Unless the ID has some sort of GPS type locator, there is no way it would help in a lost child situation. Sometimes I think lawmakers live in the clouds.4-14-2011 California:
Even though it failed to garner enough support, a Riverside County lawmaker says he won't abandon a proposal that would require convicted sex offenders to carry special identification at all times.
AB 885, sponsored by Assemblyman Paul Cook, R-Beaumont, failed to garner
enough votes in the Assembly Committee on Transportation on Monday.
Eight votes were needed to advance the bill. Four Republicans and two Democrats voted yes, while committee Chair Bonnie Lowenthal and another Democrat opposed the measure. Five Democrats and one Republican abstained.
"I'm disappointed that the bill didn't pass, but I'm not deterred," Cook said. "Requiring the worst sex offenders to carry ID would be of great help to law enforcement in the early hours of an abduction of a child. We have a long way to go in keeping kids safe."
Maurice Dubois of Escondido, whose 14-year-old daughter Amber was raped
and murdered by convicted sex offender John Albert Gardner III in February 2009, had endorsed AB 885.
Under the bill, any person designated by the California Department of Justice as a ``sexually violent predator'' -- including those convicted of assaulting a child -- would have been required to carry a driver's license or ID bearing a unique code on the card's magnetic strip. They would have to keep the card in their possession wherever they go.
The code would be immediately recognizable by law enforcement, but not the general public, according to Cook.
Right, the police have some sort of X-Ray vision. Doesn't reality strike lawmakers, if its visible at all the general public will see it too.He said the state's Megan's Law database listing the last known residences of convicted sex offenders is not always reliable, and AB 885 would bolster law enforcement's ability to quickly track down predators during an investigation.
An analysis by the Committee on Transportation questioned the practicality of trying to enforce the law, noting that some ex-cons may go by aliases or refuse to carry their licenses or ID cards.
The California Public Defenders' Association argued in its opposition letter to the bill that a person "interested in committing a sex offense ... would likely not carry the card identifying them as a (Penal Code section) 290 sex registrant."
The committee analysis also raised concerns about the amount of time the Department of Motor Vehicles would have to spend processing license applications for convicted sex offenders. ..Source.. City News Service
3 comments:
The idea sounds good, but reality shows that it isn't going to stop anyone from committing a sex crime. Plus the way they are talking about having it set up, it would require the RSO to identify him/herself in the DMV. I am not for that. If it has to happen then the police should have to put it onto the person's bar code when they go to register. Isn't the DMV bogged down enough anyway.
I believe Louisiana is making sex offenders have that label on their ID. NOT IN A BAR CODE BUT WRITTEN ACROSS IT. This will make doing any kind of business extremely stressful. Imagine going to cash your check. You have to show your ID to cash it. Or you go to use your credit card and people ask for ID to ensure you aren't doing ID theft. We really need to do something to make sure this doesn't continue.
Anyone who knows about triggers and offending cycles would know that the stress this creates could be so much that it could backfire and create more victims rather than reducing risk. Think people think.
I notice its the Rebublicans are that are on the band wagon with this and it seems its all about saving face for there party and to get some very easy votes.Yet with the econimy in bad shape how would they fund this they already slashed so much from education and health care for the elderly and disabled.And when are the voters going to wise up to what is going on and stop voting for them.
Perhaps this will be a good thing. The only time the Supreme Court reviewed registration laws there were very strongly-worded dissents and the majority made clear that if registration/notification crossed the line to punishment they would not hesitate to invalidate the entire concept. The forces of freedom and tyranny are clashing once again, and unfortunately it is we who are stuck in the middle. We must keep fighting and standing up against these abuses.
Post a Comment