Sex offenders are for the most part considered to be a group that will not change their ways.  As such they remain a danger to the community at large.  The maps of where they are residing are of great use to investigators in cases like when children go missing.  That is part of the reason they are required to keep an address on file with local police and not reside near parks and schools.  In South Dakota it is a felony for sex offenders to move and not report within 3 days.  Since the registry already existed it was a relatively simple matter to get it published and added to websites. Originally all people convicted of certain crimes were added to the lists.  Some people who had urinated in public had been charged with indecent exposure.  Technically the charge should have been public indecency.  The difference is that the exposure charge required a prurient interest element.  What happened was that people who took a leak in a bar parking lot were showing up on the sex offender registry. It diluted the list's effectiveness.  A later correction was made and officers and prosecutors trained in the use of the proper charge.

A question about how long someone should stay on the list also generated a lot of discussion.  Certain types of criminals were dropped from the list after varying years of not re-offending.  The question is not just should we list all types of criminal's addresses but which groups present a real danger to the community.  For some groups the answer is yes.  For others the answer is no.  Take for example a 35 year old man who is married and has children and a job and has not had any criminal record since he broke into a store and stole beer when he was 18. Would publishing his name and address really make the community safer?  Could it make his ability to support himself and family more difficult? Branding has it's valid uses but it is permanent and therefore we should be sure it is used sparing and appropriately.

During 35 years as a law enforcement officer the one thing I always wanted  to keep in mind was not to become complacent.  The people doing crimes who have not yet been caught and identified, are probably the best at their craft and arguably the most dangerous.  They will never show up on the list of past convictions.  The lists are also costly to update and maintain.  I am not against the lists but they must be justified and useful in order to become a reality.

Finally, consider this.  Is there anything that you ever did that if you had gotten caught and prosecuted would have put you on such a list?  Did you ever sell a joint to a friend-drug dealer.  Have sex with someone under your state's age of consent, even if you were not yet of age-possible sex criminal. Did you ever steal anything of significant worth-burglar or thief.  How would your life be different if you had been identified?  We must be careful that we are not just listing those who were unfortunate or unsophisticated enough to have been apprehended.  Would it have been possible for you to be where you are today and doing what you are now if you were on such a list?  I am not saying that people should not be held accountable rather that there should be a realistic hope attached to rehabilitation.  This is very thin ice indeed.

Thank you for sharing these reflections. Much appreciated

yes, and they should be monitored in where they go and what they do. Is one effective measure for self protectiion.

"Forewarned, forearmed; to be prepared is half the victory." - Miguel de Cervantes

Thank you