it.

The county proposal would apply only to unincorporated areas.

Advocacy groups such as California Reform Sex Offender Laws have argued that such ordinances are unconstitutional while researchers say they have found Halloween no riskier than any other autumn day when it comes to sex crimes against children.

A 2009 study by a group of University of Oklahoma professors examined nine years of crime data in 30 states and found no increase in sex crimes on or around Halloween.

The Kidnapping Hysteria

Original Article

05/09/2012

By John Stossel

If you have kids, you are probably worried about them being kidnapped. Your kids are probably worried about it, too. How could they not be after seeing all the publicity about abducted children?

In television public-service announcements the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children warns, "Every day 2,000 children are reported missing." Center president Ernie Allen told me, "Our goal is to reach into every home and to generate that key lead that leads to the recovery of a child. We need to send a message to the American public that this is serious."

That's a noble goal, but there is a downside. Kids tell me that all the talk on television about kidnapping worries them. Dozens of 7-to-12-year-olds I interviewed for "20/20" said abduction was their biggest fear. One little boy said he worries every night "because I'm asleep and I don't know what's gonna happen."

Scaring kids might be justified if abductions were common. But the media make the problem look far bigger than it is. The stereotypical kidnapping, where a child is abducted by a stranger and murdered, ransomed, or kept for a significant period of time, rarely happens. In fact, there are only 100 or so such cases every year.

Those abductions are tragic, but kids are more likely to be caught up in a tornado. Maybe we should have warnings about that, with lots of pictures to put everyone on edge.

The Center for Missing Children is a piece of the Fear Industrial Complex. It raises money by scaring us.

Businesses also profit from our fear. Brinks Security pushes apprehension about child abduction in commercials for home security systems. One terrifying ad is reminiscent of classic horror movies.

And we in the media profit from fear.

"For the media, child kidnapping is a gold mine," says David Glassner, author of the Culture of Fear: Why Americans Are Afraid of the Wrong Things. "It can go on for weeks. It's not a one-shot thing. The child is still gone, you can keep following it. Is there a new lead? Then finally, if they're discovered, that's the grand finale."

Nancy Grace has become a CNN superstar by featuring grisly crimes including child kidnappings, complete with an upbeat soundtrack. And NBC's "To Catch a Predator" has become a call to arms for parents by making it seem as if nearly everyone online is out to sexually solicit your kids.

The media have parents scared stiff, says Dan McGinn, who runs focus groups. Some parents won't let their kids out of their sight.

"When they talk about their kids and the risk of kidnapping, the numbers become irrelevant. It doesn't matter if it's 100 kids in the United States or 10,000. They really believe 'it's my child and I could minimize that risk,'" McGinn told us.

During a focus group McGinn assembled for "20/20," parents said things like, "I won't let [my son] go to the restroom by himself" and "I do not let [my kids] go out by themselves in the yard, not even the front yard."

All this worry can't be good for our kids. One child told me, "Anyone could just grab me at any time. A lot more kids are getting kidnapped."

But more kids are not getting kidnapped.

Ernie Allen concedes the point. "The numbers of non-family abductions have been remarkably constant over the years."

But if that's true, isn't his organization needlessly scaring parents and children to death?

"We're trying very hard not to scare people."

But a child is much more likely to be hurt running into the street than kidnapped by a stranger.

"We don't want you to feel like you have to lock your child into a room and never let them out of your sight, " Allen says.

But his message certainly encourages people to do that.

That's a shame. Kids would benefit from being allowed to play in the yard or walk to school by themselves. They should be more vigilant about reckless drivers than potential kidnappers. They would learn to worry about the real risks.

Next week: what we should and shouldn't worry about.

John Stossel is co-anchor of ABC News' "20/20" and the author of "Myth, Lies, and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel — Why Everything You Know is Wrong." To find out more about John Stossel and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.