>are you saying that (virtually) no one who is on the registry
>has committed a repeat offense? Or that having a registry to
>track people has prevented zero of their repeat offenses?

meaning that the registry wouldn't have helped in any way to stop them. IIRC, over 90% of sex crimes against children were committed by someone they knew and that's not limited to adults since over a third of registered offenders convicted of rape/molestation of a child were *children* themselves (source: 2010 Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire study commissioned by US Justice Dept). In this way the registry wouldn't have prevented anything.

The number of repeat offenders is quite small, quite negligible. I'll look for the paper I read about it where the whole shit was broken down.

But... You have to remember that the majority of people on the registry aren't on there for rape or molestation of a child and those people pose no threat to a child. Things like public urination can get you on the sex offender registry in 13 states and indecent exposure can get you on it in pretty much every state, this includes shit like mooning, streaking, or anything like that. Also, sexting between teenagers is still something that can get you on there (typically charged as possession/manufacture/distribution of child pornography).

Give me a bit to pull together my sources, I've got a lot going on right now and I'll get it together at some point.



---------------------------

"Where was the peace when we were getting shot? Where's the peace when we were getting laid out?
Where is the peace when we are in the back of ambulances? Where is the peace then?
They don't want to call for peace then.