Calling All Sex Offenders: Oregon Awaits

Right From the Start

Right From the Start

Are you a sexual deviant? Are you a serial rapist? A child molester? A sexual predator? Well welcome to Oregon, the government has got your back.

Have you repeatedly raped a thirteen year old child over a three year period? Well you could be Oregon’s governor. Have you pursued teenage boys in the public restrooms of City Hall? Well you could be Portland’s mayor. Have you been accused of unwanted sexual aggression, touching, fondling, or kissing? You could be a congressman or senator from Oregon. Do you insist on placing your paramours on the public payroll and using taxpayer money for sexual liaisons across the country? You could be a Multnomah county commissioner, or for that matter any number of state legislators.

Hey, don’t worry about those pesky registration requirements as a sex offender. It’s just a formality and Oregon government will bury your registration in a data base that no one from the public ever sees – that is if they even ask you to register.

A recent report by KATU’s Joe Douglass noted:

“Oregon now has the most sex offenders per capita in the U.S. according to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which in June released a map showing the state had 713 sex offenders per 100,000 residents. Nationwide it showed there were 262 offenders per 100,000 people.”

Oregon, at 713 sex offenders per 100,000, is nearly three times the national average of sex offenders per 100,000 residents. When Mr. Douglass notes that Oregon is in first place, it’s not by a little, rather it is by a lot. The next closest state is Arkansas, home of former President Bill Clinton (naturally) with 515 per 100,000.

Mr. Douglass continues:

“KATU’s On Your Side Investigators discovered more than 98 percent of Oregon’s sex offenders are not listed publicly and thousands are not complying with the law.

“Oregon State Police (OSP), the agency that oversees sex offenders, also admitted in July the state isn’t following several federal requirements.

“’Our sex offender laws are very weak compared to most states,’ Portland Police Officer Bridget Sickon told KATU Thursday.”

The story continues that a search of the publicly accessible data bases showed there were nine sex offenders within a mile of the KATU building. However, a search of the data bases not available to the public indicated that there were in fact 159 deviants within a mile radius of KATU – over seventeen times as many as the public is allowed to know.

Yes, despite resistance by the current governor while she was a state senator, Oregon does have a version of Jessica’s Law (mandatory minimum sentences for sex offenders). It also has a version of Megan’s Law (registration by sex offenders) although, according to the KATU story, that registration is kept from the public for whom it was designed to protect. Go figure.

With a population of over 4 million people, Oregon is home to over 28,500 sex offenders. Where do they all live? Well, other than the ones who populate state and local government, it is probable that one or more of them live in your neighborhood – one lives in our neighborhood. But given the fact that the average citizen cannot access a large part of the information on sex offenders, you will probably never know. I suppose we are fortunate because our sex offender is publicly identified and the Clackamas Sheriff’s Office has, on more than one occasion, alerted the neighborhood to his presence.

So if you are a sexual predator, a pervert, or a serial rapist, pack your bags and move on out to Oregon – Portland in particular – where you will be met with open arms and a decided government effort to shield your crimes from the public. After you are here for a short while, you might just as well run for public office – others have and successfully.

There are a lot of things that a state can strive to be. But when you are number one in sex offenders and number 43 in education maybe it is time to get rid of the loons who run Oregon.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 05:00 | Posted in Corruption, Cylvia Hayes, Education, Gov. Kate Brown, Gov. Kitzhaber, Gov. Neil Goldschmidt, Liberalism, Mayor Sam Adams, Oregon Government, Preident Bill Clinton, Sex Offenders | 478 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Interestingly, the rate for Oregon’s registered citizens (reported at about 5%) is far lower than a state like Florida (reported at 13%), the state with the strictest laws. All those strict Florida laws increase housing and employment instability, which in turn increases recidivism. Of course, all you tough on crime conservaturds are so short-sighted, you can’t see the forest for the trees.

    KATU has pushed this fearmongering story for many years. So what if there are more registered citizens per capita than FloriDUH? Tough on crime laws have backfired. Megan’s FLAW is a flop. The controversial federal Adam Walsh Act is an even bigger disaster. There is a reason 2/3 of states failed to adopt it after 10 years, and some of the biggest states, like Texas and California, have outright refused to adopt it.

    Oregon’s push to adopt a three tiered system is a disaster in the making. The ignorant American public has proven the registry is merely a tool for vigilantes like career criminal Patrick Drum, who you folks called a “hero” for murdering two registrants in Port Angeles WA in 2012. Never mind the fact he had 47 criminal convictions for burglary, assault, theft and drug offenses, he killed two folks on the registry. Never mind the fact one of his victims was convicted of having s*x with a classmate before his 18th birthday.

    The registry should be completely abolished. All you conservaturds claim you are anti-big government yet you support Big Brother citizen tracking programs, so you are hypocrites too.

    • Les Mis Life

      There are many misperceptions on this subject. Primarily that ALL offenders are permanently ‘wired that way.’ This fallacy then leads to the next which involves the idea that we will be safe if we run them out of the community or publicly shame them; this ignores the fact that less than 5% reoffend and that 19 out of 20 new offenses are committed by someone not on the registry, thus watching the wrong people instead of noticing clear warning signs.
      Comparing Oregon to Florida illustrates the flaw in the ‘common sense’ : isn’t taking away opportunity and driving them from society the most likely way of driving them to madness? Even then, at wits end and homeless, almost 9 out of 10 don’t reoffend.
      All victims are not the same and neither are offenders, and kudos to the state that doesn’t give in to fears that never or rarely come to fruition instead of those that legislate a self-fulfilling prophecy.

      • ieee

        The Registries are a completely likely way to “drive them to madness” and also drive them to hate other people and lash out, sometimes in ways that kill people. It has already happened, is happening, and will continue to happen. Truly idiotic social policy.

        • Connie Kosuda

          hey there / you need some help not joking

          • ieee

            Because I am speaking of things that have happened? Listing people on the Registries and harassing them has caused them to kill children. It has happened. You just want to ignore it?

            Experts said the Registries would be counterproductive and they have clearly been proven to have been quite right.

          • Connie Kosuda

            who are these experts? who has killed children?

          • ieee

            God, you really don’t know anything about this, do you? Don’t bother trying to learn because I truly expect that you are so biased and your “thinking” is so clouded with emotions that you will never be able to see actual reality. The facts could slap you right in face and you could never admit it.

            George Edenfield and Mathew Caylor are just two people who were listed on the Nanny Big Government Sex Offender Registries who struck back by murdering children. I only mention two of them because 1) I don’t keep a list of these terrible things, and 2) I know about these two for 100% certain and I would not know about others with such certainty.

            If you keep dreaming that your Registries are so wonderful then you need to pay a hell of a lot more taxes. At least pay your fair share. Because people like me are tired of paying for YOUR big government.

    • ieee

      There is nothing more nanny big government than keeping a list of citizens and lying to everyone that they are being “tracked” and “monitored”. It’s ridiculous.

      • Connie Kosuda

        lots of pedophiles and victims of pedophiles out there / the lists are necessary / too bad for them if it is inconvenient.

        • ieee

          The hit lists don’t do anything positive. They are toys for harassing terrorists, nothing else.

          But the lists have created millions and millions of people who HATE big government and their law enforcement criminals. They also hate any un-American living in the U.S. who can’t mind their own damn business and stop asking their nanny big governments to create thousand and thousands of laws.

          In actual reality, as opposed to Registry fantasy land, all of that matters and has real effects.

          • Connie Kosuda

            very glad you are on the list.

          • ieee

            If you had even the slightest clue about reality you would realize just what a huge mistake the Registries are. Just like all experts always said. But hey, don’t worry about reality, just go with your feelings.

            You are not a fellow citizen of mine. Don’t wonder why people don’t care about you, your criminal regimes, or your law enforcement criminals.

    • Connie Kosuda

      so many sex offenders complaining about the consequences of their actions / go figure.

      • The First Amendment is a lovely thing. But every time you admit this is punishment, you prove SCOTUS wrong, so that makes you a useful idiot 🙂

  • The sex offender registration law (SOR) should be (and often is) referred to as the best example of a ‘knee-jerk’ law that best serves careers in Oregon politics, law enforcement and bean-counters at KATU.

    If this writer would bother injecting a few certified facts now and then he’d have more credibility. For example, why does he not bother to tell us readers that registered sex offenders have really low re-offense rates anyway? Or that these registered citizens are not responsible for way over 96 percent of the new sex crimes committed in Oregon? Why did this writer not mention that the vast numbers of sex crimes are committed by family members and acquaintances already known to the victim and it is NOT the stranger listed on the sex offender registration list?

    The SOR law is a complete joke. The reason that Oregon has the highest per capita number of sex offenders is that every sex crime statute is a register-able offense and that Oregon rarely approves for any of these people to exit the SOR list. No wonder it is bursting at the seams and over-loaded with law-abiding former sex offenders who don’t need the life-time “sex offender” label hanging over them.

    There needs to be a crusade against the sex offender registration laws that challenge idiotic government blacklists whose only practical outcome is to further destroy people that live law-abiding lives. Let’s educate the public (KATU?) by telling them the truth about Oregon’s sex offender registration law and the people listed on it.

    • Connie Kosuda

      the people listed on it are sex offenders / what’s the beef????

      • The beef is that registered citizens are former sex offenders and debts have been paid. Sex offender registration laws do not respect reintegration back into society as law-abiding citizens that the vast number of these people are. Simple enough, yes?

        • GQ4U

          You assume that “former” sexual predators are law abiding citizens but many of them preyed on the innocent for decades before they were discovered, arrested, tried, convicted, served and released. The clever ones can repeat for years without raising suspicions and a few repeat predators may never be found out a 2nd time.

          • What you say might be true for some of them. But the question is why should the group of them pay the price for the reckless action of a few?

            Ever get a speeding ticket? I have. Imagine that the state government passes a law that all former speeders get an annual tax bill of $100 because it keeps all other citizens safer?

            I think we need to get back and away from risk-assessed predictive policing because it seriously infringes on constitutional protections and democratic values as equal citizens in society. What say you?

          • GQ4U

            How does your scenario hold up when addressing DUI? Should we fine them and forget they committed the crime so when they repeat no knows their history of offenses? Will you lead a crusade to preserve their driving privileges? Expunge their records? is their ever a case where constitutional protections are lost?

          • My arguments about crime in a free society is that alleged criminals get their day in court. If Mr. DUI is in court for the 10th time, then Mr. DUI gets his reward in the criminal justice system as per a judge and jury. If guilty, then he will (it is hoped) get jail time. But when he has completed his punishment, he should be considered an innocent citizen again. If Mr. DUI wants to spend a third of his life in jail, that’s up to him.

            I think the difference between our viewpoints is that you lean more towards a public safety stance whereas I tend to lean towards the liberty end of that spectrum. As you know, this debate is an ancient one although an interesting one.

          • GQ4U

            Mr DUI will serve his time and be released and “hopefully” become a productive citizen — however, if he drives again his insurance carrier will charge him an excessive fee because of his past behavior which is listed on law enforcement databases — why shouldn’t that extend to sexual predators too?

            As for the Bill-of-Rights you will find me to be a staunch supporter and defender. Individual sovereignty and liberty must be protected above all else, but my liberty ends where it infringes upon another. Sex predators cross over the line and take liberty from their victims. Except for murder there is no greater loss to a victim and their family.

          • Civil Rights First

            Constitutional Protections are not lost…. yes Civil rights are restricted while Under the custody of the Department of corrections… But once an individual completes his/her sentence the ONLY CIVIL RIGHT not restored is the right to own a firearm. Why should an individual be denied to marry who ever they want or travel or have their Passport marked with a special identifier marking them as a RSO. YES the Government is doing this to them. They can not marry a woman from another country nor even travel to another country. The International Megan Law put a stop to that and the Adam Walsh Act put a stop to an individual marrying a person of their choosing. When does the “punishment” stop for people who have completed their sentence

          • GQ4U

            “When does the “punishment” stop for people who have completed their sentence”

            When does the fear and anxiety stop for the victims of these sexual deviants. I will tell you based on my experience it never ends because the victims life was altered and that’s a life long sentence imposed by the predator you defend.

          • Civil Rights First

            A drunk driver killed my brother 40 years ago. I miss him still to this day. My pain is just as real for that crime. My mother’s pain, my sisters pain…… etc. They are all just as real. Why does that criminal get to live a normal life. I was molested by two brothers when I was young. I’ve accepted that what they did was not my fault and made the choice to forgive them and not let those things control me today. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be a list. I’m saying the last when originally created was only viewable at the police station. If you wanted to know who in your area was a convicted sex offender you had to go look at the book. I also think there should be a light at the end of the tunnel for ALL of them even the most violent offender if they have successfully completed all treatment programs and conditions of their release, have remained incident free, for a length of time. Most States already have the light at the end of the tunnel for less server crimes like the urination in public or the teen who was 18 and slept with his 16 year old girlfriend. I understand your position having lived it myself. But why restrict an individual from going to see the great Wall of China or any of the other beautiful sights of this world for life, or deny a person the fundamental right to marry the person they want because of their past. There are treatment programs for victims too… there is healing, hey just need to choose it like I did. The punishment for all needs to have a light at the end of the tunnel, even if it is 10, 20 years down the road And the individual remains incident free. It isn’t the ones on the list we need to worry about, many of them have a 2 strike and their out. It’s the ones not on the list we need to watch out for.

          • GQ4U

            My brother was killed by a drunk driver in 1962 and the grief remains to this day. My daughter was abused 34 years ago and the changes in her remain to this day — regardless of forgiveness — and the grief remains. My grandson was murdered 21 years ago and the pain never goes away.

            I think I have a right to inquire with law enforcement where these people are. The drunk driver is not a problem since he was justly killed in the accident. The sex abuser left the state so the fear of running into him, or recidivism is lessened. The murderer was just released from prison earlier this year and is on record threatening violent retaliation upon my family for testifying against him, so I believe have a right to keep track of his whereabouts.

            Is the SOR flawed? Yes, so change it but don’t eliminate it. And stop the bleeding heart crap for sexual predators, they are after-all guilty of criminally harming their innocent victims.

          • Civil Rights First

            I’m sorry to hear about the grief that has happened to you and your family… my prayers go out to you. I am glad to read though that you do agree that many of the SOR are flawed and do need to be changed. If only more people seen things the way you do. I truly respect your opinion in this serious subject. Being a parent of a child who was offended must be tough. I hope you sought some treatment with a qualified provider. You know it may not be to late to find one to talk to. i believe you need healing just as much as your child did. I do stand behind my statement though, even the worst offender deserves to be released from the restrictions of the SOR if and I do emphasis the “IF”… they completed all recommended treatment programs, and have remained incident free for a set period of time…. say 20 years…. Statistically Sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rate and it just gets lower the older they get… I truly think you have more to worry about with the convicted murder than the sex offender.
            Thank you for your open mind. I wish more people on here would actually read your post and understand you are not their enemy.

      • homeydclown

        Sex offenders today, me and mine tomorrow. No thank you.

      • ShellyStow

        And additionally to what Thomas said, it is not evidence based. Public notification is shown to neither reduce re-offense rates, reduce sexual crime against children, nor work toward public safety. We must have laws that are grounded in facts and evidence.

      • ieee

        No, people listed on the Sex Offender Registries are not “sex offenders”. It is simple really. I assume that you have lied in the past, yes? So at that time I could have accurately called you “liar”. Is it okay if I call you that today? How about a couple of decades from now? The rest of your life? If you call people “sex offender” then I can call you “liar” and likely plenty of other choice labels.

        That is just one minor example, there are hundreds more that I’m sure you can figure out.

        Your nanny big governments (NBG) love “sex offender” though. They will use it non-stop in their lying propaganda campaign. Remember that you need NBG. But please do pay for them. I’m personally very tired of paying way more than my fair share.

      • GQ4U

        Exactly right. However, some of those listed should not be listed. For example the 18 year old who has consensual sex with a 17 year old should not be listed or at least not permanently.

        • Civil Rights First

          OK GQ4U and Connie…. What about the man or woman who committed their offense, did their time, completed all recommended treatment programs and has remained Gainfully employed, and no further issues not even a speeding ticket for 10, 15, 20 years. Should that person be on this public list for life where anyone can discover their past.Or have their right to travel to foreign Countries restricted after they have had their civil rights restored or their right to marry who ever they want restricted (IML and AWA). Or have their passport marked with a special identifier that labels them as a Registered Sex Offender so even the hotel clerk knows their past.

          • GQ4U

            If you read my posts on this thread you already know I do not favor the SOR laws in their present form but neither do I believe it should be eliminated completely.

          • ieee

            No one threatened you, fruitloop. I simply said that is what those people deserve. You know, just like how so many people say that “sex offenders” deserve to be shot or hanged.

          • GQ4U

            You said those who disagree with you should be dead — I disagree so you must want me dead.

            I don’t even make sick comments about exile and death for the sexual deviants in this discussion — or for their misguided supporters.

  • Why would any writer reference KATU on any serious topic? Corporate “news” entities, like the other local corporate “news” presstitutes, are and have been frequently in bed with the state and local cops, prosecutors, and all “tough-on-crime” elected to public office blowhards. Does the word stenographer ever come into your mind? You cannot find any news worthy sources in corporate form in Oregon that I am aware of. For future opinion pieces, you will need to dig out your own research far deeper than the likes of the “profits-before-the-whole-truth” KATU.

    • DavidAppell

      Thomas: who do you like for news and opinion?

      • It is sad to say that I cannot recommend any local news service that produces balanced news in he sense of covering both sides of an issue. Local news corporations, print and broadcast, put sales revenue ahead of putting forth an investigative news piece worth reading.

        Imagine that KATU began covering a sex offender story where balance was the priority: “Sex offender arrested for new sex crime but official crime statistics still show very low re-offense rates for the vast number of registered sex offenders as a whole across the nation and here in Oregon”. The people need both sides of the story not just the fearful angle that gets the print readers and TV watchers to tune in.

        • DavidAppell

          I don’t watch TV news either.

          I was just wondering if you had found a replacement you trusted for news & opinion.

          • Unregulated capitalism has corrupted the “news” business by focusing on profits instead of the common good in providing truthful, balanced news.

          • Maybe we should require the FCC to re-institute the Fairness Doctrine where at least two sides of a political story must be presented. After all, the airwaves are publicly owned and regulated in terms of broadcast frequency allocations and other technical ways.

          • DavidAppell

            If only…. but it’s days gone by.

          • thevillageidiot

            maybe the FCC should be fired.

  • ShellyStow

    This article makes the case for total abolishment of the public registry as well as anything I have ever seen. All of these registered sex offenders are living all over the place, and no one knows. Is there anyone there who has the ability to work out the significance of this? It means that left alone and unhampered, those on the registry can re-assimilate into society and live law-abiding lives like everyone else. They are raising their children, doing their jobs, going to church or not as they choose, being good neighbors and friends, and contributing to their society. Isn’t that the goal of our criminal justice system? It’s called rehabilitation. Why would anyone have a problem with that?

    • ieee

      Completely agree. And I would add that they are living law abiding lives in spite of the Registries, which completely encourage and promote the opposite.

      But I would dispute that many of them are being good neighbors. I know many Registered people and they have all been ostracized to a large degree and kept out of involvement in their neighborhoods. Those people don’t care about their neighbors and see them as the terrible people that they actually are. I think one of the main effects of the Registries is that it causes the families that are listed on them to stop caring about people they don’t know. Registered families are good families and friends but they don’t care so much about anyone else.

      Everyone talks about how the U.S. is divided and creating “lone wolves”, etc. Well, the Registries are the best tool that I’m aware of for doing that. Personally, I think they are truly, truly idiotic social policy. But most of the people who support the Registries don’t actually care what the true effect of them is, the whole witch hunt just makes them feel good. They are not good people.

      • GQ4U

        Obviously you are not the parent of a molested child.
        I agree that the registry includes people that shouldn’t be on it and there should be an expiration date for many others. However, pedophiles who have actually had sex with young children should be permanently listed as should all rapists who used force. The only way pedophiles & use of force rapists should be left off the registry is if they are in prison or dead.

        • ieee

          Actually, I was sexually abused as a child. And when my children were young, I had no need for a very, very, very incomplete list of people who had committed a sex crime in the past, often times decades ago.

          No, I protected my children from all people. And that is exactly what you must do if you are to actually protect your children. And once you’ve done that, you have zero need for a list.

          I’ve said it a thousand times – good parents have no need for Registries. Bad parents will never be helped enough by them.

          The Registries just don’t do enough good to support them overrunning everything the Americans hold sacred.

          • GQ4U

            Total BS. An abused or raped child does not equal bad parenting, no parent can protect their child 24/7 and if you claim you can then you are lying to yourself.

            As for the SOR I have stated several times that it should not be available to the public on the internet and based on the offense their should be a sunset provision for each registrant.

          • ieee

            You should be more specific about what part of what I said you think is BS. Because obviously not all of it was.

            Anyway, I agree with you that the children of good parents can be molested. What I said was that good parents don’t need Registries. Personally, I assume that anyone might try to molest my children. So I take steps to ensure that will be damn near impossible. I just don’t need to know if a person did something bad in the past. I don’t have any extra steps to take against that person. I just don’t have any.

            And the flip side is that bad parents can read a Registry all day. They aren’t protecting their children.

        • ShellyStow

          Actually, I am. A public registry is justified for no one because it is not supported by evidence as effective.

          • GQ4U

            As the parent of an assaulted child I disagree. I am not one for witch hunts but I believe any victim of a sexual predator should have the right to find out where their attacker is living.

          • RadioPaul1

            That is a different story and I can share your concern but that is not the registry system we have nor what the author of this awful artical is talking about.

            I am sorry for what you and your child went through and yes victims do have and should have rights but the above artical has nothing to do with that.

          • GQ4U

            I am addressing those who would abolish the right of victims to know where their sex offender is 24/7 — because victims live the harm done to them 24/7.

            I said the SOR should not be available on the internet to the public but an individual’s name should be released to the public upon request to law enforcement officials.

          • Michael Dasky

            What if the public registry attracts vigilantes like the guy in Alaska who used the registry as a hit list?

          • GQ4U

            Vigilantism is a crime so those engaging in it should be prosecuted. If they assault or kill someone then they should have their names available to the public upon request.
            Infringing on another persons rights should be punished to the fullest.

          • antiestablismentarianism

            That’s exactly what the registry does every day and why so many people are advocating for change. It infringes on rights of people without affording any extra rights or protections to those it’s supposed to. For the most part, I agree with your position. Take away the public access and there wouldn’t be a problem with the registry other than things like range restrictions which have been proven to have a NEGATIVE impact. Some states don’t even have a “grandfather” clause on that, so if a home day care opens up in their range, law enforcement can legally evict the offender even if they are a homeowner. Like I mentioned in an earlier response, I wrote out an entire plan for reform, but politicians won’t take notice until regular people (non-registrants) understand how it’s better for society. Until then, public “perception” will be what politicians refer to.

          • homeydclown

            1. From where does originate the victim’s right where their s3x offender is 24/7?

            2. No s3x abuse victim knows where their offender is 24/7. They know where such person regularly sleeps and collects their mail, but that is all.

            3. Why should not every victim of crime have the same status / ‘right’?

          • GQ4U

            1. The right of the abused innocent victim to track the guilty abuser. I believe violent sex offenders and child rapists should never get out of prison — the SOR is poor substitute for prison sentence for life.

            2. The victim can at least know if their abuser lives in their town, or state and be on guard.

            3. Good question, perhaps they should. I’ll contact my congressman.

          • homeydclown

            1. You did not answer the question. Where is such RIGHT enumerated? In the Bill of Rights? In the Constitution? I did not find it. I did find a provision against Ex Post Facto Punishment and the Equal Protection clause.

            That you believe someone who violates any one of well over 100 different offenses under the s3x offense umbrella should never get out of prison is your prerogative, but completely immaterial.

            2. You keep talking about the registry being victim-centric. The whole underlying rationale for the registry is NOT one from the victim’s point of view, but from a public safety standpoint. The victim’s involvement ended at sentencing, after a publicly funded prosecutor proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt. At that point the victim gets one last shot to be heard, in the form of a victim impact statement. If warranted, a restraining / no contact order can be made part of the criminal sentence. Like it or not, at that point the victim’s interest in the case is finished.

            3. Do we all like certain things? Of course. That does not mean there is such a RIGHT – as you keep referring to it. And if there were, ANY crime victim would have such a RIGHT. Until such time that there is such a requirement for any criminal to be listed (all 65 million Americans with a criminal record) there should be none.

          • disqus_d6wGIf0gU6

            That’s the problem, not all people who have committed a sex offense are predators.

          • GQ4U

            List those non predatory sex offenses.
            You can’t because if a sex act is a crime then its a predatory crime. Thieves, murderers & rapists are all predators — each preys on the innocent.

          • homeydclown

            Yet neither thieves nor murderers (!) are subject to registration. Why not?

          • GQ4U

            Ask your legislators, perhaps they can add some new criminal categories.

          • ShellyStow

            Just a few:
            Statutory rape between romantically involved partners, often charged as sexual abuse of a child
            Public urination, usually charged as public indecency
            High school/college streaking, flashing, mooning
            Child play/experimentation-children are on the registry as young as 9 in some states
            Everyone on the registry due to false or wrongful conviction

          • GQ4U

            I have no problem removing those act from the registry — except for statutory rape of a child. There must be varying degrees based on age limitations and whether its consensual or not. If force is used at any age, or unwarranted coercion, especially of young children, then I have no problem with listing their name. However, the list should not be available to the public on the internet — that encourages vigilantist activity.

          • ShellyStow

            Statutory is always consensual. That is what statutory means; it is only rape due to the statute dealing with age of consent. Anyone under the age of consent…can be 16, 17, or 18, depending on the state, and for federal charges, always 18–is called a child when it comes to sexual offense charges. Certainly agree with the force part, but then it isn’t statutory; it is just rape.

          • GQ4U

            No — statutory rape is not always consensual.
            No — statutory rape is not limited to children.

            Statutory Rape:
            Sexual intercourse by an adult with a person below a statutorily designated age. The criminal offense of statutory rape is committed when an adult sexually penetrates a person who, under the law, is incapable of consenting to sex. Minors and physically and mentally incapacitated persons are deemed incapable of consenting to sex under rape statutes in all states.

            http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Statutory+Rape

          • ShellyStow

            Correct–I was forgetting adults who for debilitating conditions are not legally capable of giving consent. And when I said stat rape is always consensual, I meant consensual as in a willing partner, not forced. If it is forced, it is not stat rape; it is rape rape. Semantics…..

          • GQ4U

            Based on the reply’s I receive semantics seems to be very important.

          • Connie Kosuda

            shelly , that is moronic and you are LYING to these wackos if that is what you are peddling.

            there is no possibility of consent being given if the vicftim is a minor. period. consent can not be given. plug in your brain, or something .

          • homeydclown

            In about 20 of the 50 states a ‘child’ in this context is any person under 18. In all states a 16 year old child can get married with parental permission. And then have – even be required to have – s3x. In all states a 14 year old or younger can be prosecuted as an adult. There is no sillier term dripping with outdated morality than calling such conduct ‘rape’ – even with a qualifier.

            A commenter of your caliber is no doubt aware that the usage of this term stems from just over 100 years ago when the age of consent (in this awesome country!) was 10 (ten!!) and a (white) female’s chastity was considered a commodity.

            http://www.sunypress.edu/pdf/60840.pdf (p 11)

          • GQ4U

            So your morality is that all those from 1-day to 17-years 364-days are available for the sexual pleasure of every sex pervert out there, but isn’t that sanctioning rape? Or child molestation? What decent society abandons their young to the wolves?

            If the age of consent was 10-years of age 100-years ago then have we advanced as a civilized society by increasing the age or have we declined?

            Be careful how you answer because sexual deviancy starts in the mind — its how one thinks.

          • Connie Kosuda

            so, rape is ok in your book / not in mine.

          • You equate abolishing opposition to a public pillory with being pro-rape. That has to be the dumbest argument I’ve ever heard. I hate thieves but if we allowed the removal of their hands I’d be opposed to it.

          • homeydclown

            Brace yourself!!! S3x with a person under 18 – RAPE – is totally legal in 2/3 of the states in this awesome country.

            And in every single state in this country a person under 18 – a child – can get married – with parental consent – and then can have, no, be required to have s3x. To fornicate. To be ‘raped’.

            Now what? What shrill hysterics can you add to that????

          • homeydclown

            According to your definition / ok, rape is perfectly acceptable in the books of 2/3s of the states in this country. Do get a grip and re-evaluate your ‘book’….

          • Connie Kosuda

            what ‘states’ are those? methinks u r incorrect, to put it mildly.

            keep the public lists , please God!

            we need protection from those of your ‘ilk’.

          • Connie Kosuda

            perfectly appropriate convictions / happy they were caught / glad they are on the registry.

            an adult can not be ‘romantically involved ‘ with a child, Shelly , that is so twisted it is nauseating.

            that is a pedophile.

            I guess you must be making some money off this, but as they used to say, ‘there is a hole in your soul.” really.

          • ShellyStow

            I’ll pass that along to Frank and Nikki. They were high school sweethearts, he a senior, 18, and she a sophomore, 15, when he was put on the registry, which, in Texas, he will be on until he dies. As soon as she graduated, they got married. That was twenty years ago, and they are raising their four children. They will be surprised to know that they cannot be “romantically involved.” And no, our organization is a non-profit and all of our work is volunteer. And my soul is in God’s hands, thanks, so it is in good shape. Please take care, Connie.

          • Connie Kosuda

            yes, shelly, as we both know, 15 is a child / a minor / and 18 in most states is not / they were not married / glad they got married / that is also an exception to the rule for which these registries were created , as we both know.

            take care . nothing has changed.

          • Connie Kosuda

            it’s amazing how you rationalize this – most young women even when 15 who have sex with an 18 year old, whether or not they believe at the time that they are ‘in love’ – have in fact their lives ruined by the encounter . so you pull an exception out of your hat and think that that justifies all the rest.

            for shame, ‘shelly’ – you are doing a lot of damage in the world.

          • ShellyStow

            Equally amazing is your capacity for generalization…Most young women of 15 who have sex have their lives ruined…no one on the registry is a good neighbor…they are all pedophiles…And I’m not trying to change your mind; I recognize that yours is one that knows what it believes and doesn’t want to be bothered with facts. I’m just enjoying the debate.

          • Connie Kosuda

            it is not a debate, shelly – sorry you choose to defend and rationalize the harms done by sexual predators / pedophiles / sexual deviants / sexually irresponsible self-absorbed morons ( your key crowd, it would seem) – you are doing a great deal of harm out in the world / you are not the only one, but you certainly are one.

            I can only assume that you think young and old women, girls, females, are not worth much.

            I will pray for you.

          • ShellyStow

            Thank you; all prayers are welcome; I will do the same for you. At least you are now saying “I assume” rather than “I know.” You assume wrong, but it is an improvement.
            Connie, you say things that just are not true. Show me where I have rationalized the harm done by sexual abuse. Can you not see the difference between rationalizing the harm and wanting to stop the abuse? I advocate for the things that research shows will decrease sexual abuse. Some of those things are helping the rehabilitation of former offenders who are living law-abiding lives.

          • Connie Kosuda

            I don’t see that this site (Oregon Catalyst) supports , or sympathizes with sex offenders, rapists, pedophiles, and their cronies, so I don’t see how you are getting a free pass on this board. For shame / you don’t with me.

          • ShellyStow

            It’s called journalistic ethics: allowing and presenting both sides of a controversial issue. And as briefly as I can put it, this is what I, and I imagine the Oregon Catalyst, support: laws based on facts and evidence and policies that support the successful rehabilitation and reintegration of law abiding, former sex offenders into society, that further the goal of increased public safety, and that work toward the reduction of child sexual abuse.

          • Connie Kosuda

            Mr. Douglass continues:
            “KATU’s On Your Side Investigators discovered more than 98 percent of Oregon’s sex offenders are not listed publicly and thousands are not complying with the law.
            “Oregon State Police (OSP), the agency that oversees sex offenders, also admitted in July the state isn’t following several federal requirements.
            “’Our sex offender laws are very weak compared to most states,’ Portland Police Officer Bridget Sickon told KATU Thursday.”
            The story continues that a search of the publicly accessible data bases showed there were nine sex offenders within a mile of the KATU building. However, a search of the data bases not available to the public indicated that there were in fact 159 deviants within a mile radius of KATU – over seventeen times as many as the public is allowed to know.
            Yes, despite resistance by the current governor while she was a state senator, Oregon does have a version of Jessica’s Law (mandatory minimum sentences for sex offenders). It also has a version of Megan’s Law (registration by sex offenders) although, according to the KATU story, that registration is kept from the public for whom it was designed to protect. Go figure.
            With a population of over 4 million people, Oregon is home to over 28,500 sex offenders. Where do they all live? Well, other than the ones who populate state and local government, it is probable that one or more of them live in your neighborhood – one lives in our neighborhood. But given the fact that the average citizen cannot access a large part of the information on sex offenders, you will probably never know. I suppose we are fortunate because our sex offender is publicly identified and the Clackamas Sheriff’s Office has, on more than one occasion, alerted the neighborhood to his presence.
            So if you are a sexual predator, a pervert, or a serial rapist, pack your bags and move on out to Oregon – Portland in particular – where you will be met with open arms and a decided government effort to shield your crimes from the public. After you are here for a short while, you might just as well run for public office – others have and successfully.

            (quoting from the article that set off this ‘thread’)

            the laws are based on facts and evidence.

            there is very little successful rehabilitation of sex offenders.

            reintegration into society? not a priority.

            the reduction of child and adult sexual abuse is a good thing to focus on.

            I don’t think you’re being straight with us, shelly, you’ve got a game , you’ve got your lingo, but your priorities are skewed.

            go figure.

          • antiestablismentarianism

            To what God are you praying? Are you really going to bring religion in when you have been nothing but hateful? How do you think Jesus would have approached this subject? Don’t you dare claim to be a good Christian with nothing but hatred in your blackened heart. I usually try to avoid emotion in these types of threads, but that hits a nerve.

          • Civil Rights First

            you yourself listed one sex offender who is not a Predatory crime.. the 18 year old who has sex with their 17 year old… but how about the person caught urinating in public is that person a predator, the teen age boy or girl sending pictures of their self naked to their boyfriend or girlfriend…. now busted for child porn…. think outside of the box. The registry is to broad..

          • GQ4U

            Yes and I said as much. Plus I said the registry, which should only be a list of predators who have harmed others, should not be available to the public on the internet. I think they should list convicted murderers too.

          • homeydclown

            Why not all criminals? How about the bank robber? You do not think that bank teller suffers from PTSD? How about the burglar? A burglary victim may never feel safe again in their own home. How about the drug dealer who gets someone hooked on narcotics and plunges them and their entire family into a downward spiral? How about the Wall Street Banker or pension manager who leaves a senior citizen destitute?

            Who decides? (That is a direct question).

          • GQ4U

            homey, all convicted criminals are on a list, its called their criminal record.

            Government Legislators & Executives decide. Don’t you know how civil government works?

          • Connie Kosuda

            all sex offenders are predators / they prey upon others / reason it out.

          • CON-nie says “all sex offenders are predators / they prey upon others / reason it out.” Obviously, this includes such “crimes” as teens sharing nude selfies, having consensual relations with each other, or urinating behind trees. Think before you type next time. Generalizations are prejudices.

          • disqus_d6wGIf0gU6

            So a person while drunk urinated on a lawn is a sexual predator?

          • ShellyStow

            And I am sure that you are able to do that and would be able to do that under a law-enforcement-only registry system.

          • Civil Rights First

            When the registry originally started that was exactly what someone had to do.. go to the police station and request info for offenders living in their area.

          • antiestablismentarianism

            It was actually Megan’s law that changed that in the 90’s. The parents of Megan Kanka now actually regret contributing to the mess the registry is now and have spoken out against it. Look it up if you don’t believe me. That goes for anyone reading this.

          • ShellyStow

            And Patty Wetterling is a very outspoken opponent of what the registry has become.

          • Les Mis Life

            I am so sorry for what your child and family have suffered. Too often this issue is fought for by politicians or people who are pushing an agenda that is more oriented towards doing something “to the offenders” instead of “for the children.”
            My heart bleeds for your little one and family, and you are truly entitled to your opinions and perspective after all you have been through.

          • GQ4U

            Thank you for your kind thoughts. My little one is now 40 years old, we’ve lived with this for decades. The pain never goes away completely and the personality changes in my little one linger today — it truly is a life sentence foisted on an innocent by a self serving sexual predator.

          • ShellyStow

            I am so very sorry for what you and your child suffered and that after so much time he or she has not healed. I am sure you have done everything possible in the way of councilors who focus on recovery and healing. I do understand your feelings, and as a family member of more than one abused person, I do know how difficult it can be. It took me a while to realize that the current system actually makes it worse because it does nothing for prevention. Until we have a system that focuses on the victims and prevention, as empirical evidence suggests, nothing will change.

          • Connie Kosuda

            no you are not sorry – you are a lying hypocrite / give it a rest.

          • ShellyStow

            Connie, a little over the top here, aren’t you? You have already indicated that you “know” those on the registry can’t be good neighbors, even though you won’t answer how many registrants you actually do know, and now you “know” my feelings and sincerity and truthfulness? You don’t know the first thing about me except what I have written in these posts, and those you can take to the bank because I have not lied in anything I wrote.

          • ieee

            People like Connie are exactly the kind of people who support the SORs. I know you know that experts never have. Further, I truly don’t think there are any intelligent, informed people who do today. Especially after all we have learned from the “Connie”s in our country.

          • homeydclown

            Every victim of crime is sentenced to a life of consequences. The pain never goes away completely, and the effects linger today. Every criminal victimization is truly a life sentence foisted on an innocent by a self serving criminal.

            No?

          • GQ4U

            Is your No a question?
            My statement regarding the life long suffering for the victims of these heinous deviants stands true.

          • homeydclown

            Every victim of crime carries the effects with them for the rest of their lives.

            You statement regarding the subject is completely without foundation. Let me re-phrase my question….

            Who are you to decide which one is life crippling and which one is no big deal?

          • GQ4U

            “Who are you to decide which one is life crippling and which one is no big deal?” [homey]

            I didn’t — that is just another false assumption by you.

          • Michael Dasky

            How about a registry for drunk drivers, and they have to have a different colored license plate? How about a registry for drug dealers? They do more harm to children overall and have a higher recividism rate.

          • GQ4U

            I remind you that I believe the registry should not be available to the public on the internet but only made available to the public upon request to law enforcement.
            Do sexual predators have different colored license plates? Must they post a sign on their home proclaiming they are sexual deviants? Drunk drivers are well known to auto insurance carriers, or to would be employers upon request. The same is true of drug dealers.

          • homeydclown

            Drunk drivers are not known to me when I organize little Suzie’s or Johnny’s car pool for the new school year. Or when I let them ride their tricycles on the sidewalk in front of my house.

            Where is my RIGHT to this information? And the whereabouts of these people – who have an astronomical recidivism rate and KILL (!) indiscriminately.

          • disqus_d6wGIf0gU6

            Actualy the recidivism rate is very low. Please check the facts.

          • Civil Rights First

            I think he was talking about drunk drivers…. Which most drunk drivers do have more than one. I’m not sure what the recidivism rate is for DUI but I do activity attend AA and i count tell you how many are on their 2 or more….

          • GQ4U

            How do you know most DUI offenders repeat? Do all DUI offenders attend AA meetings? If not, then what percentage of DUI offenders do attend. What percentage of DUI offenders have done physical harm to others?

            Note: All sex offenders have done physical and psychological harm to others and I have no idea how many of them attend sex anonymous meetings.

          • GQ4U

            My brother was killed by a dunk driver so i have some idea of how that affects friends & family.

            Its stupid to compare drunk drivers to sexual predators. The Drunk isn’t inappropriately fantasizing about Suzi or Johnny — he is not watching them, stalking them or attacking them. He may cause their death but he didn’t set out to do so.

            All those convicted of a DUI are listed in the criminal justice system.

          • Civil Rights First

            Sex offenders will have a special identifier on their passport…. Does anyone else? No!

          • antiestablismentarianism

            That fight is already being fought really hard from California and it’s one registry law that the public doesn’t really support. I believe that one will end up in the Supreme Court. What’s good about that fight in particular is since the public even sees it as going too far, many states and localities are revisiting their laws such as this article shows. Things are changing for the better, just slowly.

          • Civil Rights First

            Yes I know it is being fought in California…. I will be at the next protest.
            I just wish there was a way to get rid of the whole registry…. IML, AWA are way overboard….

          • antiestablismentarianism

            You sound willing to make compromise for the better good, which is a good thing. You seem to be able to think rationally. I would agree that removing public access is in the best interest of society as a whole, but allowing just anyone, victim or not, to request information about their abuser after they are released into society is just not good public policy. Look at the guy from Alaska who started attacking registrants. In one of the news articles about him, over 90% of the comments were calling him a hero even though he had a long history of violent behavior. I wrote a plan a while back to advocate for a law enforcement registry with certain access to certain organizations on an established need to know basis. For instance, a school could request access for the school district for child offenders. When it comes to employment, it would show up on bg checks like every other crime though, so no extra need there. I also think background checks should be categorized. A factory that only has adults working there really has no reason to know about a child offender, but a retail store would. That has never stopped offenders from shopping at these places though.

          • GQ4U

            The guy from Alaska who started attacking registrants is as sick as any pedophile.

          • antiestablismentarianism

            That is very true, but what I was bringing attention to wasn’t him, but the response to his antics. The fact that the majority of people were advocating him says a lot about our society in general. “We the People” cannot be trusted to use a registry as nothing more than an informational tool as it was intended originally.

          • GQ4U

            I agree, thay’s why I said the registry should not be available online. It would work best if the public had to seek the information from law enforcement officials. That might impede the local vigilantes.

          • disqus_d6wGIf0gU6

            In some states, yes. In certain towns in Florida they actually put a sign in the front yard of a person who is a registrant. In other states there is a notification on the driver’s license.

          • homeydclown

            I believe any victim of crime should have the right to find out where their perpetrator is living. Yet they don’t. Why not?

          • GQ4U

            You do realize I am not a legislator. If you live in the USA you have state and federal legislators that you can ask why not.

            I agree that any victim should have the right to request information on the whereabouts of their abuser.

          • homeydclown

            What you believe is immaterial. Where is enumerated that RIGHT of which you speak?

          • Civil Rights First

            If I may weigh in here.. I have been reading all the post on here and While I don’t agree with all of GQ’s statements and beliefs he or she is at least seeing the error in the registry system and agrees there is room for improvement. I suggest backing down some and take smaller bites when trying to sway support. Just my observation, God bless and stay strong.

          • GQ4U

            Well at least one of my opponents is listening and comprehending my position. I appreciate it Civil Rights First, thanks.

          • antiestablismentarianism

            You actually have at least two because I’d say I fit in to that category. I would rather not say “opponent” though because when it really comes down to it, we are all fighting for the same thing… no more victims. You seem to realize that the system we have now does not help in that regard even in the slightest and actually has the potential to make it worse. The registry is against everything this country stands for as well.

          • GQ4U

            Thanks for your level headed comment. I use opponent because reply’s to my posts have been overwhelmingly negative and even include threats of death.

          • antiestablismentarianism

            Emotional judgments are what caused the mess that is the registry in the first place and I particularly don’t condone it when “advocates for reform” such as myself start using emotional judgments for their position. Intelligent, analytical, and critical thinking is how you get things done, not with hatred. I apologize for any discomfort caused to you by any of my fellow advocates.

          • GQ4U

            Thanks for the apology but its not necessary to apologize for the actions of others. I believe every pot must rest on its own bottom and take the heat.

          • GQ4U

            What enumerated right are you talking about?

            There are unalienable rights and their are statutory rights. Statutes grant certain rights to some victims of certain crimes.

          • Laws once granted the right to own slaves. Even the Bible says just because something is legal does not mean it is right. Hell, I feel there should be a registry of alleged victims so I know who I’m dating. i don’t want to date a professional victim.

          • GQ4U

            Slavery was once legal in the USA and legislation made it illegal. Change the SOR through legislation but don’t forget the position of the victims of these heinous crimes in the process.

            I feel there should be a registry for a$$-wholes because I can’t stand them.

          • Your status as a “parent of an assaulted child” simply proves your bias. The registry is simply supported by your thirst for vengeance, which is not the intent of law. It is people like you that shows te need to abolish the registry.

          • GQ4U

            Hey jerk-off, I have never used the SOR because I tracked the abuser of my child by other means. The SOR exists for a reason. Its imperfect and needs to be modified but not eliminated.

          • The SOR exists as a tool for vigilante scumbags (like you) and nothing more. Slavery existed for a reason but it was still immoral.

          • antiestablismentarianism

            You state you are not for “witch hunts”, but that’s exactly what the public registry is. Tell me, exactly what benefit does a victim get by knowing where their attacker lives? Before you answer, let me point out that victims of crimes such as child pornography that have multiple attackers repeatedly have actually reported severe depression when they get a call from a prosecutor every couple of weeks because someone new was found with their abuse images. They have actually asked it to stop. Look up the victim impact statements of Kylie Freeman and her family, a consistent victim of this crime. Most victims want to move past their abuse and the system doesn’t let them with this policy. Also, most people spend only a few hours at home, so knowing where they live doesn’t tell you where they are all the time. So, again I ask you, why is it important for a victim to know where their offender lives?

          • Connie Kosuda

            try thinking about it.

          • antiestablismentarianism

            Connie, if just thinking about it gives you an obvious reason, then you must have an IQ of 180. You have consistently commented on this thread with falsehoods, myths, and incorrect beliefs and have not provided any evidence for anything you promote while others have debated intelligently and pointed out the multiple inaccuracies in your positions. At least GQ4U is attempting to find a solution because evidence has proven over 20 years that the public registry does not protect or serve anyone except politicians, media, and those who profit off of fear-mongering. Has it ever occurred to you that many advocates for reform are former victims themselves. The new CEO of an advocacy group in California used to be a victim counselor. Most psychologists, therapists, and other experts don’t support the registry. What’s your qualifications?

        • mamabearroars

          FACTS – Most children are molested by someone in the immediate family or close relative or someone close to the child.

          Most children are molested by heterosexuals.

          Pedophilia is a medical condition and does not mean they are going to molest a child. That condition means they have brain wiring that makes they have distorted sexual attraction to a child instead of an adult

          These horrible laws make these people find it very difficult to seek help for their mental illness. They are reported to the police now and have no privacy even though they may not have acted on their impulses. That does not make children safer or help them with their mental illness.

          Laws should not be considered by the …
          SACRED VICTIM INDUSTRY . …which has huge federal funds pumped into their non-profit organizations and has created new industries of the victims rights groups.

          So what stands behind this curtain that protects the Sacred Victim and puts hundreds of thousands behind bars many who may not even be guilty but are guilty by accusation.

          That is a crime and a new type of HOLOCAUST.

          • GQ4U

            Ya, ya, ya – blah, blah, blah.
            Talk about over-hyping your arguments.

            1. I don’t care if child molestation is committed by family members or not.

            2. I don’t care about the gender orientation of the sexual predator.

            3. Pedophilia is NOT a medical condition it is a mental derangement. Did Jeffry Dahmer have a medical condition? Even if he did wouldn’t you want to know if he lived in your neighborhood?

            4. I believe only the sexual predators who are convicted should be listed.

            5. Victim Industry??? If you or your child or your mom were raped and or preyed upon by a pedophile your views on victims would completely change. Victims are scarred and altered for life.

            6. Hopefully its rare that an innocent person is convicted of any crime.

            7. Holocaust!!! Really??? You can’t be serious in comparing the gassing, burning and mass burial of millions of innocent civilians to the circumstances a domestic sexual predator faces. To start with a sexual deviant gets a trial, gets a lawyer to mount a defense, and a jury to make an impartial decision based on evidence exhibited. Holocaust victims had no trial and certainly not an impartial jury.

            Sorry mama but you’re way off on this. As I stated many times the registry should not be online for public access and the public should only have access by a request to law enforcement for the data.

          • Michael Dasky

            Hopefully it is rare that an innocent person is convicted of a crime? Our legal system was founded with the phrase, better 10 guilty men go free than one innocent convicted. Most convictions are plea agreements, but when a trial comes up, it seems the burden is on the defendant, not the prosecution, and a good defense costs money. A defendant going to trial using a public defender should have the same resources available as the prosecution.

          • GQ4U

            Agreed.
            I believe the prosecution’s job is to seek justice not convictions. Sadly that is not often the case anymore.

          • Your bias is showing again. I have a challenge for you. Show me JUST ONE STATUTE where “pedophilia” is listed as a crime. Pedophilia is NOT a legal term but a medical term. You can be one without being a s*x offender. You can be an SO w/o being a pedophile.

            And yes, we have a victim industry.

            “We have what I think of as a victim industry in this country, and industry populated by Nancy Grace and Dr. Phil and Gloria Allred and all those who make money by manufacturing outrage. I’ve been part of it. If you spent years reading about yourself in the papers with the moniker ‘Sex Victim Girl,’ you’d have a lot to say about this issue, too. But for now I’ll leave it at this: It is wrong to ask people to feel like victims, because once they do, they feel like victims in every area of their lives. I made a decision: I wasn’t going to be a victim of anyone or for anyone. Not Roman, not the state of California, not the media. I wasn’t going to be defined by what is said about me or expected from me.” — Samantha Geimer, excerpt from her book, “The Girl: A Life in the Shadow of Roman Polanski.” (pgs. 9-10)

            But I guess Samantha Geimer isn’t a “real’ victim huh?

          • GQ4U

            Samantha Geimer is a victim, she chose to deal with it in a certain way as is her right.

            If you were sexually assaulted then you are a victim and nothing can change that. How you deal is your choice. It does seem your anger has prompted you to switch sides in support of the abuser and against other victims.

          • So? L:ots of folks experience life altering issues. a person can become homeless because of downsizing, natural disaster, even divorce, but no one expects that person to stay homeless. Instead, we expect that person to overcome it.

            My side is the side with the facts and figures in our favor. Your side relies on emotional appeals and blind prejudice. Don’t forget there are two sides to any argument and others can be just as passionate and angry. If anything, YOUR side is the side that has something to prove. If you can’t answer my challenge, there is no shame in admitting you are wrong.

          • GQ4U

            You have yet to present any challenge. Its obvious you are a self absorbed sexual deviant.

          • Connie Kosuda

            horse crap . – no one is being prevented from seeking help – they need to get professional help, certainly, and as with any addiction, learn to fight it and exercise self-control – and that would include in the woe – is – me teenage lad who excuses his own behavior with impunity.

        • RadioPaul1

          Yeah same here. One sibling molest another once and gets help 20 years ago and you can say “obviously you are not the parent of a molested child”. The problem with your position is that it generalizes everyone. “All blacks are rapist and all Jews are theifs”? Your anger at what happened to you is harming others. Crusading never helps

          • GQ4U

            I don’t generalize about blacks, Jews or sexual predators. It seems your bias is showing here, not mine. I simply point out that the victims of certain crimes suffer life long problems as a result of being preyed upon by a selfish deviant. I have very little sympathy for the sexual predator. If that’s hate, or anger then I would say you must have hate and anger for the innocent victims of these sex offenders.

          • People CHOOSE to remain victims and our society acts as enablers. Stop using the abuse excuse to justify being a vindictive prick.

          • Connie Kosuda

            don’t like being caught, eh?

          • You obviously don’t like reason and facts.

          • GQ4U

            Victims never chose to be victims. Your twisted views about sexual abuse clearly make you the prick in this exchange.

          • Once again, you are wrong. You choose to keep a lifelong crutch so when you become failure at life, you can blame someone else instead of owning up to your own mistakes. That makes YOU the prick, you prick.

          • GQ4U

            I’m wasting my time arguing with a pedophile so bye, bye perv.

        • ieee

          You can list them if you want but I guarantee you that if they want to commit a sex crime, they will find a way and the Registries do very, very little to make that more difficult. And further, everything about the Registries encourages completely anti-social behavior, including committing sex crimes. They are not smart in any way.

          • antiestablismentarianism

            This is a very valid point that a lot of people who support the registries fail to realize. A few months ago, they found a compliant registrant had a victim living in his back yard for years. The registry did nothing to protect that victim and by all registry standards, he was completely compliant even to the point of address checks at the front door while his victim was in the back.

          • ShellyStow

            Including the offenders. An attorney I know said that his clients with sex offense charges almost always say they would rather have more prison and no registry.

        • homeydclown

          Did the person who abused your child have a prior conviction of this kind? Would this registry have prevented your child’s abuse?

          • GQ4U

            Not a valid question. Once the abuse takes place and the abuser is found guilty then the pervert deserves what comes next. At least the abuser can know what will happen to them before committing the crime — the victims had no such pre warning of what would happen to them.

          • homeydclown

            Au contraire. Not only is it a valid question (which you have not answered), it is the ONLY pertinent question.

            No doubt you are aware that this registration requirement is NOT part of the criminal sentence – or what the ‘pervert’ (way to discuss objectively) has coming to them. If registration were part of the criminal sentence it would never fly. Surely you are aware of the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. If it were indeed part of the punishment (it is called civil while everyone who has lived with this for a week will tell you otherwise), it would immediately run afoul of the provision against Ex Post Facto Punishment and the Equal Protection Clause.

            According the SCOTUS registration is not a punishment but merely a civil consequence arising from a certain conviction. A civil consequence that states are able to impose in the the interest of public safety, and pubic safety only.

            So again – “Did the person who abused your child have a prior conviction of this kind? Would this registry have prevented your child’s abuse?”

          • GQ4U

            The Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act did not exist at the time of my child’s molestation.

            Ex Post Facto Punishment and the Equal Protection Clause is not violated by the SOR. The sentencing requires registration and its no more ex post facto than parole. The SOR in no way violates the 14th amendment’s ‘Equal Protection Under the Law’ provision because it applies equally too all citizens who are convicted of certain sexual offenses.

          • ShellyStow

            It is applied to citizens whose offenses occurred and punishment was completed many years before SORNA or Megan’s Law. Some state supreme courts have found the application of it in situations such as those to be a violation of ex post facto.

      • ShellyStow

        But the point here is that they are good neighbors because they are not on a public registry and do not have three strikes against them before they even start to bat.

        • Connie Kosuda

          that’s really defective reasoning, shelly , they are not ‘good neighbors’ because they are not on a public registry.

          on a registry or not does not establish that they are ‘good neighbors’ – they rarely are.

          • ShellyStow

            No, Connie, it is perfectly lucid reasoning. For registrants who are known as “sex offenders” from the beginning, they are seldom given the opportunity to be good neighbors. But for those who are on the registry but not publicly listed, they are living, as the article states, in their neighborhoods without anyone knowing of their past, so they are accepted for what they now are…people like anyone else, raising their families, living their lives. And…”they rarely are”? How many registrants do you know, Connie?

          • Connie Kosuda

            living without anyone knowing what they did does not make them a good neighbor / they are pedophiles / sexual predators / sexual deviants / pass it on.

          • ShellyStow

            Well, my dear, we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one. I do hope that if someone you care about ends up on the registry for childish play, college-boy stupidity, teen-age lust, or even something serious like rape or child molestation that they will have someone in their life to still love them no matter what they have done and support them when they have served their punishment and are desperate to be forgiven

    • GQ4U

      I have a problem with shielding pedophiles & use of force rapists under any circumstances. I do believe the registry should not be available on the internet for all to see, law enforcement should have it, but upon request any citizen can inquire about a person who behaves suspiciously to see if they have history as a pedophile or rapist who used force.

      • First let me say that pedophilia is not a crime. Acting on it is. But once a crime (sex or otherwise), we should believe in rehabilitation and reintegration as a normal end stage portion of our criminal justice system. Why punish people after they have completed their obligations to the state?

        Secondly, if you have been reading the many comments here, you would have discovered the frequently stated fact that Registered Citizens have very low re-offense rates – and that goes for the higher risk sex offenders (rapists, etc.) who as compared to general criminal re-offense rates are still low.

        Thirdly, do you really want to live in a Stasi-like police state where everybody watches everybody else? Do you care that our federal and state governments know more about us than we citizens do about them? Personally, I think privacy, fairness and justice go hand-in-hand. Which do we choose? A surveillance state or a democratic state?

        • GQ4U

          Domestic spying is wrong period, but tracking certain types of known criminals is not the same thing as generalized government snooping. Also, if you read my post again you will notice I DO NOT FAVOR internet access for the public. However, upon submitting a suspicious characters name to law enforcement, officials should be required to reveal if that person is registered or not.

          The online lists can do harm.

          • Government lists of some of its citizens is a dangerous path to go down. The government SOR list is the example discussed here. Recent history shows us the dangerousness of this: 1930s/40s Germany, 1940s Japanese Americans, 1950s Communists in the USA, 1940s/1950s LGBTQs, 2010 “Domestic Terrorists” (Muslims). Get the picture?

          • GQ4U

            Interring Southern sympathizers during the Civil War, and German Americans in WWI, and Japanese Americans in WWII, and listing communists and LGBT and Terror suspects is victimizing citizens who have not committed a crime and is wrong beyond measure. The TSA at our airports makes us all terror suspects and that’s also very wrong. Those are the willful acts of tyrants and oligarchs to control and subjugate the masses and is nothing like listing convicted criminals.

            You’re waving a false flag of protection for known sexual predators.

          • But why continue calling somebody a “criminal” if they have been released from prison or parole?

            Seems to me, criminals are those persons committing crimes that are yet to be apprehended and convicted and / or serving their prison time.

            Released citizens from prisons or parole are not criminals because the debt is paid and the peace between parties has been settled. They are again innocent citizens that will reintegrate back into society as equals among their peers. Isn’t that the way real justice works? Or do we allow ourselves to have varying classes of citizenship where group A is second class with some legal rights and group B has even fewer legal rights? Seems like a slippery slope to me. What about you?

          • GQ4U

            “…debt is paid and the peace between parties has been settled.”
            What BS, the victims of murder have no peace between parties, the victims of rape have no peace between parties, molested children have no peace between parties — and it is never, ever settled. Society sets standards and sometimes they get it wrong by being too lenient on certain types of criminals. I would lock many of them away for life and even then for the victims of these heinous acts it will never be settled — never.

          • I don’t buy the ‘sacred’ sex abuse victim argument because then the scales of justice are not longer balanced. The ‘sacred’ victim has more rights as the accuser then the supposedly constitutionally protected accused. What we give to the police and prosecutors to get the ‘bad’ guys are taken away from the other side of the justice balancing act.

            In a democratic society focused on fairness, equality and justice we must guard against special or elevated rights for “special groups” of citizens. This is proving to be very dangerous for the future of our criminal justice system.

            What’s next? “Sacred cops”? Oh, never mind. Law enforcement have already moved up and above the law when murdering innocent citizens. They are vigorously protected by state and county prosecutors and police unions.

            I say no special citizens. No sacred citizens. Everybody is equal UNDER the law.

          • GQ4U

            “I don’t buy the ‘sacred’ sex abuse victim argument because then the scales of justice are not longer balanced.” Total crap Tom.

            Part of the justice system punishment is the SOR so if its balance you seek in the law there you have it.

            “In a democratic society focused on fairness, equality and justice we must guard against special or elevated rights for “special groups” of citizens.”

            So you elevate the sexual predator’s needs above his prey — how nice. A conscience choice by those who have never been victimized. Sexual assault victims suffer a lifetime — in “Fairness” so should the predator.

          • Connie Kosuda

            well, most sexual predators were themselves the victims of sexual predators when they were young.

          • ShellyStow

            I wish you could convince the courts that the SOR is punishment. It would be gone tomorrow if you could do that.

          • GQ4U

            If I could convince the courts then convicted pedophiles and violent rapists would never get out of prison — never.

          • ShellyStow

            There are no convicted pedophiles. No one is convicted of pedophilia. It is not a legal term; it is a medical one. And many, many thousands are on the registry with a conviction of sexual assault of a child who never committed another offense. Some of them are barely-over-the-age teens who had a girlfriend or boyfriend under the age. Some got married and are raising their own children. I am not talking about repeat offenders. I am talking about people who, regardless of what they did, once punished, have lived totally law-abiding lives since. They make up the vast majority of those on the registry. Repeat offenders need sentences appropriate for their actions. All the others need to be left alone.

          • Connie Kosuda

            frankly, that’s sick, thomas. children who are the victims of sexual predators of any kind are indeed worthy of special protection by the law / as are the adult victims.

          • GQ4U

            Absolutely right Connie. Don’t let these sexual predator sympathizers tell you any different.

          • ShellyStow

            I’m sorry, but you are incorrect. Many treatment programs offer family reunification therapy. It must be desired by all parties involved to be used, and for those who choose it, it offers maximum benefits in healing for victims and for perpetrators. The idea that every victim is ruined for life is nonsense. Reputable victim advocacy organizations stress healing and recovery and, hopefully, forgiveness. Those who focus on vengeance and continued suffering are choosing, apparently, what seems right for them, but I assure you, many do not agree with that line of thinking.

          • GQ4U

            Vengeance is not the focus, its the emotional scarring, personality changes, reclusive, secretive, fear, post traumatic stress and quite often self loathing. Anger is so secondary that its hardly worth mentioning. This is caused by some pervert who imposes their will on others to fulfill some sick self satisfaction. You don’t understand this at all.

            Why are so protective of these life destroying sex perverts? They don’t deserve it – period.

          • ShellyStow

            I do understand as I have had family members so affected. Thankfully they were able to embrace forgiveness which led to healing and recovery. Victims don’t forgive for the sake of the perpetrator; they do it for themselves. And I will always protect the rights of those who did wrong and amended their ways and have never re-offended. I am not talking about repeat offenders; most on the registry, once punished, are not. And I fight against the current system because it does nothing for victims. It has nothing for victim services, re-entry initiatives for former offenders, or education and prevention initiatives, and these are what evidence shows makes society safer and will help prevent future victims.

          • Civil Rights First

            Well said!!!

          • Connie Kosuda

            puh leeze / pure nonsense / this is a trauma for life event / lack of self-esteem / victim mentality for decades , etc., do not ever diminish the harm done by these self indulgent sociopaths – no pass.

          • ShellyStow

            Connie, it is not a trauma for life event for everyone. You cannot say what it is for others. You have a right to your feelings, and I am sorry for your trauma, but most I know who are former victims do not feel that way.

          • Connie Kosuda

            well, “shelly” / how would you know it is not a ‘life event’ for everyone? I don’t think you give a hoot one way or the other / happily, I am not a victim of these violent perpetrators, but many are, and I believe your “former victims” are not based in reality / like you and most of the perps on this thread. they were caught, and it must have been one of the few times they were held to account for a heinous act – that’s the way it is – I’m glad they were caught and punished.

          • ShellyStow

            Because I know a fair number of people in the situation. In my family are two. In my organization are quite a few who were former victims and who advocate for the end of the public registry because it does nothing for public safety and does nothing for past victims or to prevent future one. Even Patty Wetterling has spoken out strongly against the public registry. I too am glad when those who commit abuse are charged and punished. And then I am glad when they embrace a law-abiding life. You say I cannot know how others feel, yet you seem certain that you do. I know only how people I directly know feel. Why have you become so angry, even rude? Surely we can disagree and still remain civil.

          • Connie Kosuda

            disgusting, shelly, truly disgusting. you want to play the oh the poor poor sexual predator game / not with me. Your ‘organization’ is an appalling waste of time, decency (whatever is left ) and humanity.

            Destroying the lives of men and women is not ok. they got caught / thank God.

            what’s the ‘rude ‘ b.s. on a board apparently dedicated to sympathy for sexual predators and pedophiles? now I call that rude.

            for shame.

            the public registry is necessary and warranted / period.

          • Arele

            I found this comment on an article in Michigan interesting: “I disagree with Shelly Stow. She is associated with the national organization RSOL (Reform Sex Offenders Law) which is an organization that was co-founded by Tom Reeves who founded the NAMBLA (North America Man/Boy Love Association). I just believe these organizations come to comment sections like this one to attempt to steer the narrative to their Sex Offender Advocacy rhetoric and dogma. All the legitimate studies and facts are provided by the Department of Justice and the recidivism rates are shocking and justify the concerns of society and the validity of the sex offender registries. The RSOL and NAMBLA try to counter the facts by citing psuedo-science that is nothing more than data dredging.”

          • ShellyStow

            And why did you not quote my reply? RSOL has no association or connection with NAMBLA. Sexual activity with children is a crime and should be punished. Our sex offender advocacy rhetoric and dogma is this: those who break the law should be punished through the courts. When court-ordered punishment is ended, we advocate for laws that facilitate rehabilitation and allow for law-abiding former offenders to live peacefully. The DOJ studies are indeed accurate, and if you can read them and come to the conclusion that sexual reoffense is shockingly high, then you do not know how to read a study or do not know the difference between general recidivism and sexual reoffense or both. We do not cite pseudo-science. There is not a valid scientific or academic study done that supports the use of public notification as aiding in public safety. Please visit our website or contact us through our website for more information. And thank you, Arele, for you interest in our advocacy.

          • ieee

            That person did not quote your reply because Registry Terrorists are not interested in facts. They believe in dreams and fantasies.

          • If it’s on the internet it must be true, eh, Arele? Next you’ll be posting Illuminati and Raptor Jesus stuff too.

          • Arele

            Seems like a pretty true assessment to me. If it quacks like a duck….

            Or should we take your internet word for it, oncefallendotcom?
            http://oncefallen.com/

          • ieee

            And the U.S. will continue to pay a very grave price because they have Registries. The Registries will continue to protect no one and cause grave harm. In reality.

            Pay more taxes.

          • You are the reason the registry ahould be abolished. Between you and GQ4U, there isn’t two brain cells to rub together.

            I’m still waiting on the first person to show me an actual statute showing me the crime of “pedophilia.”

          • ShellyStow

            Umm, no, I never said “poor, poor sex offender.” I don’t think in those terms.
            No, destroying the lives of anyone is not okay. I never said it was. Yes, I too am thankful they were caught. I want all who have been victims to report and for perpetrators to be punished, because roughly 95% of the time, that ends the offending for that specific perpetrator and it certainly ends it for that victim.
            No, the public registry is unnecessary. It serves no purpose. Public notification does not reduce re-offense or reduce child sexual abuse. It serves public safety not at all.

          • GQ4U

            I disagree — most are harmed for life.

          • Civil Rights First

            Most? Do you know most of the victims? Where is that empirical evidence?
            Empirical = based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.
            GQ I have a lot of respect for your stance and view. I appreciate your open mindedness in this very serious subject. While I agree many victims do carry the emotional scars with them for a very long time and yes some for life but I believe everyone has the power to heal if they choose to as I did. I only wish the government would funnel some of the millions they spend in continual punishment for SOR’s and the court cases defending it into treatment for victims and yes programs for the offender to help them reintegrate into society. When laws are passed making it nearly impossible for a convicted Sex offender to find housing, job, restricting who they can marry or where they can go it does nothing to ensure the safety of the people it is trying to protect. How does a list stop an offender for doing what ever they want? All it tells you is where they live and possibly in some states where they work. It does not tell you where they are every minute of every day.

          • homeydclown

            Where is the life long trauma for this ‘victim’?

            http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/12/23/63979.htm

            puh leeze.

          • Connie Kosuda

            no way in hell are they innocent citizens / they are sex offenders / for life. and folks who talk like you are actually a very good reason to KEEP these lists forever – predators / pedophiles don’t get how sick they are, and how likely they are to re-offend . They are in denial . They need intensive psychiatric help , they are sociopaths and /or psychopaths , narcissists, sex offenders, pedophiles / look it up. see if any bells go off.

          • ieee

            You are a douche bag / for life.

            Personally, I would rather have a Douche Bag Registry. Those are the people who I would like to be alerted to so that I can ostracize and avoid them.

          • GQ4U

            You would be first on the list ieee.

          • ieee

            I’m only a douche bag to Registry Terrorists. I’m very kind to anyone else.

          • GQ4U

            You are always a douche bag.

            You are a hater who opposes the first amendment of the US Constitution because you would eliminate free speech for anyone who doesn’t agree with you.

          • ieee

            You are wrong, as usual. In fact you are so wrong that I’ll just call you a liar.

            But anyway, I’m all for free speech. You can say whatever you like. It boils down to something very simple – there are people who do not act like Americans and don’t know what it means to be an American. The less of those people that we have in our country, the better off we are. I want them gone, that’s all.

            Pay more taxes for YOUR nanny big governments. And make sure you fund the rest of the Registries that need to be created.

          • GQ4U

            Death pretty much takes all rights away and you want death to all your opponents. Your position of support for sexual deviants is lost in your vile position on honest debate. Now do both side a favor and shut up.

          • ieee

            Go F yourself, liar.

            And pay for YOUR Nanny Big Governments. Maybe you can get them to pass a thousand more laws for you so you can get through life. Oh, help me NBG!!

          • GQ4U

            I’d F myself but then I’d be a sexual deviant and you would have to love me. I am too kind to do that to you.

          • Ironic coming from someone seeking to silence those of us who oppose the registry.

          • GQ4U

            Posting an opposing view is hardly an attempt to silence anyone. You on the other hand post nothing of substance — just insults and they have no other purpose than silence others.
            Come back when you an something intelligent to say. (I should never hear from you again)

          • Your lame attempt at an insult shows I was right about you. I asked you to prove to me pedophilia is a criminal statute and you could not answer my challenge. Just admit you were WRONG. It isn’t hard.

          • GQ4U

            I don’t need to prove anything. The law is on my side. Ha, ha, ha!!!

          • ShellyStow

            And do you agree that it is also on the side of Juan and of any others who have paid the court-ordered debt for a crime and have committed no more?

          • GQ4U

            Your question lacks detail so I will not be able to answer.

          • ShellyStow

            Fair enough. First, explain, if you will, what you mean by “the law is on your side.” Give a specific example, please, of how the law is on your side.

          • GQ4U

            By law the registry exists – therefore the law is on my side. That doesn’t mean I agree with it in its current form. My comment on this was made in response to the small minded rantings from “oncefallendotcom” who isn’t worth any detailed explanations.

          • You’d be the poster boy.

          • GQ4U

            I could never be on the same list as ieee or you so the douche bag list belongs to you guys.

          • I’d never e on a douchebag list, personally. I do a lot more to help the public than you, a typical internet troll, ever could. You are just mad because you got called out on your douchebaggery.

          • GQ4U

            You are the angry hater and mad — mad as in nuts, a wacko.

          • GQ4U

            You are correct Connie and these folks who stand up for people who intentionally went out of their way to inflict harm on others for self gratification are worthless members of our society. Protecting the guilty is unfathomable.

          • ShellyStow

            But our constitution and our legal system says they are no longer guilty. You would extend guilt and punishment beyond the justice system’s boundaries. They committed crimes. They were punished. If they do not commit any more crimes, they are entitled to the same protections as you. You are not able to judge the worth of others, especially people you do not know and of whose situations you do not know. You bear hatred toward someone specific, which is your right, but it is not your right to inflict it on others that you believe are similar, nor is it your right to extend punishment to the one you hate. Doing that crosses the line and makes you guilty.

          • GQ4U

            Total BS Shelly.
            The constitution is not violated by legislation that includes guidelines for punishment of crime. For sexual predators part of their sentence is to be placed on the SOR. They are never considered innocent again. Serving their time, including parole, is common for all convicts but “Paying their debt to society” doesn’t remove the guilty conviction moniker. A murder will always be a murder just as an alcoholic is always an alcoholic. And they remain so even though they may refrain from engaging in the activity again. The same is true for the sex predator.

          • homeydclown

            Oh but you are 100% mistaken. Being placed on the SOR is NOT part of the criminal sentence. It is a civil consequence of a criminal conviction that the State is able to place on the convict in the interest of public safety (completely debatable after 20-70 years of having the registry). If it were part of the sentence it would never pass constitutional muster.

            Any journalist worth their salt will report such person’s sentencing hearing as “xxx was sentenced to xxx time of incarceration, xxx time of probation and ORDERED to register as a s3x offender”. Surely you have noticed this phrasing.

            A murderer or thief of bank robber will always have a criminal conviction but never be treated as a current offender, as in the present tense. Coincidentally, many s3x offender have had their convictions expunged / dismissed / set aside / fulfilled their registration requirements, yet are still treated as guilty. When they have no criminal conviction.

          • GQ4U

            You do understand that a civil consequence is law. Statutes are valid law and the fact that we may disagree with any of them doesn’t make them NOT a law.

            You really are delusional.
            ” A murderer or thief of bank robber will always have a criminal
            conviction but never be treated as a current offender, as in the present
            tense” [homey]

            This is false and you know it. Convicted felons permanently lose rights & privileges all the time, like possessing guns, voting, job restrictions, drivers license, jury duty to name a few. Sexual predators also lose the right to privacy and restricted travel to certain foreign countries that choose not to allow them to visit or live there.

          • ShellyStow

            GQ, a person living in the community with a prior murder or theft conviction will never be told he cannot live within 1000 ft. of a school or park or, in some cases, a church. He will never be arrested if he goes to his child’s school for parent day. He will never be told that he cannot put a jack-o-lantern in his window at Halloween or, in some jurisdictions, a Christmas wreath on his front door. These policies vary state by state and sometimes county by county. Most states restore voting and jury privileges once supervision is ended to all. The ban on firearms is the only one of which I am aware that is uniform across the board for any felony conviction.

          • ShellyStow

            And, I will add, he will not be hunted down by someone he doesn’t know and shot because his vigilante killer was using the SOR as a hit list and a road map to facilitate his murder spree.

          • ShellyStow

            Wrong, as homey says. Registration is not part of punishment. Courts are beginning to declare parts of registration unconstitutional in certain situations. As this trend continues, more and more will realize that it violates ex-post facto in many cases and specific constitutional protections in others.

          • Civil Rights First

            Shelly, if you read most of GQ’s post he is on the fence about registries. I think if handled with kid gloves he/she can see more of the wrongs of the registries than the ‘good’ they supposedly do.

          • GQ4U

            So do sex offenders volunteer to be on the list or is it imposed on them when they are found guilty? If its imposed then, right or wrong, its part of the punishment. I do believe the SOR law needs to be modified and likely 80% of the offenders should not be listed at all.

          • ShellyStow

            You definitely need to be on our side! Yes, it is imposed, and yes, of course, it is punishment. The problem is the Supreme Court has said it is not, so it continues to be imposed. That is starting to change some in the state courts though. Thank you for recognizing the danger of the public registry. 80% may be a little low. I’ve read several studies where the number of those considered dangerous by their law enforcement entity comes in at around 10%.

          • I think the only ones here in a state of denial is you, GQ4U, and the other victim industry apologists who have yet to show a single statistical fact. Just face it, you LOST this round.

          • Connie Kosuda

            thomas / I do not understand the basis for your rabid defense of sex offenders and pedophiles, but I can guess.

          • GQ4U

            I was thinking the same thing.

          • Michael Dasky

            Maybe civil liberties. I love how people jump to conclusions here. Objection, your honor, assumes facts not in evidence.

          • GQ4U

            Certain criminal convictions include the loss of certain civil liberties and certain constitutional rights.

          • Arele

            Connie you may be right – there is a Tom Madison who is a registered sex offender in Gresham who is an activist against sex offender registries. http://www.oregonlive.com/sexoffenders/special-presentation/

          • Connie Kosuda

            thanks for the verification! that’s what they do.

        • Connie Kosuda

          pedophiles / sex offenders have a high incidence of re offense /

          they are the bearers of a lifelong condition and as such it is necessary for neighbors to know who is amongst them . in order for children to be protected.

          • Civil Rights First

            Where do you get that from? What Statistics? Where? Can you show me? Please? I would be very interested in this.

          • Connie Kosuda

            http://www.bjs.gov/content/reentry/recidivism.cfm

            good study / look for more on “Google”.

          • Civil Rights First

            Connie…. You said, “pedophiles / sex offenders have a high incidence of re offense /” I asked you for where you got that statistic and you gave the site above.. what a waste of my time. No where on that site does it break it down to Sex Offender. Get your facts straight before you say anything that isn’t true. This is a serious subject that should be discussed based upon facts not fear. People like you are the reason many of these laws exist.

          • Connie Kosuda

            I should hope to shout – thanks.

          • Civil Rights First

            so you like being an uneducated uninformed idiot. you just don’t get the facts…. what a shame to be so blind and ignorant

          • ShellyStow

            This should be the correct link: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsorp94.pdf
            This is the pertinent passage: “Within 3 years following their 1994 state prison release, 5.3 percent of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today….Sex offenders were less likely than non-sex offenders to be rearrested for any offense…” That is, of course, an average. The rates vary among the different sub-categories. What is interesting, though, is that incest abusers, which account for at least half of the child molestation cases, have some of the lowest re-offense rates.

          • Michael Dasky

            This did not list sex offenses, only violent offenses. So do you agree then if someone does not reoffend after 3 years, then no registry anymore, how about 5, 10, or 15 years. Eventually the disease is cured. Just because we do not know the cure does not mean there is none. Don’t even say prison is a cure, it is a treatment.

          • ShellyStow

            First, Connie, pedophile and sex offender are not synonyms. Pedophilia is a medical term, not a legal one. No one is convicted of pedophilia; they are convicted of the act, child molestation. And many who have pedophilia have never committed it.
            Secondly, the re-offense rate for sex offenders in general is extremely low, lower than for any other crime but murder. The only sex offenders who have relatively high re-offense rates are those who choose for victims strangers who are most likely of the same sex as themselves and who tend to use violence with their victims. These are the guys for whom the registry was created. They are extremely rare…by far the exception rather than the norm. Research evidence shows that nothing about the public registry system protects children from sexual harm. Virtually all sexual crime against children is committed by those in their family and social circles. Before you continue engaging in this discussion, you want to do some reading and a little research and at least learn the basic facts about the topic.

          • Connie Kosuda

            thanks Shelly / the conversation has taken a bunch of threads with the shield the rapist crowd – with a sense of entitlement, these predators and their shills do damage for decades / that’s the point..

          • GQ4U

            Not all child molestation is done by a pedophile. For instance, I do not believe a 19 year old having consensual sex with a 17 year old makes the adult a pedophile. To speak of convictions for acts of pedophilia is to differentiate the teen sex partners from the deviant who has wet dreams about molesting a 10 year old then acts upon them.

          • ShellyStow

            Pedophilia doesn’t even apply to teenagers. Textbook definition of pedophile: one who has a primary sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children. You cannot correctly speak of convictions for pedophilia because no one is charged with pedophilia. They are charged with the act they commit. Pedophilia is not a crime. The act of child molestation is.

          • GQ4U

            “Pedophilia doesn’t even apply to teenagers.”
            It applies to 18 & 19 year old adult teens.

            Pedophilia is an “abnormal & unnatural attraction” to prepubescent children classified as a mental disorder. In the context of this thread it is being used to describe a particular type of deviant child molester. The ones who prey on the weakest and most innocent among us.

            You can parse words all you want but that will never justify their heinous acts. All pedophiles are disgusting and those who act upon their freak nature deserve no sympathy and they will get none from me.

          • ShellyStow

            I’m not trying to justify any criminal acts. All I am trying to do is be factual and accurate. Calling a person who has a sexual relationship with a willing teenager a pedophile is inaccurate. If the age difference is such and his state laws are such that he is committing a criminal act in doing so, then he should be appropriately punished for his criminal act. But he is still not a pedophile. If the teenager is not willing, then he is a rapist and should be prosecuted as a rapist, but he is still not a pedophile. And I rather doubt than any of the persons of whom you speak would want any sympathy from you.

          • GQ4U

            An apparent miscommunication — I thought you were claiming a teenager could not be a pedophile.

          • ShellyStow

            I thought I had said this, but…yes, I realized when I read over what I wrote that it could be easily misinterpreted. I believe that there is an age difference given that must be present before the diagnosis is considered for juvenile offenders. According to research by Human Rights Watch, most juvenile offending is exploratory in nature, not predatory. And you do know, I assume, that many who sexually offend against children and teens, even older adults, do not have pedophilia? That is what makes this so complex; there is no one-size-fits-all for any of it. And too many people just can’t wrap their brain around too much complexity. That does not appear to describe you, though, and thank you for that.

          • GQ4U

            It is a complex situation and I do ‘mostly’ understand it. When I use the term pedophile it is to refer to children who have been sexually abused but I know that’s too general in nature.
            As for the tracking of sex offenders I believe it should not be on the internet and it should only include offense where harm was done to another. I see no reason to ruin someone’s life for urinating in public, or for teen lovers where one is over 18 and the other is not, or a college kid streaking on the football field, or some street flasher. These folks should have never been on the SOR in the first place. Other sex offenses should have a sunset provision based on the severity of harm done.

          • GQ4U

            Pedophiles don’t seek sympathy they seek secrecy.

          • disqus_d6wGIf0gU6

            Your information is incorrect.

          • Connie Kosuda

            wow / try reading it this time .

          • Civil Rights First

            open your link and do a key word search…. alt + f to do a search… type in the word sex… ZERO results.. NO WHERE in that does it mention sex offender… try again

          • Michael Dasky

            What is the threshold for a high incidence of re offense? Who makes that judgement? I believe in the registry for multiple offenses.

        • HeebsDweebs

          You stated. “Secondly, if you have been reading the many comments here, you would
          have discovered the frequently stated fact that Registered Citizens have
          very low re-offense rates – and that goes for the higher risk sex
          offenders (rapists, etc.) who as compared to general criminal re-offense
          rates are still low.”

          Then doesn’t that mean that registering child molesters works?

      • antiestablismentarianism

        This is part of the problem. Let’s say you as a citizen inquired about someone acting suspicious or shifty and they weren’t on the registry. Would you just let it go at that point? Over 95% of new sex crimes are first timers. The registry is nothing but slight of hand saying “look over here” while the real crime is happening over there. We as a society need to learn to be more vigilant on all people and maybe, just maybe, more crimes will be prevented in the first place. We need to be more proactive rather than reactive.

        • GQ4U

          “Would you just let it go at that point?”

          No, I would not. As a father who’s child was molested I am more vigilant than most about suspect behavior and an inquiry with law enforcement may help to substantiate my observations. If the person was not listed I would continue to monitor them for the protection of my family and my neighbors.

          Again, I do not favor online public access to the registry and I favor limitations on the time a person can be listed based on the severity of their predatory actions.

          • You said: “As a father who’s child was molested I am more vigilant than most
            about suspect behavior and an inquiry with law enforcement may help to
            substantiate my observations. If the person was not listed I would
            continue to monitor them for the protection of my family and my
            neighbors.”

            You are right: Vigilance is the key. You as a protective father would know that vetting any and all persons who might or do come into contact with your child would be on your radar. Teach your children to know and report any and all inappropriate touching or language.

            But regardless of the emotions that sex offending bring to society, we must gird our loins against advancing state power against a sub-group of people no matter how heinous they may seem to be.

          • GQ4U

            Sex offenses are not an emotional issue, they permanently alter the life of the victim and their family. You tune would change if, God forbid, your child, wife or mother is raped.

      • Connie Kosuda

        unsuspecting neighbors need to know right off the bat / in the time it takes to inquire based upon a suspicion lifelong damage can be inflicted upon an innocent / hence the need for lifelong warnings made public. these folks are dangerous / they are predators .

        • GQ4U

          I agree but would note the biggest threat is the predator that has not been discovered yet. Keep vigilant.

      • homeydclown

        Why? The only reason this is constitutional is in the name of public safety / prevention. If that is the case, why not include all criminals? Upon request, mind you.

        Plus, there is way more to this registration than public notification. It includes residency and presence restrictions, job restrictions, travel restriction, always having one foot in prison for neglecting to provide information that a convicted murderer is not required to.

        Why?

        • GQ4U

          For convicted pedophiles & use of force rapists I have no problem listing them and providing public access them upon request. They can add murderers, attempted murderers, drug dealers, and spousal abuse too. But I do believe the SOR includes crimes that it should not list.

          • Since pedophilia is not a crime, there is no such thing as a “convicted pedophile.”

          • GQ4U

            They were convicted for acting on their pedophiliac derangement.

            There is no such thing as death from smoking cigarettes but when its brought up everyone knows why — with the exception of you of course.

          • That’s your best retort? How weak. You still failed to provide an actual criminal statute. You are also committing a fatal error by assuming every registrant is acting on a “pedophiliac” urge. There are many individuals on the registry who would not meet thee clinical definition of pedophilia. Ever heard of a “situational offender?”

            Once again, you fail.

    • GQ4U

      Many sexual predators live undetected for decades. Criminals can be very skilled at blending into society — read about the Boston Strangler and what a nice neighbor & wonderful husband he was or check out this recent Oregon story of Jeffrey Scott Bettman and his twenty history as child pornographer. Being clever doesn’t make them law abiding.

      http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2016/08/medford_gymnastics_coach_faces.html

      • People who commit crimes (sexual or other) should be held accountable. Who would disagree about that? Criminals should pay and when payment is complete, they become law-abiding citizens again. I think somebody once said that justice is that which resets the peace between parties. That’s a good one. That’s why the SOR law breaks the concept of real justice.

        • GQ4U

          I do believe the law needs to be changed. Online access needs to be stopped. Certain persons listed, like a 19 year old having consensual sex with a 17 year should not be listed and if they are it should be for a short limited time then removed.

          Pedophiles & use of force rapists should remain listed for life on a nonpublic list.

          • Connie Kosuda

            public does need to know, however, for its own protection , and the protection of the neighbors and their children. that’s the reason for the list.

          • ieee

            The public doesn’t need the hit list at all. I have neighbors who are not on the hit list (I presume, because I never read it). Do you think I trust them any more than someone on the hit list? Nope.

            I don’t let my children get molested by anyone. Whether they are on the hit list or not. Because I KNOW that the person who does attempt to molest my children is not going to be listed.

            So I don’t need a hit list at all. I can be kind and interact with ALL of my neighbors, including any family listed on the hit list, and my children won’t be molested.

            Good parents don’t need Registries. Bad parents will never be helped enough by them.

          • disqus_d6wGIf0gU6

            If they wish to know whether there is a sex offender living in their neighborhood they should be required to go to the police department of their city and request that information. People have been murdered because their name appears on the registry.

          • Michael Dasky

            That is a false sense of security. What about the person never caught, or the first offense. You need to carefully watch children, yet give them the freedom to grow. Very difficult in these times.

          • Connie Kosuda

            that’s correct – and as the injury is so horrendous, the lists help .

          • Michael Dasky

            I’m sorry, but I can’t intelligently discuss the injury aspect, as I was never a victim. Please forgive my description, but I see it more as emotional pain, not physical. I kind of equate it to the pain of losing a family member, but we get over it, life goes on. Please don’t call the PC police on me.

          • Connie Kosuda

            emotional , psychological, spiritual , physical pain – all are pain / some get over it / (being raped / molested / abused ) some do not.

          • It is their choice. Some people don’t get over suffering from other life tragedies such as a car wreck or tornado, but we don’t allow folks to use that as a crutch for the rest of their lives.

          • RadioPaul1

            I am glad to hear your reasoned response to the law neededing to be changed. Yes not all people or all crimes are the same. Thank you for being open to the idea of change.

          • Michael Dasky

            Agreed

          • homeydclown

            But wife beaters or child murderers should not be? Because they are not and no one – including you – seems to care.

          • GQ4U

            I would include spousal abuse, murderers & attempted murderers and I said as much already.

        • Connie Kosuda

          no / not really / because this is a noxious addiction which targets children, and as such, requires a warning.

          • Michael Dasky

            Like drug dealers hanging around places children gather? Maybe a registry for them too.

          • Connie Kosuda

            absolutely . although they are easier to spot / the sex predator is often wealthy, charming and a ‘pillar of the community.’

          • GQ4U

            Anyone who intentionally harms others, especially children, should be listed and subject to exposure as a public threat.

      • Wow, next you’ll be comparing registered citizens wit ISIS. Just how mentally ill are you?

        • GQ4U

          You need to work on your comprehension skills, they are sadly lacking. Its no wonder you support sex abuser’s with your limited acuity.

          • My comprehension skills > your comprehension skills. I’m a nationally known expert on the subject, you’re just an anonymous troll. I win, you lose. Take your weak troll game to 4chan or something.

          • GQ4U

            That’s laughable. If you’re the nationally known expert on perverts then your cause is in deep $hit.

    • Connie Kosuda

      rehabilitation is great / good for them

      as to the registry / that falls under a separate category called public information / so that the public may protect itself from these folks, rehabilitated or not, who engaged in such horrific behavior.

  • What we need is a public debate: Should Oregon be the first state to completely and utterly repeal the sex offender registration law? I wonder if KATU would cover that sort of debate?

  • New! Oregon 2018 Initiative #3: Repeal the Sex Offender Registration law. Signature gathers are organizing in their districts right now.

  • disqus_d6wGIf0gU6

    Proven fact, the registry does not work. I would love to see Oregon get rid of tbe registry. It would show the rest of the country that they are making laws based on reliable data and common sense. Kudos to Oregon.

    • ieee

      It would take a truly enlightened government to get rid of the Registries. I absolutely would not expect that. I think you can count on more stupidity. People living in the U.S. are not getting smarter or more sane.

  • All Sex Offender Registration (SOR) laws are a complete and utter
    FRAUD and HOAX on the citizens of this land. The facts have long been
    available that show it to be so. But facts in the face of the
    persecution of formerly convicted sex offenders (Registrants) do not
    matter. It doesn’t matter whether the argument to repeal the SOR law
    says that it is without any relevant underlying supporting facts, or
    that it ignores Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment constitutional
    considerations, or that it injures the Registrant’s innocent family
    members who live with him, or that the Registrant himself is denied an
    equal opportunity to employment and housing.

    The harsh fact is that Oregon’s SOR law (like all others) exists to feed and benefit the members of the iron rectangle of political power: The legal monopoly cartel, the political-class “tough-on-crime” careerists, the “news” media profiteers, and the cruelty-focused law enforcement psychopaths.

    • ieee

      Exactly right.

      And the SORs are not only hurting the families that are listed on them. They are having a grave effect on the U.S. overall. Really idiotic social policy. It like our overly large, huge nanny governments want to create terrorists right here in our own country. Good thing that the families who are listed on the SORs are, in general, good people.

      • GQ4U

        Families are not listed, the list consists of convicted sexual predators. Does the system need changes, yes but not complete elimination. The most heinous offenders could be locked away forever then the list may not be needed.

        • ieee

          You’re wrong. When a person in a home is listed, everyone there is. I’ve seen it too many times to count. Every single one of them is ostracized. The children are bullied, sometimes beaten. The list of what happens is literally endless.

          And THAT is the actual true effect of the Registries. In the meantime, they do absolutely nothing to even slightly hinder the person who is listed from committing any type of crime that he or she would like. The Registries encourage and promote them to strike back, in fact. And many do. Just take a look at actual reality and not the dreams of lying legislators.

          SORs are idiotic social policy and that is why no expert has ever supported them.

          • GQ4U

            I’m not wrong, family member names are not listed – ever.
            I say again, the registry should not be online for public access but made available to the public on a person by person request to law enforcement.

            Sorry the families are victimized along with their predatory family member. Guilt by association is never right — but neither is sexual assault and the victims should have the right to know if their attacker is nearby or not. It is not uncommon for women to be raped by the same man twice and sometimes years apart.

          • ieee

            Lord, please don’t be so literal. Of course the family member names are not listed. Not even our moronic criminal governments would be that stupid and criminal.

            My point is that the family is attacked. Children are attacked. And it’s unacceptable.

            There certainly should not be public Registries. Private Registries are at least a little debatable. But I personally don’t think they are nearly worth the effort. It doesn’t help a past victim to know if the man who raped her lives nearby or not. Do you think that a person who runs the risk of raping someone, and FRIGGING especially the SAME FRIGGING PERSON (with DNA and everything!), would not travel from a different state to do so? That’s just dreaming.

            And the last point is that no victim has a “right” to a Registry unless every victim, of every type of crime, does.

          • GQ4U

            Sexual abuse is unacceptable and the repercussions are solely owned by the sexual predator — they brought this on their family by their own actions. Of course the bleeding hearts among us are too foolish to understand that actions have consequences!!!

          • ieee

            No, they did not. There is no legitimate government that says “You have committed a crime and we’ll punish you for the rest of your life by putting your family in danger.” People can be punished without Registries. Every crime except for a sex crime is.

          • GQ4U

            Sorry, but the predator’s family is in danger because of the predator’s criminal acts, you need to blame predator who brought this onto themself and their family. Alcoholics & gamblers can harm their family greatly but you would blame distillers & casinos because you fail to accept the consequences of ones actions.

            If sex predators families are harmed that’s a separate crime that needs to be prosecuted and its the perpetrator’s fault not the SOR.

          • ieee

            Well, we aren’t talking about “predators”. We are talking about people who are listed on the SORs. And really, if you call them “predators” or “sex offenders” then I can legitimately call you liar and likely a bunch of other names.

            The people listed on the SORs did not put their family in danger. The SORs, lies, crimes, propaganda campaigns, and witch hunt run by criminal governments did that. And supposedly all that is for “public safety” but obviously that is a lie because they can’t even take the most basic step of Registry all people who have committed crimes.

            It doesn’t do a bit of good for people to know where a past offender lives. The research on that is clear. And there aren’t any Americans who support criminal governments keeping a list of people to whom they can continually add, ex-post facto, new requirements/restrictions/harassment/punishment any time they feel like it.

            So sorry, people who support the Registries are not Americans. They are harassing terrorists who cannot mind their own business and who think it is acceptable to harass families for decades and lower the quality of their lives. So I am going to do the same to them.

          • GQ4U

            So there are no sexual predators on the SOR?
            Sorry sweetie but that’s not true.

            I understand that you believe anyone who doesn’t agree with you is somehow un-American and deserves harassment, punishment, exile or even put to death. That’s not very American at all.

          • disqus_d6wGIf0gU6

            There are sexual predators on the registry however not everyone listed on the registry is a sexual predator. In some states everyone who has committed a sex crime is considered a sexual predator.

          • ieee

            GQ4U is not so bright. I wouldn’t worry about it.

            There are plenty of sexual predators who are not listed on the Registry. BFD. GQ4U misrepresents most things that people say.

          • GQ4U

            I agree. Upwards of 80% should not be on the list because they are not sexual predators.

          • ieee

            You aren’t very bright, are you? I didn’t say anything like that. And great job avoiding everything that I did say. So never mind all that.

            And it’s got nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with me. It has to do with whether or not you know what it means to be an American or not. Americans don’t support big government keeping lists of people to whom they can add restrictions/harassment/punishment/whatever to at any time that their tiny brains get a whim. And that is just one simple example. There’s really no debate at all about it.

          • GQ4U

            You don’t know my position on the SOR and its many failings and abuses. Read my posts in this thread to understand where I stand. Then you can apologize.

          • GQ4U

            I think the victim of a sexual predator has a right to know where their attacker is at any given time in any given state in the USA.

            You protest against the victims who were going about their lives with no thought of harming another person. You should protest against a predator who fantasizes, plans and takes action to harm their prey — they are truly unjustified an untrustworthy.

            Also, it’s their actions that brought harm to their own family, however the outsiders committing the harm are still guilty and should be jailed for their crime.

          • disqus_d6wGIf0gU6

            You do know some family members as well as the registrant have been murdered don’t you?

          • GQ4U

            In those cases the perpetrator should be arrested and tried accordingly. Again this stems from the original actions of sex predator.

          • ieee

            No one cares about the spouses or children of people who are listed on the SORs. Which is why all people who support the SORs should be attacked by any and all means that are legal. Every day.

          • Connie Kosuda

            you know that’s b.s. too, right?

          • ieee

            I’m sorry that you have such a difficult time with reality. Go F yourself. Don’t want your kind in my country.

          • GQ4U

            You claim victims of sexual predators harbor anger and then retaliate against the sexual predator but where does your deep seeded hate come from?

          • ieee

            You said to me, “You claim victims of sexual predators harbor anger and then retaliate against the sexual predator but where does your deep seeded hate come from?”

            I did not claim that. But victims should be angry at whomever victimized them and they should expect justice. That has nothing to do with the idiotic Sex Offender Registries (SORs).

            Zealots of the SORs destroyed any hope at all that the SORs could be American, just, or useful. Any hope. If they had merely used the SORs as it was originally lied that they would be – to inform people – then they possibly, maybe could have been acceptable. But what they turned into is not acceptable to any American. And anyone who disagrees with that is not an American and deserves a bullet between the eyes.

            The other main thing that shot all the credibility of the SORs is that there are no excuses that there are not a hundred other national, public Registries, along with all the BS, anti-factual laws that came from the SORs.

            Lastly, my deep hatred comes from the SORs. And I will use it to attack people who support the SORs who are enemies of America. I will make that hatred matter. I won’t sit around and write on blogs all day. I take action and will continue to do so.

          • GQ4U

            “And anyone who disagrees with that is not an American and deserves a bullet between the eyes.”

            So now I am un-American and you would have me shot in the head for holding a different opinion than yours. Sorry sweetie but that’s not an American position but is in line with many third world dictatorships and theocracies like Islam. Perhaps you should get out of my country along with anyone who agrees with you.

            I now understand clearly why you protect predators who willfully harm others — its because you are one of them. Don’t bother posting your vile garbage anymore — you are not worth hearing from.

            Good bye & good riddance.

          • ieee

            Do you have any sense? My problem with you is not that you have a different opinion than I do. It is that I believe you support the idiotic, worse-than-worthless, immoral, un-American SORs. I don’t think that informed, intelligent, good people do that. So maybe you are just misinformed, I don’t know.

            But yes, I would love to see all people who support the SORs get out of America. It would be such a better place. And since I don’t think the people who support the SORs are really people, I don’t care how they get out.

          • GQ4U

            Your problem is my opinion and lying to yourself won’t change that.

        • disqus_d6wGIf0gU6

          However, if you are part of the family leaving at the address listed on the registry, you are also at risk.

          • GQ4U

            And who’s fault is that?

    • Michael Dasky

      The real fraud with the registry is that it is not considered a punishment. Ex-offenders that were convicted before these rules took effect are still subject to them, to get around the ex post facto rule.

      • Civil Rights First
        • Michael Dasky

          Find something like that for NJ and it will be helpful.

        • Connie Kosuda

          page still ‘can not be found’

          • Civil Rights First

            Don’t know what to tell you they work when I click on them. And I highly doubt you would read them with an open mind anyway. You would probably want the judges in those cases disbarred

      • Connie Kosuda

        the registry goes along with the crime / I’m sure you all had this explained to you.

        • Michael Dasky

          Not talking about me, there is a case I’m aware of that a man was convicted before the law came into effect, therefore no explanation waa possible. Since he was in prison at the time the law was enacted, he is subject to notification and registration requirements, but not the lifetime parole. I still believe this to be unjust, we must follow the laws, but they must not be retroactive.

          • ieee

            There is not one single American who thinks that is acceptable. If there are people living in the U.S. who think it is, F them, they are not my fellow Americans, and I don’t rip what happens to them. Hopefully the terrorists will get them.

        • Michael Dasky

          And this hits close to home since he is a member of my family. That is why I know the details so well.

        • disqus_d6wGIf0gU6

          The registry never ends.

          • GQ4U

            Perhaps the registry should never end. Perhaps sex crimes can be specifically categorized and the less heinous predators could have a sunset provision so their names are eventually removed.

  • thevillageidiot

    I think we should also repeal all the stupid gun control laws for the same reasons. they entrap innocent people trying to do the right thing and little to catch or prevent criminal activity.

    • Connie Kosuda

      yes, village idiot / not at all.

  • HBguy

    Of course Oregon has lifelong registration, while most other states have a period of registration. Oregon also has a lot of conviction types that require registration.
    19 year old boyfriend and 15 year old girlfriend having consensual sex? Boy has to register for life as Sex offender for life.
    Public safety could be improved if we reduced the number of registratable offenses, or at least gave the Judge the discretion in some of these cases to determine if registration is required and for how long.
    Because then we could let law enforcement focus on the predators.
    Also, that 19 y/o that registered can tell everyone that he had to do so because he got caught with a 15 year old girlfriend, when the truth may be that he was convicted of something much worse.
    I actually knew of a case exactly like that. 32 y/o man moves in with girlfriend and her 7 year old daughter. He tells girlfriend that he has to register because of a 15 year old girlfriend when he was 20 y/o. The truth was, he had raped a 6 year old girl in another state and had served 10 years in prison, no early release, because he refused sex offendor treatment.
    The truth was revealed when he was arrested for trying to lure a young girl into a bathroom at a local store.
    We should NOT get rid of the registration. We should focus on predatory sex offendors and chronic offendors and hold them strictly liable

    • You’d think after 20 years of having a registry, people would understand there is no possible way to separate the threats from the non-threats. After all, the registry began as a list of only those folks felt was high risk, and it barely took two years to turn it into the mess it is now. The registry will never truly differentiate between the 18 year old with a 15 year old girlfriend and the 18 year old rapist of a 15 year old.

      • Connie Kosuda

        below the age of consent = no consent = sex crime / get it? as if they didn’t know!

        • What you seem to have a hard time understanding is that a previously issued criminal penalty was fulfilled. When a sentence is complete, why have laws that keep these government blacklisted people from becoming productive citizens again. You should focus on the question: How do we stop future sex crimes from happening. Answer: Educate parents about the fact that most sex abuse happens in the family by a first-time somebody already known to the child. Extremely rarely does a registered citizen sexually abuse any child – especially a stranger child to him.

          • Connie Kosuda

            always curious when this many law n order folks get on the side of the criminals / this is a repeat offender demographic / it is a form of addiction / I choose not to blame the victims / and excuse the predators. Child sex predators troll the internet looking for ‘dates’, ya know?

          • 1. Citizens that have paid their debts for previous wrong doing are not criminals.

            2. Registered Citizens have very low rates of re-offending as proven by the many federal and state recidivism studies over the last 25 years.

            3. The political play of the sacred victim of sexual abuse gave rise to the trampling of the Constitutional rights of pre- and post- criminal justice Americans that might be ever be accused of a crime. The victims’ rights indu$try make for big profit$ for the ‘Just-Us’ Legal Cartel.

            4. “Child sex predators troll the internet looking for ‘dates’, ya know?” —- Maybe some people do but very few of them are Registered Citizens who have long since learned their lesson.

            5. Please consider signing the Initiative #3 (Oregon 2018) to “Repeal the Sex Offender Registration law” when you get a chance. We are getting organized and will be on a street near you soon.

          • Connie Kosuda

            I guess you’re sorry / that you got caught /

            I’m very happy you were.

          • Can I still count on you to help collect signatures for the 2018 Initiative #3 to Repeal the Sex Offender Registration Law here in Oregon? You seem very energetic. Where should I mail these signature sheets? To your home or office?

          • rightandwrong

            You are completely wrong about recidivism. In California it’s 1.8% PER THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. Yes 1% of sex offenders have a mental disorder like you mention..1% of nearly 1 million on the list. Connie stop watching To Catch a Predator and Nancy Grace. You want REAL info start here. I will start you with a fact: “About 95% of solved sex crimes are committed by individuals never previously identified as sex offenders and so not registered.”
            http://www.casomb.org/docs/Tiering%20Background%20Paper%20FINAL%20FINAL%204-2-14.pdf

          • mamabearroars

            When you hear about sex offense issue do you just react and decide that your emotional reaction is more accurate that academic and scholarly studies?

            This would be when people rule instead of the instead of the rule of law. This is the type of thinking that hung many young black men in the South during the 50’s.

            When society crumbles it brings the uneducated out in mobs with clubs which is what Jacks Boots and Brown Shirts represent. With the crisis we have in this country and blind ignorance that is at a critical level today from the addiction to the zombie box and reading tabloid newspapers disguised as informative journalism and never questioning this powerful source of information is a huge contribution to our failing country.

            No one can know everything, but everyone has the ability to question everything. Sometimes what you thought was true turns out to be totaling wrong.

            Most people that think the registry is great and that punishment is never severe enough usually has gossip anecdotal stories to tell, but never have they research the issues.

            Just hope that this police state we live under does not nab you for some trumped up charges. Will you hope that the laws work they way they should?

            History shows us that when one group is separated out from society it does spread to others and eventually you will also suffer under that type of poorly thought out, cruel and unfair extended punishment that goes against our own precious US Constitution.

            To bad we do not have the kind of people elected to office that could take issues seriously and honestly.

            Now all the elected politicians think about is getting re-elected so they can get that good seat in the restaurant.

            Take a simple test on our criminal justice system, just spend a day in traffic court and watch the way people are treated and the outrageous fines they have to pay. Why? Because that is what our justice system and police department are designed for now.

            Profits…….. Profits………… Profits.

          • Connie Kosuda

            so a ‘female’ is chiming in in favor of the sex offender ? kinda creepy /

          • Your opinion = nothing. Proof or GTFO.

          • Connie Kosuda

            wow – you are way off – the onus falls upon parents / and what exactly does the convicted sexual offender have to do to prevent his or her own criminal behavioral tendency from occurring again ???

        • ShellyStow

          Connie, the difference is the threat to society. The girlfriend-boyfriend situation has no element of anyone being a potential danger. And for no one is a public registry appropriate because there is no evidence supporting public notification as a deterrent to re-offense or an aid to public safety.

          • Connie Kosuda

            sex offenders routinely re-offend / it is the nature of the beast / the threat and danger is to underage children, in the case you reference above, if that is what the sex offender is drawn to / it is a danger and a threat to that demographic. do not minimize the harm done to these children. I do not excuse this particularly egregious form of child abuse. , and I do not excuse the abuser.

          • Les Mis Life

            Violent rapists of women and pedophiles attracted to boys are the subgroups with the highest rates of reoffense. By lumping everyone together like you want to do, you are actually ruining your own argument of saying that they all are like that/ always will be like that/ all victims suffer egregious harm.

          • Connie Kosuda

            all victims do suffer egregious harm, in that you are correct . only that. and all rape is an act of violence . this is a predatory category / these offenders have an addiction / are sociopaths without conscience or remorse / blame the victim / and believe in their own innocence.

          • Les Mis Life

            They say you can’t argue with a zealot or a fool, so I guess neither of us will get anywhere with this conversation since you don’t have any room for facts or reason in your opinion.
            If you don’t see the difference between a high school girl wanting to have a college-aged boyfriend and a toddler or child who is forcibly abused/raped, then I’m glad that you’re not making laws and instead are raising awareness by articulating your side’s positions.

          • ieee

            The vast majority of people in the U.S. are self-entitled fools. Our country is not getting smarter.

          • antiestablismentarianism

            You are completely wrong from your first sentence. You are also severely outnumbered in this thread. They DO NOT routinely re-offend and I challenge you to prove me otherwise. Sex offenders actually have the lowest re-offense rate in the country other than murderers. Nobody is asking society to “excuse” the abuser, just to follow the constitution and use fact based laws instead of emotional judgments like yours to promote true public safety. It’s interesting that Oregon actually has one of the lowest re-offense rates in the country as well but this author didn’t want to mention that.

          • Connie Kosuda

            I realize this is shaping up to be the sex offender club ‘thread’ / very enlightening / that would explain a great deal as to the ‘value’ of your ‘stances’ on other topics as well. zero.

          • antiestablismentarianism

            You don’t know me or anything about me other than my comments here. You sound like a toddler stomping your foot going, “NO!” Until you can speak intelligently and critically, I refuse to engage with stupid.

          • ieee

            Experts have never supported the SORs and never will. Just take a quick look at who does. That is all intelligent people need to know.

          • Civil Rights First

            you are an idiot!!! you ignore all the facts. You won’t ever have an open mind. if the Registry was police info only and people had to go to the police station to look up offenders in their neighborhoods that would be one thing. Bottom line you need to read and read and read. Look up EX-Post-Facto… Punished after the fact… At no time do people loose their constitutional rights.

          • You aren’t using backslashes properly. Also, your assumption about high reoffense rates have been debunked. Try again.

        • One problem with your equation is you are assuming every registered citizen abused a child. Thus, you are 100% WRONG. You failed.

    • Connie Kosuda

      a 15 year old can not give consent, hence, the sex crime conviction .

      who are you boys trying to protect anyway? anyone we know?

      • HBguy

        We’re concerned about people like possibly your son, or brother or cousin, who may be 18 and get involved with a 15 year old high school classmate. Get convicted of a misdemeanor statutory rape or sodomy and have to register for the rest of his life as a sex offender. Won’t get into college. Can’t get a decent job, or rent an apartment or home in a decent neighborhood.
        If you review what I said above, you’d see that I don’t think we need to eliminate the registration requirement. Lets assure its for predatory sex offenders and give judges, who are in the best position to know if a defendant fits the bill, make the determination.

        • Connie Kosuda

          a sex offender is a sex offender is a sex offender.

          if it is your relative, let them know about the age of consent. so simple.

          • j.d.

            sure about that? a sex offender can even be your kid, peeing on the corner when your car breaks down and no bathroom in site.(california)registers for at least 10 years to life?. a 15 year old can have sex with a 15 year old legally, she sends him a nude picture or visa versa, of themself, they are the victim and they get charged as the offender for pictures of their body. How is any of that justice, just sounds like something they want in place to pad their pockets more. Adam Walsh was put in place because John Walsh, John Walsh is a sex offender not on the list, he admitted to sleeping with an underage girl, he admitted it on video. Look at him he has never re offended, infact he’s a tv star and all you sheep watch him let him and let him manipulate/brainwash you and go after people like himself. there are now 3-4 diffrent registrys they want to register 99% of the usa, as of now we have the sex offender list, child abuse list, terrorist list, I heard even a dwi list. these are just the tests group. these guys want everyone on the list. while they do the same thing and dont face any consequences

          • Connie Kosuda

            reading the remarks here in opposition are making the case for the lists more and more clear.

            keep the lists / it’s really not in the best interests of society for children to be having sex with slightly older children. with sex comes responsibilities / it is not a game.

          • antiestablismentarianism

            So you think it’s in the best interest of society to let a person out of prison that committed a sex offense with nothing more than the clothes on his back and tell him to get a home (rental places deny SOs routinely), get a job (businesses don’t want to hire them or have their business listed on the registry), and provide for their family? The reality is that many end up jobless, homeless, and broke. Think critically here… Don’t you think at that point prison might seem like an attractive out? If so, what do you think they’re willing to do to get there? Eliminating registration, at least public registration, is in the best interest for society

          • ieee

            Don’t worry about Connie. Clearly not so bright.

          • Eric Blair

            Not all sex offenses are the same. There is a huge difference between in sex between a 15 year old and a 19 year old, and a pedophile who preys on prepubescent children. If you cannot see how they are worlds apart, I don’t know what to say.

      • homeydclown

        If a 15 year old is mature enough to form mens rea AND is mature enough to be prosecuted as an adult, then a 15 year old is mature enough to consent to willing and voluntary sexual conduct. It is the legislature that decides that a 15 year old or a 17 year old can not legally do so.

        • Connie Kosuda

          you would like that, wouldn’t you.

          too bad / the law IS formed by the legislature. go figure.

          • j.d.

            Law is formed by the Bankers, legislature hasen’t had say in decades. Trump told us that on tv even. wake up

          • I would agree that big money is behind much of what amount to as divide and conquer tactics. Why have the common people asking questions about the division of the economic pie for all to share in. The wealthy don’t want those kinds of questions on the political table. They want the popularization of second tier issues like abortion, religious freedom, environmental issues, LGBTQ[WTF] gender politics — but no questions about how big a bite from the economic pie that the 0.1% take from it (about 50%). Big banker cartels, ‘Just-Us’ legal cartels, prison-slavery cartels, etc. When in doubt, we say cui bono? Then just follow the bread crumbs.

          • homeydclown

            Yes. I truly would like sane and logical laws.

            The legislature is the body that decided that for decades African Americans had to sit in the back of the bus and could not drink out of certain drinking fountains. That women could not vote.

            THAT legislature. Go figure.

        • ieee

          Yep. Can’t treat them like adults only in some situations when we feel like it and not others. That whole “charged as an adult” BS is criminal.

      • Les Mis Life

        But it’s ok to try teens as adults and make them register for life?
        It seems the only people who are unable to change their thought patterns are the ones who refuse to see the difference between a dumb old boy and a dirty old man; the difference between hooking up at a party and a predator.
        Maybe someone is standing up for the family members of former offenders who live decent lives but have a Scarlet letter on their addresses; children who suffer needlessly at the hands of the state for the long-ago sins of the father, while demagogues claim it’s needed ‘for the children.’

        • freedomforall

          what if your level 3 , in Oregon and 30 years clean? I live in cali and they never get off , our family is always in danger , my son has been attacked by self appointed street law , we have been attacked every place we try to live , and its really hard to find a place to live and let live ,because no one will rent to, we cant even think about buying because we are always broke from the last move , or fine we have to pay because I try to protect my family and property ,cops don’t even care that I was attacked ,instead they jump me ,beat the hell out of me and say that I failed to take orders , take me to jail , leaving my wife to fear for her life as the guys that attacked me were right out side our door trashing our truck , folks will find out the hard way I guess , anyway , and as a side note we would be the best people you could ever ask for to live next door , we are good folks that love , not hate , put a fishing pole in my hand I am set to go , but harming my family for something 30 years ago , well lets just say not everyone is going to be so full of fear that things will not always go well for you , because the way I am forced to start looking at it is that we should have our own towns , to keep the so called normal people out , or should that be the big mouth finger pointers that have not yet been cot

          • ieee

            That is exactly what the Registries are for – harassment. I hope that you understand that the people who support the Registries are not your fellow U.S. citizens and they are not decent people. They are enemies who are attacking you. Treat them as such. Really. You need to create a good society for yourself and other good people. And treat the people who are not in it as enemies who are attacking you, your society, and your country. People use war to protect against attackers.

    • homeydclown

      Why should we then not do the same with all criminals?

      • ieee

        There are zero excuses not to. And since we don’t that is complete proof that the SORs are not REALLY for “public safety”, “protecting children”, or any of those other lies. The primary purpose of the SORs is harassment.

        • And with harassment also comes political persecution, oppression and vigilantism. Registered Citizens are sacrificed on the alter of the sacred victim of sexual abuse. Sacralization of any group puts that group of people above the law and the Constitution. They become precious and adorned. They must be given special rights that in some cases violates the accused person’s Due Process Rights or their right to cross-examine witnesses against them.

          Victims of sexual abuse are not and should not be given special rights that blocks the rights of those persons standing accused of sexual crimes.

    • mamabearroars

      Most of the time sex offender treatment is not necessary even though it as sold as needed. What exactly does it accomplish? Nothing. Absolutely nothing but more debt to someone that has paid their debt to society, has an almost impossible situation to get a job, Does not have to have a diagnosed mental illness, but a requirement as another kind of classifying of a person who previously committed a crime, What I do think should be required is that every elected male official should have to have a plethysmograph test before being sworn in to office. This should be required by State and Federal law.

  • DavidAppell

    Larry wrote:
    “Well, other than the ones who populate state and local government….”

    That is a really shitty sentence, Larry. You need a better outlet for your hatred and anger — writing here clearly isn’t doing it for you.

  • Connie Kosuda

    you might want to focus on ending child sex trafficking / which is rampant in both Portland and Seattle / and of course make sure all the big wigs get prosecuted, and CONVICTED with more than minimum sentences. let’s start with the trumpster.

    • Trafficking news stories I have read mostly deal with illegal labor trafficking and a sliver of that is sex trafficking. The sad part is that sex workers who want to be sex workers are often counted as sex trafficked victims. Child sex trafficking seems very overblown – mainly for “news” ratings and political careers purposes.

      • Connie Kosuda

        please don’t peddle that b.s. to me / sex workers do not WANT to be sex workers.

        all children are victims of sex trafficking / they cannot give consent / they are preyed upon by predators / often white men / ya know?

    • homeydclown

      Yes indeed. Preventing abuse as opposed to obsessing over those with a historic conviction would be very helpful.

  • The Equalizer

    I used to be involved in these treatment programs. Most sex offenders (93%) are already known to the victim, usually in the extended family. Only 7% offend again. The registry, in no practical way, stops any crime. It in fact keeps some from working, the very thing society has created, albeit unintentional, it is not a good idea for all the unemployment during the day! Bad idea to start, it should be tossed or limited to 5 years, or the sentences should be longer and no registry. It costs taxpayers millions of dollars.

    • Connie Kosuda

      source of your data?

  • Noemi

    So, Mr. Huss, explain how many of these so called “deviants”, “perverts”, and “predators” have gone on to commit another sex crime? Where are the statistics on that? Is it because most new sex crimes are committed by those NOT on the registry? Perhaps you should be more concerned with those not on the list. Registrants are the least of your problem. Perhaps abolish the list altogether because clearly it isn’t doing anything to prevent new sex crimes.

  • ieee

    There are zero Americans who support the Sex Offender Registries (SORs). Experts never have. Same with informed, intelligent people who are serious about preventing sex crimes, UNLESS they have something to gain from it (for example, money or votes).

    The SORs have some tiny, nearly negligible benefits. Which could possibly make them worthwhile if the negatives that they have, including more sex crimes and other crimes, were not just so outrageously huge. The SORs have bred millions of people who have complete disrespect and contempt for our criminal governments and their law enforcement criminals. And in actual reality, that has mattered a great deal and will continue to do so.

    People in the U.S. have very clearly proven that they cannot responsibly have and use Registries.

    People do not “have a right to know” about people who have committed sex crimes in the past. Because if they did, then we would all have that same right to know about anyone who has committed any crime in the past. Everyone has to be Registered or no one. There is no way that anyone with a brain can claim that a “sex offender” is dangerous and that people who shoot other people, break into their homes, etc. ad nauseam, are not.

    It is also unacceptable that so many laws, company policies, neighborhood policies, etc. ad nauseam, are just fine with anyone who has committed any crime, at any time, as long as the crime did not involve sex! That is unbelievable. For just one very simple example, everyone is fine with a person who actually shot a child with a gun, ON PURPOSE, just a year ago, to be living next to schools or going to parks with his/her family. But supposedly that same person would be just so outrageously dangerous if he/she had touched someone’s rear end two decades ago.

    The SORs are the latest, newest disgrace and stain on America.

    • Eric Blair

      Actually, unless a record is expunged, we do have a right to know who has been convicted of a crime.

      • ieee

        Surely you get the point, yes? Surely you are not comparing the ability of us being able to look up a criminal record to the Registries.

        There is no right to Registries and there are no legitimate excuses to have Registries for sex crimes and not hundreds, if not thousands and thousands (you know how many laws our big governments have!), of other crimes.

        • Eric Blair

          I am not comparing them… but the fact remains that is a private organization wanted to create a “registry” from conviction records, they could do so.

          Also, it is important to be clear in your meaning. If you mean that people convicted of other crimes are not required to register, then say so. Your short hand only created confusion where it didn’t need to exist.

          Your statement that people don’t have a right to know… was completely wrong. Please don’t get pissy with me if your writing was less than clear.

          • You said: “Your statement that people don’t have a right to know… was completely wrong.”

            I disagree. Anonymity is part and parcel of a democratic society. It’s also called privacy. People who have completed their criminal justice obligations should not be on a mandatory government shaming, humiliation, and police oriented blacklist such as the SOR law is being used (sound Orwellian doesn’t it?).

          • Eric Blair

            I wasn’t addressing what the law should be, but what it is… and you’re right. It’s not a right, that was bad phrasing on my part. It is, however, completely legal, and all convictions are accessible, except for some exceptions.

          • ieee

            There is a complete difference between being able to see criminal convictions (past information) and a Registry (present information). If you can’t understand that, there’s no hope.

          • Eric Blair

            It’s not how you presented your argument. And I did not acknowledge there is a difference. If you can’t admit to your imprecise writing, then there is no reason for further discussion.

          • ieee

            A private organization could not create a Registry. People who were convicted of murder or hundreds of other different crimes do not have to tell Nanny Big Government where they live, work, blah, blah, blah. So no Registry could possibly be created. We don’t know or care where past murderers live.

            I agree that sometimes writing can be confusing. So I will repeat that if a person committed a sex crime in the past then the only thing that people have a right to know about that person is that they committed that crime, the details, etc. They do not have a right to know where that person lives, works, or anything else about that person after the person is no longer on probation or parole.

    • Connie Kosuda

      sorry to disappoint / you are flat out wrong.

      • ieee

        I’m not wrong. Take a closer look at the reality of the Nanny Big Government (NBG) SORs, their pros, cons, and benefits, and think a lot more deeply. You will agree with me or you don’t know what an American is. There aren’t any Americans who think it is acceptable that NBG put people on a list and then let criminal governments all over the country pass law after law that affects only those people. And based on zero evidence or facts.

        The Registries would fit in pretty well in Iran, Iraq, China, N. Korea, and other repressive places. They have no place in America. Did you know that the U.S. recently passed a federal law to put a special marker on the passports of the hated “sex offenders”? There are only two other countries in the world that have ever done such a thing. I’ll let you guess who they are. I don’t think America should aspire to be associated with them.

        Unfortunately, the U.S. has a long, sordid history of doing stupid, immoral, illegal things to a hated minority (lots of examples, slavery is a good one). The SORs are just the latest.

        • Exactly. You’re on to something here: Government lists are politically dangerous. As I mentioned to somebody else on these comments about the recent history of government blacklists: 1920s/30s Soviet purges, 1930s/40s second-class citizens in Germany, 1940s internment of Japanese Americans, 1940s/1950s Hollywood communist blacklistings in the USA, LGBTQ police persecution lists in the USA and in the last few years, surveillance red lists, terrorist watch lists, and TSA no-fly lists.

          Our fascist government police-state is out of control. Do you not think that future political purges are out of the question here in this East-German-esque empire that we have allowed to evolve?

          It can happen here.

          • ieee

            And people wonder why millions of Americans do not trust or support law enforcement. I personally work very hard to keep money and other resources out of their criminal hands. They need to be shrunk to a tiny fraction of their current sizes.

  • From Reason.Com 8/10/2016:

    Judge Critical of Sex-Offender Registry Confirmed to Massachusetts High Court

    http://reason.com/blog/
    2016/08/10/judge-budd-confirmed

    Times are a changing. As far as we in Oregon go, help us to be the first state to completely repeal the sex offender registration law in 2018: Initiative #3 (2018). [email protected]l.Com

  • Gene Assist

    Rx for male sex offenders: Cut off their Pepe’ Le Pews. Period! Female, reconsign them into foreign lesions where not even Xavieria Hollander can mince what they’ll meat. For GLBT, OMG forgive.

    • Okay, so lets cut off the “Pepe’ Le Pews”. Let’s start with the 22 year old college guy who was convicted of engaging in sexual intercourse with this 17 year old high school sweet heart.

      Nice justice system you’ve got there.

    • I wonder what your remedy would be for Wall Street plunderers who crippled our economy? Or what your remedy would be for America’s war criminals (both Bushes, both Clintons and Obomber) and their administrations? Just curious.

      • ieee

        People who talk about castration are not to be taken seriously. Those people are part of a problem and have nothing to offer for any solutions.

  • mamabearroars

    Good Grief! I thought the article in the Oregonian was disgusting, unprofessional, clearly imbalanced and filled with the sloppiest journalistic skills that I have seen in a mainstream trash newspaper.

    Clearly the newspaper is struggling to get people to read it and its only goal is following the Neoliberal path of profits first.

    This slop you could get from the Enquirer that we use to joke about with the child raised by wolves stories, and bat baby.

    Okay, so they sell salacious fear mongering trash to make a few . bucks. That isn’t so shocking to those that READ BROADLY on economics, political philosophy and current events from academics, scholars and those that have been in positions and showed integrity in the swamp land of corruption.

    Here you have an article by a person that clearly is educated on trash television controlled by the deep state and big financial wall street and military interests. He has no education and never read one book without the emotional connection to this subject. He is exactly the type of person trash television entertainment news tries to entice.

    Bravo! They found someone that considers their articles of fear bating of some brilliant academic status.

    If this were an article in print the birds would not allow it at the bottom of their bird cage.

    I would love to see inte

    • GQ4U

      “Most people do not understand crime and why it occurs and we need to address the broader reasons.” [mama]

      Apparently you don’t understand the nature of the beast you so adamantly defend. Are you or a loved one on the SOR? What possible reasons do you have for defending people who prey on others? Its sick mama — sick.

      • ieee

        All decent, moral Americans recognize the SORs for the abomination that they are.

        • GQ4U

          So I am an indecent, immoral American because I don’t agree with you?

          You are really sick ieee and anti-American and you do your self righteous SOR crusade more harm than good. I will never be swayed by such an imbalanced mind as yours.

          • Noemi

            Yes, you are an indecent, immoral UN-American because you believe that American Citizens who have long paid their debt to society and are law-abiding should remain on a list classifying them as 2nd class citizens undeserving of their inalienable constitutional rights.

          • GQ4U

            And you are an amoral defender of predatory animals that should be locked up forever. Society may consider the debt paid but restoration to the victims can never be made.
            They may remain law abiding but the harm of their actions lives beyond their death.

            Various crimes carry sentences that limit or eliminate certain rights and privileges beyond “paying their debt to society”

            As for the SOR list and its numerous flaws I have addressed it in this thread for you and all to read.

            Are you unaware that sex predators violate the rights of their victims and cause life long pain & suffering?

          • Noemi

            Actually, I am a rape survivor. I refuse to be a victim forever. That only gives the person who attacked me more power. Furthermore, this person was NOT on a registry. So what good had it done me? Nor was he ever convicted because more often than not, a woman’s report sits in a police file drawer never to be opened again when the attacker is someone known to the victim. The country likes to promote stranger danger when it is an urban myth.

            Yes, I am a person living with PTSD, but it doesn’t have to run my life, and I refuse to let it. I will even go on to say that I am a far better and stronger person today than I was before the attack.

          • GQ4U

            You almost sound like you are glad the rape happened. Sorry is it did happen and obviously it has altered the course you were on and diverted you into being where you are today. Its not a good change Noemi.

          • homeydclown

            @Noemi is a brave defender of the US Constitution in the face of shrill hysteria, at the risk of being shamed by the likes of you.

            Are you unaware that all criminals violate the rights of their victims and cause life long pain & suffering?

            The only RIGHT forfeited is the Second Amendment RIGHT for ALL felons, the RIGHT to sit on a jury of your peers, and in some states the RIGHT to vote if there were such a thing. Again, that is for ALL felons.

            Now, I do not see why a person who had a 15 year old girlfriend or wrote a bad check should never be able to go duck hunting ever again, or lose the right to take part in the democratic process, but oh well. Again, that is for all those convicted of a felony.

            I hate to break it to you, but arbitrarily punishing people for life for certain convictions is unconstitutional. Only way this flies is that it is NOT a punishment (SCOTUS has said so – ha ha).

          • GQ4U

            Noemi is not defending the US Constitution, she is defending sexual deviants who have violated innocent people to satisfy their evil nature. And when that’s pointed out to her she becomes intolerant and hateful towards anyone who disagrees with her position. Your defense of her only demonstrates your own small mindedness.

            “…all criminals violate the rights of their victims and cause life long pain & suffering” [homey]
            Then perhaps we need more & more lists. Or perhaps you could re-read this thread and learn my “true” thoughts on the SOR.

            Lost Rights:
            The most common rights and or privileges lost or severely curtailed by a felony record include:
            Voting
            Traveling abroad
            The right to bear arms or own guns
            Jury service
            Employment in certain fields
            Public social benefits and housing
            Parental rights & benefits
            http://thelawdictionary.org/article/what-rights-do-convicted-felons-lose/

            “I hate to break it to you, but arbitrarily punishing people for life for certain convictions is unconstitutional.” [homey]
            So lifetime prison sentences for murder, 3-strikes, treason, espionage and the death penalty are all unconstitutional — AND the SCOTUS has said so. Your ha, ha, is appropriate because your position is a joke.

          • Simply because the law allows deprivation of rights doesn’t make it right. We had Jim Crow laws to degrade the rights of blacks. We had black registries. We had residency restrictions for blacks. It was all legal so why did that change?

            And before you claim there is no comparison, there were lots of blacks accused of rape, and a stereotype of blacks was of the savage rapist, and most white believed those stereotypes. They were perceived as always plotting to rape white women. We all know that’s patently untrue yet prejudice allowed the belief to spread.

          • GQ4U

            One big difference is that black stereotyping was based on fear & assumptions but convicted sex abusers have been proven guilty, there are no assumptions — just facts.

            Another bid difference is that most blacks were and are innocent law abiding citizens — convicted sex offenders are not innocent.

          • It is irrelevant whether they were innocent or not, they were still treated the way they were because of assumptions of guilt and being a danger to society. Those who fail to learn from history (folks like you) are doomed to repeat it. We weren’t the only folks in history who created registries and residency restrictions. Lets just say we got more than a few ideas from 1930s Germany.

          • Noemi

            Oh but some of them are. Orange County, CA is known for its DA to tamper, withhold, and/or manipulate evidence to get a conviction even though the defendant is completely innocent of the charges.

          • GQ4U

            Corruption in law enforcement should never be tolerated and innocent people are convicted form time to time and that is unacceptable regardless of the imposed crime.

          • Noemi

            “Noemi is not defending the US Constitution, she is defending sexual deviants who have violated innocent people to satisfy their evil nature. And when that’s pointed out to her she becomes intolerant and hateful towards anyone who disagrees with her position.”

            No. I just stated a fact that you are un-American. I never said anything about hating anyone. I do defend sexual deviants. I defend racists. I defend Trump and Hillary supporters. I even defend indecent, immoral, ignorant un-Americans like yourself because I am a strong defender of the Constitution and its alienable rights FOR ALL people.

          • GQ4U

            That would be unalienable rights and they are mentioned in our Declaration of Independence not the US Constitution. As an American who claims to abide by the constitution why do you want to remove my 1st amendment right to free speech. I dislike your position favoring these sexual deviants but as a good American I concede your right to your opinion — no matter how messed up it is.

            So get off your damn hi-horse and at least behave like an American. And learn the constitution before attempting to hide behind it.

          • Noemi

            No, the wording is INAlienable rights. You can dislike what I have to say all you like, but I won’t let you take MY words out of context to serve your own self-interest. That is MY speech that you are denying my freedom to speak.

          • GQ4U

            Hey stupid — inalienable & unalienable mean the same thing — but you wrote alienable which has an entirely different meaning. And you said “alienable” was in the constitution which is also incorrect.

            I didn’t deny your freedom of speech, if I could that I would’ve shut you up a long, long time ago.

          • Noemi

            Ah…the age old name calling of “stupid”. That’s when you know that a person has:
            1. Lost the argument.
            2. No longer has a leg to stand on.

            I don’t argue with people who demonstrate a lack of respect. It’s time for the block button.

          • GQ4U

            So when you called me un-American it was a compliment?
            Sweetie you incorrectly referenced the US Constitution – I called you on it – your ignorance was exposed – your pride hurt – so now you run and hide — good riddance.

          • Dehumanization is a hallmark of fascists. You need to go to North Korea. You’d be a better fit there.

          • GQ4U

            Sexual deviants who prey on the innocent dehumanized themselves, I had nothing to do with it.

            You lack factual support so you lash out with deranged insults — you poor baby.

          • My website is full of facts you could never comprehendbecause i don’t write my site in crayon and puppet plays for the likes of you. Come back when you can answer my challenge. You still have yet to show me JUST ONE criminal statute listing “pedophilia” as a crime. Just one. How hard can it be?

          • GQ4U

            “…you are an indecent, immoral UN-American…”
            [Noemi]

            Then you must believe Noemi is a dehumanizing fascist who should live in North Korea too, but I keep checking and you have yet to rebuke her behavior. That narrow minded double standard makes you a hypocrite.

          • ieee

            It has nothing to do if you agree with me or not.

            But my statement wasn’t complete. I said, “All decent, moral Americans recognize the SORs for the abomination that they are.” But that’s not really correct. A person can be a decent, moral American and just be uninformed and/or stupid. I should have qualified my statement by saying that if a person is informed and intelligent and still supports the SORs, then the person is immoral and not an American. There aren’t any Americans who understand the SORs and think they are acceptable.

            But regardless, YOU pay for YOUR nanny big governments. Stop asking people like me to pay for them.

          • GQ4U

            I don’t consider those who shield and protect violent sexual deviants as being intelligent, informed or moral.

          • ieee

            Neither do I. And people who are serious about reducing sex crimes and protecting people do not support the SORs. In fact, I would say that people who support the SORs are much, much more guilty of “shielding and protecting violent sexual deviants”. So good job, dipsh*ts. Experts have never supported the SORs. But politicians and uninformed people really do.

            But I don’t think your position and mine are that far off. I understand that you do not support a public Registry and I think that likely eliminates 90+% of the problem. A private Registry, without all the extra, useless, counterproductive, stupid restrictions/harassment/punishment, could be considered American or fair. Perhaps. Maybe. But, we still have to Register all people. It is not legitimate in any way to single out sex crimes.

          • ShellyStow

            And legislators here and there are eschewing the bad legislation in favor of more fact-based, public safety oriented bills. Erin’s Law is an excellent vehicle for implementing research-based sexual abuse programs in schools. Over half of the states have signed on to it. I find it very illuminating that nothing in it suggests the use of the public registry as an aid to stopping sexual abuse.

          • GQ4U

            Sweet cakes, your death to all American dipsh*ts who aren’t in lock step with you makes you not worth hearing from.

            Honey, you can’t talk that way then try and say we are very nearly in agreement on our position. I would never wish death on my opponent — not even you.

          • ieee

            I only meant that we are in somewhat close agreement about the SORs, as are nearly all people with brains. Doesn’t mean we have to agree on everything in life.

          • GQ4U

            According to you if we don’t agree on everything then death to all American dipsh*ts who aren’t in lock step with you. Not a sound position for people with brains.

            Now go play in the street.

          • ieee

            One other thing I missed – you don’t have to be swayed by anything I say. I’ve declared war on you people. That has mattered and will continue to matter, in actual reality. The beauty of war is that only one side has to declare it. The other side does not have to agree.

          • GQ4U

            War? Really? Take your best shot ieee and be prepared to lose. Most people will not support your position of unwarranted protection of convicted sex abusers. I repeat, you have an imbalanced mind.

          • ieee

            Be prepared to lose? So funny. You are so clueless that you don’t understand that it is quite possible that war came decades ago and I’ve been winning all along. And in actual reality, that possibility is actually reality. War has been brought. Registry Terrorists and others have been losing. I can’t see how that is going to change.

            I don’t need people to support any of my positions. I just need you people to keep doing what you’re doing. Give me motivation, work for me, use/rent what I own, etc. My life will remain a thousand times better than the average person’s living in the U.S.

          • GQ4U

            Your last post is too convoluted for any sane person to comprehend. It would make Charlie Manson envious. You’d like Charlie, he’s a sexual pervert who master minded a mass murder.

          • ieee

            It was only convoluted to people who aren’t so bright. Don’t worry about it.

          • GQ4U

            Bright people like you and Charlie Manson?
            LMAO!!!

      • Is your loved ones autistic? Maybe you are. Or just retarded.

        • GQ4U

          You defend perverse sexual deviants and attack the autistic. You are not worth hearing from so shut-up.

          • Come shut me up. You won’t though, because you are just another troll.

          • GQ4U

            Post your “real” name, address, phone number.
            An anonymous challenge from a coward like you is funny, very funny.

  • Craig

    I still believe that once your debt has been paid for any crime you should be able to move on with your life, most sex offences are not repeated by that person, if they are that much of a danger then keep them locked up. But the myth about all sex offenders being the bogey man is and will always be a MYTH. Facts are what people need to look at, not the lies of the lawmakers which want a registry, good for Oregon to allow people to move on, given a second chance.

  • RadioPaul1

    The person who wrote this is a sick person who sells hate and ignorance.

  • Help Repeal the Sex Offender Registration law by signing Initiative #3 for the 2018 Oregon Ballot. Inquires can be had at Anti-RegistryMovement.Org. Is one of your family members listed on Oregon’s shaming, humiliation and persecution sex offender registration government blacklist? Check us out at the above website.

  • ieee

    F big government and their law enforcement criminals. We need to do everything legal to ensure that they stay dysfunctional.

    For you Registry Terrorists who love big government and cannot grow it too big or have too many laws – pay for YOUR big government. Their debt is yours. And try to mind your own business for a change. Stop harassing other people. Mind your own business.

  • Book’m Dano, under JLG’s tread

    Sex offenders here, sex offenders there, everywhere sex offenders in including Bill Clinton’s entrance into Juanita Broddrick’s affair, Anthony Wiener’s efface-booking; Hello, even Larry Craig installing his in a lavatory peddling his penal-sense.“` Brazil Nuts to em all: Rx, go take a diva like HRC and go divining into Real Janitorial Bay, to wit reveling what’s RID-X next to en trail/enthrall US all.

  • Sue

    When your education ranking is #43 out of 50 in a country that is ranked about #30 in the world you may want to re-evaluate how to spend your resources. Just sayin…

  • Marie D.

    Here are some concerns I have as a mother.

    1. 90%+ sex crimes occur by people not on the registery and not strangers. Parents rely on the registry to protect their kids / false sense of security.
    2. The registry was created 30 years ago when kids roamed more freely. Maybe back then it was needed to know the guy down the street was a perv so you could warn your daughter. But nowadays we don’t let our kids go around to neighbors houses or roam for hours. We arrange play dates, know the parents of the kids ours are involved with and keep a tight reign. Whether or not that guy down the street is listed my daughter is told to never be alone / out of sight with him. She is taught that any adult who asks to keep a secret is ‘tricky’ and needs to be reported. Registries do nothing to change my parenting in 2016.
    3. I’d rather the money that is now spent on maintaining and tracking people who 90%+ are not a threat to me and the percent that are won’t follow laws anyway – so are a threat regardless of the restrictions we like on – I’d rather the money spent on prevention. On teaching kids and adults to recognize grooming and tricky people. On helping those who can be helped. This point is about money.
    4. This Point is about use of the limited law enforcement bodies. I’d rather their work focus on preventing terrorism , mass shootings, gang activities, etc, then investigating a guy who exposed himself 20 years ago who now moved and forgot to tell them in the 48 hours required by these stupid laws.
    5. These registries track where a person sleeps and gets mail. If a person is going to reoffend they will be breaking greater laws than where they sleep. These laws do nothing to prevent recidivism of sex offenders and I do think prevents those who want to be ‘normal’ from having the support needed. Someone who received a picture from an underage girlfriend isn’t a monster. They are a kid who made a mistake. Let them grow up and be a good citizen. Someone who mooned or streaked or peed in public – they deserve to get on with life, get a job and have a family. Ironically had they gotten drunk at 19 and killed a family they have a much better chance of getting on with their lives once a sentence is served than the guy who received a texted picture of his underage girlfriend.

    6. We should revisit consent ages. My daughter can get birth control at 14 and an abortion without parents knowledge but legally can’t have sex until 17? She can drive a car at 16 or drop out of school but can’t have sex until 17? In the next state over (15 miles) if she’s 18 and her boyfriend 17 it’s illegal – because their age is 18. Let’s pick an age. Let’s make age of consent apply to everything – drinking , military, school , sex, birth control , getting a tattoo, abortion, etc. and let’s make it the same in all states. This will eliminate a lot of confusion. We need to either let a kid control their actions (driving, smoking) or tell them they are not ready. Saying ‘you can drive a vehicle that could do a lot of damage if handled immaturely but you aren’t old enough to choose to smoke’ seems silly. I don’t know what that age should be… Just throwing it in because it’s a pet peave of mine.

    I want my kids safe too. They are young elementary age. My bigger fear in this world is gang violence and mass shootings and drugs.

    Let’s use our resources correctly.

    Let’s try to prevent sex offenses. Let’s teach our kids about consent and respect and identifying tricky people and grooming. Those are worth my money. Not a list that does no good.

    • ieee

      Oh gosh. Let’s not bring facts or common sense into this. We’ve got a panacea witch hunt to run.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)