Friday, March 1, 2013

OR - Mix of emotion at hearing for sex offender bills

Original Article

These are good bills, and thank you to all who attended the hearing.


By Anna Canzano

SALEM – There was a mix of emotion Thursday as Oregon lawmakers heard testimony about a pair of bills that would overhaul how sex offenders register and are supervised.

The first proposal, House Bill 2552, concerns juvenile offenders. The bill would allow those who committed a sex crime before age 16 from having to report as a sex offender under certain circumstances.

The second bill, House Bill 2549, would mandate that all sex offenders be classified by their risk level to society. For instance, a Level 3 sex offender would be classified the most dangerous; Level 1 would the least likely to re-offend.

Currently, Oregon does not classify sex offenders; Washington does have a ranking system.

Surprising fallout of House Bill 2549? It would also provide relief to certain sex offenders. If passed, those convicted of serious crimes -- such as first-degree rape and sodomy -- can ask to be taken off the state registry within as few as five years after they're done with probation or parole.

Connie Hollon was behind the original law in 2006 that put a portion of Oregon’s sex offender registry online. She finds the proposal disappointing.

It saddens me,” Hollon said. “This is a bill … by a few select proponents that have their own agenda.”

This is also a crime that doesn’t walk away from the victim,” she added.

Others spoke in staunch support of the bills. Ken Nolley, president of Oregon Voices, said the current laws are actually creating an unjust culture.

The very laws we’ve passed to protect our community is actually destroying families … in many, many cases,” Nolley said.

Both bills were heard by the House Committee on Judiciary. The judiciary committee did not hold a vote on either bill.


SOIssues said...

Comment we left on the article:

"The laws will not prevent / deter crime nor protect anybody! They are merely state sanctioned homelessness, joblessness, exile and vigilantism, and we have tons of proof, a long with children being ruined by the laws."

Macintosh said...

Hollan is admitting that she wanted the registry to punish sex offenders. She admits that fact when she said "This is also a crime that doesn’t walk away from the victim." Basically she's saying that the registry isn't about protecting the public after a person has served their sentence, but rather it's about getting even for a victim that can't walk away. Not all registrants have victims. Not all "victims" were victimized (Romeo and Juliet) cases. Even if all sex crimes have victims, the punishment is decided by the judge (or jury) and not by the legislature.

Loneranger said...

The media with it's hype is so full of crap. If they really understood what they were talking about they wouldn't even say the things they are saying. this law will not release dangerous individuals ever. What it is doing is removing the automatic lifetime requirement. Affording relief from the registry to the ones that have served their time on this and in the end for some will be double and triple the amount now deemed appropriate. The person complaining how she is so disappointed hey they got their pound of flesh from these people. Conciser the scales balanced and go on with your life. The key to healing is to be able to let go. If you are one that feels you need to see the offender and their family suffer forever only means you have not let go yourself. So will never heal as this goes on forever. Look at this as a time of closure. Not you didn't get enough punishment.

Frankly the fact that this has been deemed regulatory has hampered the leagle system from being able to do just that. Regulate the reentry of sex criminals into society by making a lifetime burden that creates barreiros that the offender may never over come. the idea that registration somehow protects society has been so grossly over stated that it has caused this to grow to a point where even the broadest of views on this can not say it really protects anyone. Given this they can finally admit this is punitive, However at least it's not as cruel and unusual as it has been.

The one part i had a problem with is the amount of time they can take to classify a person. In many cases a person has already been on this for 20 years and could wait an additional two years for a classification in-order to petition for removal if I understand this correctly. I'm sure the ones that have been crime free for the last 20 years and having to deal with this will be willing to wait the extra two years but would prefer not to. All in all this is a good thing as it makes it fair or at least a bit more fair. tracking someone that is of no danger for life has done nothing to help victims and has not reduced crime. So the ones that take delight in tormenting and hating have had this for long enough. Limiting the amount of time a person has to deal with the problems can only be good for the populous in general. Less problems with housing and employment will lesson the burden on social services. Will help ex-offenders to be able to go on after serving their time. Being productive taxpayers instead of a burden.

I see this as a well structured approach that if applied fairly will have a positive outcome for the state as well as the individual families that have had to deal with life without a chance of ever being considered for relief from the system.

As in so many proposed laws I'm sure a few will see this as some kind of benefit to sex offenders. when in reality it creates fairness as this was a punitive sentence cloaked as regulatory that was to broad and bordered on being one ruling away from being unconstitutional. This should be constitutional as it does not appear to be cruel and or unusual though punishment the debt can finally be paid.

this law took a long time to come about. the registering of sex offenders although a noble idea at first grew over the last 20 years to unmanageable, expensive as well as being counter productive in it's very nature.

I don't see the idea of registering sex offenders ever going away in my lifetime. However until it does this is the next best thing. the fact that this approach creates hope and eliminates the lifetime requirement will provide a incentive to lead a crime free life that leads to being released. Instead of constant disappointments and new barrios to being able to do that. For the ones that just don't get it and reoffend they will be the ones on this for life or in prison. for the rest that do get it have paid their debt the reward will be to someday go on with their lives.
What a novel idea.