North Dakota’s sex offender registry gets update to provide residents more information
In 1947, California became the first state in the US to have a sex offender registry program and, over the years, other states followed suit. North Dakota’s law was passed in 1991. The registries are meant to give residents the tools to protect themselves from victimization. Now, North Dakota’s registry is getting an upgrade to provide residents more information.
The website, sexoffender.nd.gov, will now display photos of all offenders regardless of risk level and offer additional search functions to determine offender location and description of crimes. Individuals can also sign up to receive notifications about any offender. More information can be found on the website.
“Many of the public safety features were only available for high-risk offenders and those required to register for life. The updated website makes it easy to search for and find detailed information about every offender, regardless of their risk level. The short synopsis of the crime will help the public to gauge their own level of concern about each offender,” said North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley.
If only they would do the same for politicians!
The article’s weak attempt at balance:
“For years, law makers have grappled with the best way to deal with offenders. Psychology Today reports that research is inconclusive on how effective sex offender registries are to prevent individuals from committing additional crimes, but some research shows registries can deter first-time offenses.”
Everything I’ve read states that sex crime rates are unchanged from the pre-Megan’s Law days, so I’d really like to see the research that supposedly shows that registries deter first-time offenders.
And Psychology Today does not report that research regarding registry effectiveness is inconclusive. It reports the exact opposite in the first hit on Google searching “Psychology Today” AND “sex offender registry”, dated August 9, 2019.
Another brick in the wall
Perhaps in full transparency the website can allow if an offender’s crime was brought to light by a disgruntled spouse and how many other men are also are ‘offenders’ based on her testimony alone.
It sounds like this “upgrade” to the registry is intended only to give the brainwashed public more tools to commit vigilantism on registrants. SMH.
A better journalist would have attempted to quote those whose personal information is being made available by the state. Instead, they are allowing the AG to use their outlet to promote himself.