Bubbaworld

Sex offenders – few if any of us would feel comfortable living next door to a sex offender particularly if the sex offender is a child predator or a violent rapist. This is why most folks are pleased with each new restriction on where sex offenders may live, new registration and tracking requirements and limitations on where sex offenders may work.

Recently Governor Henry signed into law SB 1755 which among other things prohibits registered sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of public or private schools, parks, playgrounds or licensed childcare centers.

At first thought keeping sex offenders 2,000 feet away from such locations sounds like a really good idea. Then the ‘devil in the details’ aspects of this new law surfaces. So much so that some police departments including the Tulsa Police Department opposed the new restrictions and for very good reason.

The problem centers upon the fact that unlike some states Oklahoma groups all sex offenders into a single category and does not differentiate the nature of the threat presented by the sex offender. Under Oklahoma law the person that simply ‘had to go, right now’ and was caught urinating behind a building, the woman who bared her breasts at a concert and the child molester are all treated the same in spite of the vastly different ‘threats’ each may present.

Tulsa Police detective Tim Lawson has the job of ‘educating’ sex offenders upon where they may live in the city of Tulsa. Yesterday he was handed a color coded map containing red, green, blue and white circles. Under the new 2,000 foot restriction registered sex offenders, regardless of the nature of their offense or threat they may or may not present, are prohibited from living within the red, green or blue circled areas. The prohibited areas comprise 99.5 percent of the land area of the city of Tulsa. Similar scenarios are developing all over Oklahoma, particularly in those cities and towns well equipped with schools, parks and daycare facilities.

Detective Lawson fears the implications of these new restrictions and that they will ultimately ‘backfire’ making the task of keeping track of dangerous sex offenders much more difficult, if not impossible. Lawson pointed out, “There’s only going to be so much before there’s lawsuits and the pendulum will swing back the other way and we’ll lose ground as opposed to maintaining the integrity of the act as it was initially written.”

Lawson also expressed fear that more and more sex offenders will simply refuse to register in light of the new restrictions. In Oklahoma, the minimum time sex offenders are required to maintain their registration and notify authorities of any change of address is ten years from their date of conviction.

Lawson pointed out that the vast majority of people who molest children did so to a relative inside their own home, not to strangers at playgrounds or daycare’s. The original sex offender law was to make them register so citizens could know where offenders live and protect themselves, but has now gone well beyond that.

With the new restrictions in place the odds are high that when sex offenders move they will simply do so without notifying authorities. This will be particularly likely with younger adults whose only offense was of a minor nature – peeing on a building, flashing breasts and similar offenses usually committed when the individual was young and which have followed them into their ‘adult life’. An adult life with homes, jobs and families all of which carry with them a need to maintain a stable residence close to their jobs, their children’s schools, daycare and so forth.

Oklahoma law requires that police departments expend time, money and effort keeping track of ALL sex offenders suspected of living within their jurisdiction, not just those that present very real dangers of the worst nature. Once the ‘minor’ sex offenders cease registering and updating their information the police departments will be required to devote the same effort in finding them as they do with the child rapist. Is this going to make Oklahoma’s children and other potential victims safer? Of course it is not. If anything it will put them at even greater risk.

That the House and Senate passed this provision of SB 1755 and that Governor Henry signed it into law is understandable. After all it is an election year and no one wants to appear ‘soft on crime’, especially when it involves sex crimes. Political pandering, rather than logical thought went into these new restrictions on sex offenders.

Had Oklahoma’s politicians actually wanted to address the problem they would have followed the advice of numerous law enforcement professionals and created a multi-tiered sex offender registration system wherein those sex offenders that present a very real and on-going danger would have received ‘special attention’ including enhanced tracking and restrictions and the thousands of other sex offenders with only one minor offense would have been required only to update their address when they move and have no restrictions upon where they may live.

As is so often the case, with this bad law Oklahoma’s elected representatives have taken a bad situation and made it worse.

The ‘Law of Unintended Consequences’ is like that…