By Sandy . . . A 71-year-old man was murdered on September 18 in Fremont, CA. His killer did not know him. He didn’t kill him during a robbery. He had never seen him before. Nevertheless, he set out to kill David Brimmer specifically, going to his house with a knife, attacking him when he opened the door, and chasing him as he tried to escape across the lawn and into a neighboring garage.

Why?

In 1995, Brimmer was convicted of a sexual crime. He served nine years in prison, was released, and was required to register on California’s sex offender registry. Like almost everyone who has served a sentence for the first conviction of a sexual crime, he has, from all evidence, not reoffended in 30 years.

Using the information readily available online, the murderer selected his victim. The killer said that he sought a registrant who was elderly, presumably because he would be easier to kill. However, Mr. Brimmer fought for his life. The attack lasted for what had to have been five minutes or more.

This would be horrific if it had never happened before. But it has, over and over and over again; in state after state, vigilantes have sought, found, and murdered individuals on sex offender registries. In some cases, killer knew victim prior to the murder and killed him after finding him listed on the state registry.

Horrific doesn’t even begin to be adequate. It has happened in Maine; in Washington

State (two separate incidents, four victims)*; in Nevada; in South Carolina; in Minnesota (with moose horns as the weapon); and, less than a year ago, in Pennsylvania.

It has happened before in California, four separate times, from 2007 to 2011. ** Mr. Brimmer’s murder makes five.

And those are just a few of the many that we know about, all senseless murders of individuals on registries. How many more do we not know about?

It is far past time for it to stop.

People will kill other people. But when they identify and locate their victims by means of a government-required online list, complete with address, it has gone too far.

NARSOL calls on state attorneys general to order the temporary removal of home addresses from their states’ online sex offender registries.

NARSOL further calls on state legislatures to enact legislation as soon as possible that will eliminate the online publication of home addresses of persons listed on their states’ sex offender registries.

We will never stop individuals from killing other individuals.

However, our government must stop providing roadmaps to murderous vigilantes by putting their potential victims on a list that tells the world they are dangerous—even though the vast majority are not—and providing their addresses to make the killers’ task as easy as possible.

Adocates, if you have any connection with legislators in your state, send them this or write something about it yourself.

If you know anyone with connections, tell them.

If you don’t know anyone, phone the legislative offices. Talk to the aides. Tell SOMEBODY! Tell anyone who will  listen.

SPEAK OUT; your voice may be the one that makes the difference.

* https://www.cbsnews.com/news/man-claims-child-rapist-murders/

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/12/the-vigilante-of-clallam-county/281968/

** https://www.record-bee.com/2007/12/11/murder-and-megans-law/

https://kesq.com/news/2010/01/12/second-arrest-made-in-sex-offender-murder/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2319621/Charles-Gaskins-White-supremacist-sentenced-life-murder-child-molester.html

https://ktla.com/news/man-convicted-of-murdering-sex-offender-neighbor-in-vigilante-killing-2/

The post ACTION ALERT: Protect ALL citizens; remove addresses from sex offender registries first appeared on NARSOL.

By Sandy . . . Looking at some of the headers of the articles sent in today’s alerts, I cannot help but shake my head in wonder.

“Communities explore other Halloween plans after sex offender law abolished,” announces a Missouri news outlet. This is in regard to the Missouri Supreme Court’s recent ruling that requiring those on the state sex offender registry to post “No candy here” signs at their homes is unconstitutional.

Even if the signage requirement were not only one part of a comprehensive set of restrictions, would this require that Halloween plans be changed?

Another media outlet says, “California’s tiered sex offender registry law allowed two convicted sex offenders to remain off list.” This is a reference to changes in the registry law in California that allows registrants to be removed after a certain length of time. This is part of a legal process, and a process followed in many states, not, as the article implies, some “loophole” that is used to skirt the law.

In spite of the online outlet Patch abandoning its “red dot” Halloween safety maps in virtually every state and location, a few Illinois editors are running them, “warning” parents where registrants in their communities live. NARSOL has done battle with Patch for years and are pleased that so few editors remain who are willing to defy all empirical evidence by printing this information.

Changing Halloween plans, dismay over legal registry procedures, and trick-or-treat “safety” maps—why would these have me shaking my head in wonder? Perhaps because I am old enough to remember the time when the registry and all it has spawned did not exist.

What was life like then? Were children molested while they were trick-or-treating? Did community members feel panic over who might live down the street? Were sexual crime and reoffenses rampant? Were children grabbed daily—or weekly—or monthly–out of school playgrounds and parks?

No.

Empirical evidence shows the rate of reoffense by those convicted of sexual offenses has remained steady over many years, both before the registry existed and since. As shown in an AI overview, “According to research, there is little evidence to suggest that sexual crime recidivism was significantly worse before the existence of sex offender registries, with most studies indicating that sex offenders generally have a low recidivism rate regardless of the registry system; in fact, some studies even suggest that public registration could potentially increase recidivism rates by making it harder for offenders to reintegrate into society and find employment, potentially leading to further criminal behavior.”

And as far as Halloween, this has been said many times, and it remains true: research reveals no instance of a child being abducted or molested by a person on the registry while trick-or-treating. As far as can be determined, the only time this has happened was pre-registry, in 1973—51 years ago—in Wisconsin. The victim was a little girl named Lisa French, and the perpetrator was someone who, even if there had been registries, would not have been registered.

This is a good place to remember that virtually all sexual crime against children is committed by those who are not already registered. What does this mean for Halloween?

Quoting myself from the Lisa French piece:

According to research, approximately 96% [of the perpetrators of sexual crime] have no previous history of this type of crime and therefore are on no registries. They aren’t locked up or confined to their homes with all lights off on Halloween. They aren’t checked on by law enforcement to assure that they are keeping themselves away from all child-related activities. They don’t show up as red dots on a map warning parents away from those addresses.

They are in your homes, at your parties, in your neighborhoods. They answer the doors and hand out candy to your children. They are where they have always been. And all of the Halloween restrictions on all of the people on sexual offense registries across America mean absolutely nothing.

The post Halloween 50 years ago and now first appeared on NARSOL.