New sex offender laws create questions

1-18-2008 Ohio:

Unintended consequences can be the downfall of many a policy. Sometimes, though, the intended consequences aren't all that great either.

This month, the state began requiring sex offenders to comply with a new law that puts them into one of three tiers, requires longer reporting times for offenders and adds to the list those whose names and residences are made public.

The state move comes as a result of a federal requirement to standardize and toughen penalties for sexual offenses nationwide. These sorts of crimes are terrible and making it worse for the perpetrators is understandable. But in its attempt to do so, the state and feds may have gone, if not too far, in the wrong direction.

The most troubling aspect of these changes is their retroactive nature. Some of the offenders meeting their reporting obligations were about to see those requirements end, according to the law. Now they might see their reporting times increase in number and length. Some will have to report for the rest of their lives.
Sexual offenders register so sheriffs' offices can assure they do not live near restricted areas, such as schools. It's also so the public can be notified of their whereabouts. But the new law expands the number of offenders who have to register, adding those found guilty of what was considered a lesser offense.

It's not like sheriffs could easily keep track of everyone under the old law, let alone this one. Meanwhile, since offenders can appeal their new requirements, courts could be inundated; Licking County Common Pleas judges Thomas Marcelain and Jon Spahr have placed a stay on answering individual challenges.

Many predict it will be just a matter of time before the Ohio Supreme Court has to weigh in.

These crimes are horrible. But it must be asked: At what point do these laws become exaggerations? When do they do less to punish the guilty and protect the innocent and instead become a false sense of security and examples of exasperation? Are they helpful to us or simply serve as a bullet item on a politician's campaign mailing, enabling the claim to "be doing something" about crime.

Why just sexual offenses? Should we not know where drug dealers live after prison? What about those who commit home break-ins and terrorize, or worse, family members? Released killers?

Unless we are prepared to lock these offenders up for life -- and perhaps we are -- our American sense of justice must balance crime and punishment. If not, it becomes neither American, nor justice. ..more.. by NewarkAdvocate