Friday, February 8, 2013

MI - Law would require registered sex offenders to pay annual fee

Original Article

Requiring ex-sex offenders to continually pay a fee and other ex-felons do not have to is pretty much extortion.



The more than 40,000 registered sex offenders in Michigan may soon be required to pay an annual fee.

They currently pay a one-time $50 charge, but most offenders will be on the registry for 25 years to life.

State Senator Rick Jones says the database costs Michigan State Police about $1 million a year to maintain. He's working on a bill that would require sex offenders to pay $50 or $100 a year.
- I don't buy this.  How does adding records to or changing records in a database cost $1 million per year?

"I want to keep troopers on the road," Jones says. "This is not too much to ask sex offenders to pay a dollar or two dollars a week."
- When many of them are homeless and jobless due to the online registry and residency laws, then it's too much to ask.

Jones believes he'll get almost unanimous support for the bill.

"The only ones who object are the offenders," he says. "We hope that the sex offender list helps keep them out of trouble. We hope that it keeps children away from them and keeps them out of prison. Therefore, this is simply a fee that they will be paying for that service."
- So why don't you force all other ex-felons to pay some fee for your service?

"It's legal in many other states", Jones says. "It's working. It will work here."

Ohio and Illinois each charge registered sex offenders $100 per year; Indiana charges $50 annually.


nathan rabalais said...

Wait when did extortion become legal am I missing something

deathklok said...

And I'm sure if this is challenged, SCOTUS will again say "It's like renewing your membership at Costco. Instead of a 'Gold Membership' you now have an 'Executive Membership'. It's still not punitive."

ASOinGA said...

The problem with deathklok's example is that if you choose not to renew your membership at Costco, there is no harm to you (you just can't enter/ purchase goods in that store). However, if SO's do not re-register, the result is most definitely harmful - and some would say punitive- a felony and/or immediate arrest for not following the law.

Surely somewhere in the great US of A there is a case or situation that would force SOCTUS to change their opinion from the registry being 'regulatory' to 'punitive'.

Anon said...

Quoted from a comment on the article (hope that is OK):

A fee that you are ordered to pay without recourse, based on a past
action and subject to further punishment, is a fine. Fining someone well
after conviction, sentencing and completion of said sentence is 100%

Brilliantly stated!

Steven Atkinson said...

i still don't know why the registry is made public, i know here in Australia it is not public and no one has to pay any fee.the offender has done his time so why should he or she be forever punished for something that happened 5 or 10 years ago, maybe they should do it for drug offenders and the like i personally think o drug o's are worst the sex offenders because there is no real repercussions to there actions they get locked up for a bit then are back out doing it all again and do think twice about it ... i am not saying not to keep an eye on them but don't push them out of the world like we are doing. the registry should be scraped it is in humane and is forever punishing the offender it just bull s**t