Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Yearly Driver's License Renewal for Sex Offenders Bill Debated

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 12:13 PM
Original message
Yearly Driver's License Renewal for Sex Offenders Bill Debated
Yearly Driver's License Renewal for Sex Offenders Bill Debated

California lawmakers are considering a bill that would require convicted sex offenders to renew driver's licenses annually so that their whereabouts can be tracked.

California authorities do not know the current addresses of more than 17,000 sex offenders, according to the bill's author, Assemblywoman Rebecca Cohn, D-Campbell.

Not only does AB 1788 require proof or verification of an offender's current residential address, but it bars offenders from providing post office boxes as their address.

Critics of the legislation say it penalizes law-abiding offenders by requiring license renewals in person as well as a $36 fee each year.

http://www.kxtv.com/storyfull2.aspx?storyid=16572
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. On the surface it isn't a bad idea at all...
But the yearly fee does seem to be something of a Constitutional hitch.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. It also depends on how "sex offender" is defined for this purpose
In some places, getting caught mooning someone counts as a sex offense (public lewdness).

Why would that rate such close scrutiny, especially years later?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. I know...I've got issues with that myself.
A lot of people are going to jump up and down in support of it, but I'm not sure they're ever going to look at the big picture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Right, prorate the fee so they're not paying that much more
because they're complying with public safety, surely we can afford to give the compliant ones a break.

Of course, it'll just encourage rogue males to drive unlicensed, but that's just another way to catch them and encourage them to obey the laws about registration.

Registering these guys is a public safety issue, a way for the police to rule them in or out when a sex crime happens that fits their particular MO down the line. I disagree with the publication of their names and addresses on vigilante lists. It doesn't make anybody safer and discourages compliance.

After all, the guys who register know they have a problem and want to obey the law.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uncle ray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. males, guys?
hey, good thing there are no female sex offenders, huh?

and not having a liscense does not in any way make it easier to catch them, there is no way a cop can tell if a driver is liscensed or not until he actually stops the driver.

if they want to keep track of sex offenders, fine, make them check in yearly, but this proposal does nothing to help. as far as i'm concerned, the only time they should be able to restrict your driving priviledges is for driving related offences. being a sex offender has nothing to do with ones ability to operate a motor vehicle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. Woops, my bad
However, female sex offenders are still so rare they rate front page columns in the papers and round the clock coverage on tabloid cable news shows.

Yes, they are included in that category.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whoa_Nelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. This makes no sense
If the whereabouts of the sex offenders is unknown, then how will sending them yearly notice to update their licenses make sure they re-register?

Seems the only way this whole weird idea would work would only be when any offender is caught in a routine traffic stop or a vehicle accident, or is naive enough to go to the DMV to renew their license.

Seems like a waste of money to create this when all the offenders have to do is keep driving with expired licenses, keep ignoring any forwarded mail...if they even get forwarded mail...and to avoid detection of being in any neighborhood/town/city by flying below the radar and not being stopped for any traffic reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
3. Sorry, but this is absolute nonsense
More piling on of sex offenders, even though they've paid their debt to society, let's penalize them some more. Oh, and while we're at it, we won't discriminate between real rapists, and people who got busted for statuatory rape back when they were seventeen, and their consenting girlfriend who was sixteen.

This is a huge blind spot people, wake up. What is happening here is that a precedent is being set, not just for future sex offenders, but for anybody who is convicted of any crime. This year, it is sex offenders who have to register for a list, and have to renew their license yearly. Next year, it could very well be applied to the guy who got busted for a couple of joints.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MazeRat7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. agreed...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. I agree, it would have more meaning if they cut out the bullshit
If your neighbor's kid peeks over your fence and sees you sunbathing in the nude, suddenly you're a "sex offender". Many of these laws don't make any distinctions between innocuous activities such as this, getting busted at a swinger club, etc and actual sex crimes like rape or child molestation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BiggJawn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
7. Why do they need to know where they're at if they're not re-offending?
Are these offenders who are currently on Probation, and if so, isn't there a clause in their Probation agreement to keep their PO aprised of any change of address?

What? they're out of jail, they're off probation, and they've dropped off the face of the Earth?
Given that your Average Joe thinks they should be burned at the stake without the complications of a trial and all that legal "stuff", can you blame them?

Grandstanding. More of this "Look! I'm REALLY tough on CRIME!" bullshit that comes out in an election year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. I think it would all make more sense if
They actually (ie judges and prosecutors) made some intelligent distinctions on sex offender.

Those who are truly repeat types and whose crimes were pretty 'bad' (as it were) I could see keeping an eye on - same goes for killers and serial robbers and bush and his whole crew.

The system is broken, deeply. And people will keep buying into such things as this so long as politicians make them feel more safe (sadly).

We don't fix problems, we monitor them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
10. Backdoor tax hike
If there's 17K they can't find, how many are there who they CAN?

Want to raise some revenue? Target some easy-to-scorn group and charge them a "fee".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 01:08 PM
Response to Original message
12. The one day every year they spend in the DMV
Edited on Tue Mar-21-06 01:09 PM by Freddie Stubbs
is one day they can't molesting children.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 11:53 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC