Texas sex offenders in sight of rare policy win

http://www.centurylink.net/news/rea...org>&news_id=19406138&src=most_popular_viewed

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Four convicted sex offenders huddled in a busy hallway at the Texas Capitol, congratulating each other for going public and testifying against a bill that would plaster their criminal past on their Facebook profiles.

As expected, not everyone was moved by their objections.

"I don't feel bad for the guys that came in here whining," Republican state Rep. Steve Toth said after the men had left the room at a recent House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee meeting. A Democrat switched on her microphone to voice on the record that she, too, had no sympathy............

Pushing forward what advocates say would mark a minor but extraordinary softening of the state's sex offender laws, the GOP-controlled Senate has passed a bill to remove employer information from Texas' online sex offender registry.............

It's not a change of swaying lawmakers but the wringing hands of frustrated business leaders — they complain their bottom line suffers when the public discovers who's on the payroll.

The odd result: Sex offenders and Gov. Rick Perry's favorite conservative think tank is among those left seeing eye-to-eye. The Texas Public Policy Foundation, which backs business-friendly bills, argues the current registry comes between the private relationship between employer and employee........

Mary Sue Molnar, executive director of Texas Voices for Reason and Justice and the mother of a registered sex offender, said the bill is only the second her group has endorsed since forming in 2007.

Hers and a small band of similar organizations typically play defense in statehouses, arguing that decades of stacking one restriction atop another has pushed sex offenders to society's fringes. They say the result is growing ranks of unemployable and homeless outcasts, who then become more likely to commit new crimes.


More at 3 page article.........

How does their story go?

Gee no one wants to hurt them. We lurv them. We just want what we want. They wanted it too. They knew when they harmed a child what the penalty would be.

Yes I am being sarcastic based on what is heard from SO's.

In actuality no one does want to cause any physical, emotional or financial harm to SO's (pretty much.) IF they never touched a kid, they wouldn't have to worry about all this. As far as harming businesses, I am sorry. But when I walk into a retail store where someone gives my grandchild a piece of candy, I'd like to know just who it is giving it to him.

I've seen some states that don't list their place of employment on the public registry. Mine does. The RSOL group is going to keep pushing to abolish all the sex offender laws. They have people in a lot of places. The group is mainly made up of SO's and their family members. You will see them posting in comments on articles that pertain to sex offenders. They twist the truth or well just flat out make things up and lie, thinking others will not research further. This group had or still has some of the N A M B L A members in it. Women are the main voice of the group from what I have seen. This is another one of their tactics.

I think we need tougher sentences for SO's. But we have to deal with the way thing are now. I would much rather have a sex offender employed somewhere than sitting at home getting government assistance. I don't think it would be good for them to have a lot of time on their hands. I have seen someone local here post sex offenders pictures and their places of employment on a popular blog and encourage people to ban the business for hiring them. These were crap jobs like washing dishes in a restaurant or standing outside wearing a pizza outfit and holding a sign. Now, that I definately disagree with.

I really don't know how much good adding more laws and restrictions is going to do at this point. They simply need longer, tougher, sentences that fit the crimes that they commit. If they are going to be released then we need a better way to monitor and track them.

I really don't know how much good adding more laws and restrictions is going to do at this point. They simply need longer, tougher, sentences that fit the crimes that they commit. If they are going to be released then we need a better way to monitor and track them.

Click to expand...

:clap:

I would like to see some stats showing that registration is effective, frankly, although I think it can be very important information for the public sometimes.

Longer tougher sentences is definitely the way to go.

I honestly don't see the point. What does a registry do but name those who have been caught and (perhaps falsely) suggest that the rest of us are safer than we really are?

As believe said, longer incarceration is another matter, if we use it wisely. We had or have a mother here at WS whose college-student daughter was caught peeing behind a bush after a rock concert. The DA was offering the kid no jail time if the daughter would agree to register as a sex offender for the rest of her life.

When we pass laws, we need to remember there will always those who abuse the new powers we create.

IMO the registry is useful as long as it is used. For instance if a mother who is dating would run the names of her dates. Or people would run the names of their child's teachers or doctors. New neighbor moves in.

But the problem is like most things. People don't use it. Then later they are shocked when they find out there is a sex offender in their neighborhood. And no, they can't be used to retaliate against an SO. But it can sure give you an idea about which end of the neighborhood you don't want your child to play.

Nova is right though that just because someone's name is not on the SO list does not mean they are safe to around your child. IMO the average pedo will have molested 10 or more kids before they ever get caught.

A mother running the name of the men she dates (or the babysitters she hires) is the first really good use I've heard of such a list. (Surely a teacher loses his/her certification for child abuse! And no child should be left alone with a doctor for any number of reasons.)

But even there, sadly, it's important to remember there's no guarantee.

Nova said:

I honestly don't see the point. What does a registry do but name those who have been caught and (perhaps falsely) suggest that the rest of us are safer than we really are?

As believe said, longer incarceration is another matter, if we use it wisely. We had or have a mother here at WS whose college-student daughter was caught peeing behind a bush after a rock concert. The DA was offering the kid no jail time if the daughter would agree to register as a sex offender for the rest of her life.

When we pass laws, we need to remember there will always those who abuse the new powers we create.

Click to expand...

Do you know what state this girl lives in? I'm just asking because peeing in public does not classify as a sex offense in my state, but the group commonly uses that as a excuse to abolish the registry. If they are putting people on the registry in any state for urinating in public, then it's a problem with the statutes, not the registry itself. The same should apply to Romeo and Juliet laws, depending on the age range between two consenting teenagers. I have seen the SO advocates quote that a lot of the people on the registry fall under this category. A little further digging on one individual whose wife was advocating to abolish the registry, turned out to be a situation where as a teen he had repeatedly, sexually assaulted a baby. Anyone can tell a story but the court file may show different.

I use the registry quite often, but I don't allow it to give me a false sense of security. As long as they are going to be let out to freely roam in society, I will be in support of the registry.