Anyone with kids in the US, this is a must to look at.

[Hardbopjazz]

Scary to think one may be living very close to your home or your children's school.

http://www.familywatchdog.us/

[Jazzmoose]

Well, since many sex offenders are actually family members, I don't know how much scarier it can get...

[Man with the Golden Arm]

yipes!

i did it with an alias address and low and behold a guy shows up right up the road from the studio here.

small town .... i've seen him many times.

[catesta]

spooky

[BruceH]

The fact that I've got kids is the reason I'm NOT going to look at it, thank you very much.

[Hardbopjazz]

The fact that I've got kids is the reason I'm NOT going to look at it, thank you very much.

I guess everyone has the right to live somewhere. But it is scary when fond one close to your home.

[Hardbopjazz]

The dots in red are ones that have been convited of sexual abuse against children.

Edited February 17, 2006 by Hardbopjazz

[Claude]

The map legend is on the left side of the page.

[Hardbopjazz]

Yes, I see it now.

[Noj]

Anyone else blown away by how many there are? It's a friggin' epidemic! Several within walking distance of my home.

[Dmitry]

Unfortunately, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont do not currently provide addresses for registered sex offenders. Consequently, we are unable to provide adequate or meaningful information about sex offenders located in these states

[Son-of-a-Weizen]

Ya know, it's ironic....I'm the one always getting zinged in the political forum as the bad guy who (supposedly) wants Bush to take away everyone's rights...doesn't care (supposedly) about The Constitition, blah, blah, etc.... but I've got serious concerns about public registries like this. I've got young kids and am as watchful and protective as the next guy but if someone was tried & convicted of one of these crimes and served their time, why are they then listed on this thing that can be accessed by any blockhead? Hell, you get a couple of guys belting back a few drinks, scanning the online registry on Fri. night for names, deciding to take a six block walk on over to John Smith the convicted offender's house to cave his skull in with a lead pipe. What the hell is that all about? Where's the ACLU when you need 'em? You might as well just lock 'em up and throw away the key if you're going to put them into a situation where -- after they've paid their dues to society -- they're at risk having their house torched on any given night because they're on a list. I say, let the cops operate something like this...and keep it low key.

** no hits within a 15 block radius of my place.....no need to saddle up and drill someone in the melon with a 9-iron tonite!

[Chuck Nessa]

I'm with Weizen on this one.

[Alexander Hawkins]

Am absolutely in accordance with Chuck and Weizen here.

[Hardbopjazz]

But what about those repeater?

[Noj]

I agree with Weizen too.

[Jim Alfredson]

Ya know, it's ironic....I'm the one always getting zinged in the political forum as the bad guy who (supposedly) wants Bush to take away everyone's rights...doesn't care (supposedly) about The Constitition, blah, blah, etc.... but I've got serious concerns about public registries like this. I've got young kids and am as watchful and protective as the next guy but if someone was tried & convicted of one of these crimes and served their time, why are they then listed on this thing that can be accessed by any blockhead? Hell, you get a couple of guys belting back a few drinks, scanning the online registry on Fri. night for names, deciding to take a six block walk on over to John Smith the convicted offender's house to cave his skull in with a lead pipe. What the hell is that all about? Where's the ACLU when you need 'em? You might as well just lock 'em up and throw away the key if you're going to put them into a situation where -- after they've paid their dues to society -- they're at risk having their house torched on any given night because they're on a list. I say, let the cops operate something like this...and keep it low key.

** no hits within a 15 block radius of my place.....no need to saddle up and drill someone in the melon with a 9-iron tonite!

The point is taken, however when typing in my address I noticed two people with offenses against children in my neighborhood and I live across the street from an elementary school.

Now, I realize that a child is basically anyone under 16 so it doesn't necessarily mean these two people committed a crime against an elementary school kid, but damn...

It's a tough issue, for sure... as a father, I'm not sure where I stand on it.

[Jim Alfredson]

From that site:

90% of all sexual assaults against children are committed by someone whom the victim knew. * <LI>The typical sexual predator will assault 30 - 60 times before being caught. ** <LI>The re-arrest rate for convicted child molesters is 52%.

That last one is scary and one good reason why this site exists. Obviously throwing perps in jail isn't helping them rehabilitate, so it's about protection. Well, that's one side of the coin, anyway.

[Jim Alfredson]

I guess Michigan ain't taking no stuff:

Laws to protect children take effect

Published Tuesday, January 3, 2006 1:25:39 PM Central Time

LANSING, Mich. (AP) -- More than a dozen new laws that went on the books Sunday are intended to better protect children from felons, particularly sex offenders, but a few advocacy groups say they are too strict and could hurt the reputations of innocent educators.

The new laws ban registered sex offenders from living, working or loitering within 1,000 feet of a school and require schools and day care centers to take fingerprints and do background checks on all their employees, including janitors and coaches, by July 2008.

They also require school employees and applicants charged with a crime to report it to the state Department of Education within three business days of their arraignment. The law previously didn't guarantee that school districts receive that information.

A state audit released in late 2004 showed that the state did not routinely check lists of school employees against lists of convicted criminals. It found that 222 licensed school workers had criminal records since the state began mandating background checks for school employees in the 1993-94 school year, prompting state legislators to come up with the new laws.

"We need to keep kids safe and the only way to do that is to keep the records on file," said House Speaker Craig DeRoche, a Republican from Novi who helped guide the bills through the Legislature. "We will root out bad actors who have access to children."

Shelli Weisberg, legislative director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan, said the new laws reflect a national trend aimed at cracking down on sex offenders and other felons.

The law that creates a 1,000-foot perimeter around schools exempts registered sex offenders who already live or work in the area from the ban, but it prohibits them from interacting with children. The law also allows a court to exempt some young sex offenders from provisions of the law in certain circumstances, but that decision ultimately is up to a judge.

Despite those exemptions, Weisberg is worried about the fallout of the new laws. Michigan has one of the nation's largest sex offender registries that does not distinguish between truly harmful predators and those who had consensual sex with peers under age 16, she said.

It had nearly 38,000 people on it in November, including a little more than 2,400 juveniles and about 12,300 in jail or prison, according to the most recent data from the state police.

"You've got people who are not a danger to society being affected because our sex offender registry doesn't do a risk assessment," Weisberg said.

Gov. Jennifer Granholm pushed for the 1,000-foot school safety zone to help keep children safe, spokeswoman Liz Boyd said.

"When the governor proposed these new laws, she made it clear that we want to know that sex offenders are nowhere near our children," Boyd said.

Teachers and administrators have been required to submit fingerprints and background checks as part of their application process for more than a decade, but they will have to get them done again under the new laws so their information can be stored electronically.

Job applicants who have been convicted of a sex crime will not be eligible for employment and current employees who have a felony conviction revealed by a background check will lose their jobs.

The Michigan State Police will monitor the database. It can match fingerprints of people newly arrested to school employees already in the system, which will allow authorities to quickly get that information to school districts.

The state's largest teachers union says it's concerned the state police records could be wrong, said Margaret Trimer-Hartley, spokeswoman for the Michigan Education Association.

"Some people the state police has listed as criminals are the victims of identity theft. We're hopeful the data won't be released in a public way until it is clean," Trimer-Hartley said.

Tim Bolles, manager of the state police's identification and criminal history section, said the new database is an important improvement from the old system that collected paper copies of fingerprints, checked the people they belonged to for a criminal record and then discarded them.

"We didn't have an automated way to store applicant prints," said Bolles, who said the new database eventually will have information from 250,000 school employees. "We now will be building an applicant file that stores fingerprints in the system. In two years, if an employee is arrested, those prints will come back and match one."

The MEA says school districts should cover the cost of fingerprints and background checks for school employees, which can cost as much as $70 per person. Groups representing school officials and school board members argue that it's not their responsibility because the state is requiring them for employment.

"We want to make this work for everybody, but if you're a large district this is a huge expense," said Don Wotruba, legislative affairs director for the Michigan Association of School Boards. "It's a bigger expense for a district than an individual. It could be $70,000, which is difficult when you have to cut that out of a budget."

The MEA and the school groups said the issue likely will be discussed when districts negotiate new contracts.

A few intermediate school districts in the state, including Ingham, have purchased their own equipment to take fingerprints rather than use a vendor.

The Ingham ISD spent about $12,000 to set up the new system so schools could quickly get back information about job applicants, said Susan Tinney, the district's business office supervisor.

The district charges $69 for new applicants, but is considering dropping the district's processing fee from $15 to $5 for teachers and administrators who are getting their background check and fingerprints redone, Tinney said.

"The idea that we would have the results so quickly was the greatest benefit," Tinney said.

School safety bills

Highlights of a package of new laws that took effect on Sunday intended to better protect children from felons at school and day care:

--Ban registered sex offenders from living, working or loitering within 1,000 feet of a school with some exemptions.

--Require schools and day care centers to take fingerprints and do background checks on job applicants and their current employees, including part-time workers and contractors, by July 2008.

--Prohibit school districts from employing a registered sex offender.

--Require school employees and applicants charged with a crime to report it to the state Department of Education within three business days of their arraignment.

--Require school districts to put the salary of teachers who are convicted of certain crimes while they are employed into an escrow account during court proceedings. If they are fired, they will have to forfeit their earnings for that period.

--Require the state departments of Information Technology and Education to work with the Michigan State Police to develop and implement an automated program that compares school employee information to criminal records.

[Hardbopjazz]

Now we're moving into the relm of the political forum.

[Claude]

It's a difficult issue, because both sides have good arguments. But I agree more with Weizen.

If the names and adresses of those convicted sex offenders are made public, the next step would be to force them to wear warning badges whenever they leave their home.

Either they are dangerous and should be locked away, or they are not and have the right to live anonymously as other criminals who served their prison time. It's OK to ban pedophiles from jobs that involve contact with children, but singling them out in public only provokes irrational and unjustified discrimination.

[Robert J]

I also agree with Weizen et al.

In Canada it is not published -

"The public does not have access to the National Sex Offender Registry. It is a database that provides Canadian police services with important information that will improve their ability to investigate crimes of a sexual nature. "

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/techops/nsor/index_e.htm

[Hardbopjazz]

This debate will never have an resolution. Those against it, you may have a change of heart if it happen close to you. When I was 5 back in 1968, my cousin also 5 was killed by a pedophile, he went to a mental hosiptal and did 3 years. He lawyers said he was crazzy and the courts agreed. After 3 years the doctors said he was rehabilitated and was safe to be let back into society. In 1972 two more kids were found buried in his back yard. He was senteance to life without any chance of getting out.

This is a tough one. My aunt even today would have no problem taking that 9 iron to his head.

Edited February 17, 2006 by Hardbopjazz

[medjuck]

To add to the confusion: I think a 16 year old guy who has sex with his 16 year old girl-friend can be convicted asa sex offender.

[Robert J]

This debate will never have an resolution. Those against it, you may have a change of heart if it happen close to you.

I do have kids, but I guess I don't want to live completely paranoid for them as well. Nor do I want to assume a vigilante mentality either. (See some of the quotes on the Testimonial page.) I am not opposed to registries, just one like this that is publicly available with an quasi-defined purpose.

Here's the RCMPs stance on the Canadian registry:

Q. Does the National Sex Offender Database respect the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Privacy Act?

- The National Sex Offender Database complies with the provisions of the legislation as approved by parliament.

- There will be criminal penalties for the misuse of the data either by persons authorized to have access to it or by third parties who may acquire National Sex Offender Database information.

- Access to this personal information will be tightly controlled and used for police investigation purposes and as authorized by law.

We have one in Ontario too.

ONTARIO'S SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY

Christopher Stephenson's Death was Catalyst

- Ontario's Sex Offender Registry, the first of its kind in Canada, was

sparked by the tragic 1988 murder of 11-year-old Christopher Stephenson

at the hands of a convicted pedophile on federal statutory release. At

the 1993 inquest into his death, the coroner's jury recommended

creating a national registry for convicted sex offenders, requiring

that they register with their local police service as soon as they are

released from jail.

- With the support of the Stephenson family, victims' groups and law

enforcement organizations, the government proclaimed Christopher's Law

(Sex Offender Registry 2000), on April 23, 2001, making the Sex

Offender Registry a reality.

Role of the Local Police Service with Ontario's Registry

- Ontario's registry gives police the crucial information they need to

investigate and solve crimes of a sexual nature. It is designed to

provide a reliable current address and photo of an offender, aiding

police in monitoring sex offenders in their community. The database is

only accessible to the police.

- Police services are responsible for establishing at least one

registration site where offenders are required to report when they have

taken up residence in the community for 15 days or more. The onus is on

offenders to comply with designated times and locations for

registration, as set by the local police service. Offenders must

re-register within 15 days of relocating to a new jurisdiction. An

offender moving out of the province must advise police 15 days prior to

leaving. Finally, an offender must report at least annually to update

the information in the registry.

- The Ontario Community Safety Act, which amended the Police Services

Act, empowers local police chiefs to publicly disclose information on

offenders considered to be a significant risk to a community. Such

disclosure must be done in accordance with the Police Services Act and

its regulations.