home

Move Over, Sex Offenders

By Jeralyn, Section Civil Liberties
Posted on Sun Jan 22, 2006 at 08:29:09 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Sex offenders are about to share the stage with society's latest pariahs: meth cooks.

Newsweek reports:

Law-enforcement officials in Tennessee have a new approach to fighting meth: naming names. Now the public can search an online database for the name, alias and birth date of anyone convicted of manufacturing the drug since last March. It's the first compilation of its kind nationwide....

By using the registry, landlords or property owners could make sure they're not renting to cookers. The names will stay on the site for seven years, at which time the offenders can appeal to be removed.

Civil libertartians are rightfully up in arms:

"We need to recognize that [meth offenders] served their sentence, and we need to re-integrate them into society," says Hedy Weinberg, executive director of the Tennessee ACLU. Convicts already face many postprison obstacles, including finding jobs and housing, she adds.

Housing and jobs are key ingredients to staying out of trouble and re-integrating with society. The more we ostracize ex-offenders and prevent them from obtaining housing and employment, the more we increase the chances they will re-offend. These registries cripple attempts at rehabilitation.

If we prevent meth cooks and other ex-offenders from obtaining work, how will they survive? They can't, which means they are an increased risk for re-offending by committing an economic crime. It then becomes a vicious cycle.

It's time to break the cycle, not create more impediments to rehabilitation.

< The Bush-Abramoff Photos | The Pentagon's Domestic Spy Program >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Move Over, Sex Offenders | 19 comments (19 topical)
    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 22, 2006 at 08:57:37 AM EST
    I'm glad to see TL's consistency between this issue and that of Megan's Law(s). Keep up the good blogging.

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 22, 2006 at 09:05:15 AM EST
    The supposed logic for sex-offender registries was that such offenders are uniquely recidivist because of their psychological makeup, perhaps because of a biological basis. Now that meth cooks are being treated the same, what would stop jurisdictions from setting up registries for all ex-cons, so that everyone leaving prison will have even more problems getting housing and work and otherwise rejoining society?

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 22, 2006 at 09:24:42 AM EST
    Looks like something hitler did and it looks like bush is doing the same thing.

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#4)
    by Edger on Sun Jan 22, 2006 at 09:33:12 AM EST
    It would be a good thing if there were laws against "extra-judicially" arbitrarily adding to and effectively extending punishment meted out by courts for offenses.

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#5)
    by Jlvngstn on Sun Jan 22, 2006 at 10:01:20 AM EST
    And how long before a landlord is sued for renting to a "meth cooker" "knowingly" when the information is so publicly available? Meaning no one wants to live next to them and no one can rent to them. Then what?

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 22, 2006 at 10:44:24 AM EST
    Criminal convictions are part of the public record. It's hard to imagine that, in the very near future, all public records won't be available online for a far more nominal fee (maybe even ad-supported) than is required now. I don't care for the implications of Megan's Law or what Tennessee is doing, but we are really talking about the margins here. We're just talking about local governments defraying the expense of keeping these databases. If local governments didn't publish registries like these, wouldn't/won't the private sector step in at some point? It sucks that, in Database Nation, nothing will ever be lived down. But "it sucks" doesn't make it less inevitable.

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#7)
    by Edger on Sun Jan 22, 2006 at 11:49:28 AM EST
    kth: It's hard to imagine that, in the very near future, all public records won't be available online for a far more nominal fee (maybe even ad-supported) than is required now. We're pretty much there now... For 9 years rapsheets dot com has selling criminal record searches, and custom criminal records databases. There are others as well... Google search criminal record

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#8)
    by Johnny on Sun Jan 22, 2006 at 01:37:48 PM EST
    Oh why don't we just create a prison island and be done with it?

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 22, 2006 at 04:36:01 PM EST
    Maybe the local governments could defray a few more expenses by selling torches and pitchforks through the websites.

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#10)
    by Johnny on Sun Jan 22, 2006 at 08:20:48 PM EST
    Upon further reflection, I beieve the gov't is aware that vigilante justice will be the inevitable result of this kind of ostracism. I also believe that most americans will be comfortable with murders committed against persons on this list.

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#11)
    by roy on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 10:51:39 AM EST
    Don't most landlords make applicants agree to a criminal background check before letting them rent? That's been my experience, but maybe I'm just shifty looking. If they do (or can), that tells me the folks behind this law are just looking for a way to say they're doing something about drugs without the hassle of actually doing something.

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 11:40:34 AM EST
    In case you haven't noticed, meth labs have a tendancy to explode often. I don't think it would be a bad thing to know if your next door neighbor is a "cook."

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#13)
    by Jlvngstn on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 01:33:36 PM EST
    Variable, I understand your concern, however my point was poorly worded and was to be interpreted as someone that was convicted of meth cooking, whether 1 year ago or 10 years ago. Ergo, someone with this scarlet M may find it difficult to rent a place and if the scarlet M does find a place, heaven help the landlord if the person commits a crime in the building as they will be sued for renting to them. ROY: I live in one of the largest us cities, and to my knowledge none of the mgmt companies running the apt buildings here conduct background checks. Almost every one of them do run credit checks. And the smaller buildings barely run credit checks.....But then again, I look like Opie.

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 01:36:37 PM EST
    Boy o boy...what is this Government trying to do? They just keep taking away our constitutional rights to cook meth... assult children, call Al Quaida... and do whatever the hell else we want in your neighborhood...? I give up....what is this world comming to? I guess I need to go back to being a lib... so I can do all these things in peace.

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#15)
    by Patrick on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 01:53:45 PM EST
    I find myself in agreement with KCinDC. The rationale behind the sex offenders was their inablity too change their "programming". Meth cooks have no such hardship. So unless there is a plan to register all felony offenders, I think it's arbitrary a waste of time and money.

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#16)
    by Patrick on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 02:07:01 PM EST
    arbitrary and a waste of time and money. BB, I don't think I quallify as a lib either (No lobotomy ;-) )

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#17)
    by Johnny on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 02:44:50 PM EST
    I don't think I quallify as a lib either (No lobotomy ;-) )
    Just a rectal-cranial inversion.

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 04:12:03 PM EST
    BB, Variable, et al.: If you don't believe in rehabilitation, then by all measn argue that every crime shoudl be punished by life in prison without parole (or the death penalty). At least that would have some logic to it. But it makes no sense to release people from prison and then make it as difficult as possible for them to find honest work or a place to live.

    Re: Move Over, Sex Offenders (none / 0) (#19)
    by kdog on Mon Jan 23, 2006 at 06:31:31 PM EST
    KC...dont give 'em any ideas. Yet another example of the "cure" being worse than the problem.

    Move Over, Sex Offenders | 19 comments (19 topical)