Agreed. In our desire to get along and get people listen to us, we’ve slowly backed ourselves into a position that few of us really believe or want. Who here believes that sex offender registries are a way a life and there’s really nothing we can do to totally get rid of them? Unfortunately, many. It’s almost become a part of our lingo.

I don’t know about you, but i came here with the goal of getting rid of this rubbish and with the intention to force the state to act on their supposed intention to protect children. Since sex offender registries have been PROVEN not to do that but in fact do much of the opposite, then why are we still using them?

Registries go against everything we’ve ever been taught about Democracy, Fairness and Freedom. We have always understood in order to protect society you remove dangerous people from society and put them in prison. We then have probation and parole but not registries. Registries are a bridge too far.

I encourage NARSOL not to back down. We came here to end the registry. That is our goal and that alone determines victory. All this other stuff is just a waste of time, money and energy. A State’s Registry being deemed unconstituional doesn’t seem to be helping us much does it? The Hawaii Supreme Court deemed their State’s registry unconstitutional way back in 2001! Yet, they still have one and it’s rockin and rollin to this very day.

THE REGISTRY is unconstitutional, not some State’s version of it that can always be altered and modified at the whim of a Lawmaker needing votes.

Sex Offender Registries, on their face, are UNCONSTITUIONAL in that they violate the rights of the people placed on them. The Government is not allowed to devise schemes that by their very design put people in physical danger, publicly shame them or cause them the loss of a job or a home.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The Sex Offender Registry in EVERY state in ANY form denies everyone on that list all three of these unalieable rights. This is not difficult stuff.

Tier 3’s have to petition the court of conviction directly.

I’m concerned that SLED is misleading juvenile registrants by telling them that they have to wait based on tiers when the law states all juveniles only have to wait 15 years.

The law says, “An offender may file a request for termination of the requirement of registration with SLED, in a form and process established by the agency…” That means, unfortunately, that we have to wait for SLED to get organized, establish the review team and define the process. Also, it will probably not happen until after they do the reclassification of registrants. It is likely that over half the people on the registry will move down a tier from where they are currently classified. So please be a little patient. This is all new ground for SLED and it will take them a little time to figure it out. (But we won’t wait forever!)

Don, that is surprising AND good news that the polititians looked at facts and logic to make a change. Still the number of years on the registry over 10 years is obvious they don’t look at the single-digit re-offense rate for the vast majority of sex crimes. But it’s progress.

I don’t recall making any statements about removal of those convicted in other states. There is nothing in the SC registry law that addresses another state’s registry law. Our law applies to people who committed crimes in other states equivalent to the listed sex crimes in SC and then relocate to SC. They are registered according to the terms of our registry law and now will be eligible for release on the same terms as people who were convicted in South Carolina.

I cannot speak to the handling of people who move to North Carolina, as I am not familiar enough with their registry law. The situation described certainly makes sense, though many states have prohibited such actions to discourage registrants from other states from moving to their state just to get off the registry. We have successfully litigated the state’s failure to provide due process to those entering the state by requiring judicial review of the law’s applicability. It may be that they simply don’t want to bother to conduct court hearings to people who have already exceeded the NC registration period for their offense. But that is only speculation.

Don

For the record, the bill was formally ratified and became law on Wednesday, May 18th.

Don

Jeremy,
Completely agree with that restriction. It is part of all release conditions and registry conditions. Any person, company, or agency that is legit will run a background check, as they should. The ALI recommendations still allows law enforcement to provide that info when requested since ALI recommended that the registry should no longer be public ally available on the internet.
The registry should be abolished, but keep in mind NARSOL is an acronym for National Association for Rational Sex Offense Laws. That restriction you pointed out IS rational.

Thanks @Don. I figured you had and many of your colleagues do when in battles like this.

I have to agree the ruining of lives is a short argument where the argument should be why are they ruining the ability for people to reintegrate into society productively after paying the penance handed to them? Of course, they want the pound of flesh and will continue to ask for it regardless.

Please keep up the good fight in the Palmetto state!