The ONE Good Thing Bush has done...

[irishgrl]

He signed into law H.R. 4472, the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006.

Back to Story - Help
Bush signs law for national sex offender registry 1 hour, 37 minutes ago



President George W. Bush on Thursday signed legislation that will establish a national sex offender registry and try to make it harder for sexual predators to reach children on the Internet.

The legislation, called the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, is named for Adam Walsh, a 6-year-old boy who was abducted 25 years ago on July 27, 1981, and eventually killed.

The boy's death prompted his father, John Walsh, to lead a long effort to seek greater protections against violence crime. He became host of "America's Most Wanted," a television show aimed at catching criminals.

"The bill I sign today will strengthen federal laws to protect our children from sexual and other violent crimes, will help prevent child pornography, and will make the Internet safer for our sons and daughters," Bush said in signing the new law in the White House Rose Garden.

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children estimates that there are more than 560,000 registered sex offenders in the United States. About 100,000 are not registered or do not have up-to-date registrations.

The legislation will create a national sex offender registry, available to the public, to plug gaps in existing state systems and community notification requirements.

An offender who does not keep his registration up to date in any state in which he lives, works or attends school could face felony charges and up to 10 years in prison.

It will also create a registry for substantiated cases of child abuse or neglect to help law enforcement and child protective services.

Addressing concern about Internet predators and online pornography, the bill establishes education grants, and provides for 200 new federal prosecutors and 45 new computer forensic scientists to work on such crimes.

*************************************

[carrie721]

I'm sure this is a wildly unpopular opinion, but I disagree with sex offender registries in general. I think they violate the rights of those who have served their time. The vast majority of sexual crimes are committed by family members, so IMO these registries do more harm than good. If society feels these criminals are not appropriately punished/reformed while serving their time, perhaps we need an overhaul of our penal system, not a policy that violates their rights to move on with their lives.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by carrie721

I'm sure this is a wildly unpopular opinion, but I disagree with sex offender registries in general. I think they violate the rights of those who have served their time. The vast majority of sexual crimes are committed by family members, so IMO these registries do more harm than good. If society feels these criminals are not appropriately punished/reformed while serving their time, perhaps we need an overhaul of our penal system, not a policy that violates their rights to move on with their lives.

Whilst I can appreciate your sympathy for the rights of the accused (convicted), Im more concerned about protecting children. And experience teaches us that the highest rates of recidivism occur among child molesters.
These folks may have served their time, they may have even undergone therapy but they are still a risk to their own children and those of their neighbors. I am not sure how you think a registry does more harm than good if the molester is a family member but I can tell you that the greatest hurt, the ORIGINAL hurt came from the family member, or neighbor or even the stranger that did the molest/abuse in the first place.

[carrie721]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

Whilst I can appreciate your sympathy for the rights of the accused (convicted), Im more concerned about protecting children. And experience teaches us that the highest rates of recidivism occur among child molesters.
These folks may have served their time, they may have even undergone therapy but they are still a risk to their own children and those of their neighbors. I am not sure how you think a registry does more harm than good if the molester is a family member but I can tell you that the greatest hurt, the ORIGINAL hurt came from the family member, or neighbor or even the stranger that did the molest/abuse in the first place.

What I'm saying is that if the vast majority of child molesters target family members, how much help could a registry do? Family members would already know, and wearing that scarlet letter around would be a detriment to anyone wishing to turn his life around. And for those child molesters who actually do target random children ... realistically speaking, if they want to find a child, they will find a child, registry or no.

[Rickypt]

Originally Posted by carrie721

I'm sure this is a wildly unpopular opinion, but I disagree with sex offender registries in general. I think they violate the rights of those who have served their time. The vast majority of sexual crimes are committed by family members, so IMO these registries do more harm than good. If society feels these criminals are not appropriately punished/reformed while serving their time, perhaps we need an overhaul of our penal system, not a policy that violates their rights to move on with their lives.

I agree with everything you've said. I am far more supportive of much longer prison sentences for sex offenders than creating an ongoing prison for them once released through these public registries. If the fear of recidivism is so great, then keep them in prison. There is no point in releasing someone in a way that they can't possibly be a member of society.

This is yet another election year feel-good "we did something for the children" measure. If someone is a major danger to children, what is the better solution: keeping them in jail or letting them free but putting their face on the internet?

The guy who kidnapped/molested the boy (killed the boy) and girl last year in South Dakota (I think that's the state) after killing their mother and step-father was a registered sex offender.

[carrie721]

Originally Posted by Rickypt

I agree with everything you've said. I am far more supportive of much longer prison sentences for sex offenders than creating an ongoing prison for them once released through these public registries. If the fear of recidivism is so great, then keep them in prison. There is no point in releasing someone in a way that they can't possibly be a member of society.

This is yet another election year feel-good "we did something for the children" measure. If someone is a major danger to children, what is the better solution: keeping them in jail or letting them free but putting their face on the internet?

The guy who kidnapped/molested the boy (killed the boy) and girl last year in South Dakota (I think that's the state) after killing their mother and step-father was a registered sex offender.

Glad to know there's someone who shares my view! I agree that it is a feel-good measure, and it makes parents feel as if they have a better ability to protect their children against molesters, but truly, if someone wants to take advantage of a child, he/she will no matter what. Our tax dollars could be going towards something better.