Sex Offender Legislation

A sex offender is anyone who is convicted of a sex crime. The crimes that qualify as sex crimes vary by state, but most states include rape (forced and statutory), sexual assault or battery, child molestation or any sexual conduct with a minor, production or possession of child pornography, and attempts to commit any of these crimes. The history of sex offenders has been active since the 1800’s according to author Philip Jenkins. Jerkins explains that in the Middle Ages, children were constantly coming up missing and he also explains that sex crime laws have existed as far back as biblical times with a number of penalties ranging from fines to death for various sexual acts considered deviant at one time or another in society. (Jenkins, 1998)

An Alabama convicted sex offender was charged Thursday with kidnapping and murdering 12-year-old Naomi Jones after finding Jones's body in a creek near her house.

California enacted the first sex offender register law in 1944. However, sex offender registers in the United States did not become widespread until the 1990s. The Jacob Wetterling Act 1994 was named after 11-year-old Jacob Wetterling who was abducted and to this day has never been found. The Jacob Wetterling Act implemented the first nation-wide sex offender register. Originally, the concept of a sex offender register was intended to for use solely by law enforcement; it was not an intention for the sex offender register to be public. However in 1996, Megan’s Law was added to the Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act 1994 and made it a requirement for the information on sex offender registers to be accessible by the public. Megan’s Law was enacted as a result of a heinous crime where 7-year-old Megan Kanka was raped and murdered by her neighbour, who had two previous convictions for sexually assaulting young girls. In 2006, Congress passed the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act. This Act required states to enact stricter registration requirements, including an increase in the penalty for not registering and more frequent verification of sex offenders’ locations. Since 2006 public access to sex offender registers has been accessible on the Internet in most states. On these websites you can search for an offender by name or location, and find information such as their photo, convictions, address,

Notification: Public Attention, Political Emphasis, and Fear”, by Richard G. Wright, makes the following statement that goes along with issue involving the allocation of funds, “For the millions of direct and indirect expenditures spent on compliance and implementation with registration and notification laws, there is very little funding spent on sexual assault prevention, victim support, and offender treatment” (Wright 102). It is extremely important to put money towards rehabilitation, and the support of the victims of sexual assault, not just the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act.

Research questions. There is little doubt that unsafe, abandoned structures and vacant lots trigger expenditures by municipalities, either directly or indirectly, and result in lost revenue. However, less certainty exists about the relationship between crime rates and the conditions of neighborhoods as expressed by abandoned buildings and vacant lots. The research questions are: (1) Do abandoned properties actually attract criminals and contribute to social

The Sex Offender Act 1997 stated that people who have been convicted of a Sexual offence must register their address with police and may be served with an order preventing them from going near places where children are.

Before Megan’s law there was The Jacob Wetterling sexually violent offender registration act. Under this act it meant that all violent sex offenders will have to register and the police will be informed when they are release also. Now we move forward couple of years 1996 when the Megan’s Law was passed. The difference between these two the Jacob Wetterling sexually violent offender registration act and Megans Law is that the act focus on the high risk offender having to register once they get out of prison. When you look at Megan’s law it has to do with that and also adding community notification.

In my opinion, Mary Kay Leourneau was and still is a rapist, and I would qualify her has a female sex offender. Leourneau was educated and knew right from wrong, she was an elementary school teacher and she was also a respected member of society (Mary Kay Letourneau Biography 2016). Even though her marriage had problems, in no way does this make it ok for her to become involved with a child? Vili Fualaau is a victim for life; she took this kid a 13-year-old adolescent with his hormone changes and swings. At this age boys bodies are experiencing physical changes combined with mental changes, what do boys at this age think about sex. She manipulated the situation to her liking, by having him in her home and becoming friends with her son (Mary Kay Letourneau Biography 2016). I can’t even think what kind of psychological mental abuse her children had to face. She's not sick in the sense she has a psychological problem(s) from her past or her marriage, she knew exactly what she wanted and went for it.

The process through which gentrification is carried out is very intricately planned. Drugs, prostitution, and violence usually play the most important role in the process of gentrification. When neighborhoods are infested by crime of any sort, the first thing that happens is the immediate decline in property value in areas like Guilford and Park Heights (“The Mortgage Bubble Invades Baltimore”). The home owning taxpayers in Baltimore City are usually blue collar workers who are just trying to make ends meet, and because of their income restrictions many of these citizens are forced to live in areas of high crime. Generally people only live in these areas if they have to, so when a developer comes along and offers to buy citizens homes at a price that the citizens at the time considers to be extremely profitable in their neighborhood, they usually take the money and run without carefully considering that the offer that they have accepted is much less profitable than what the developers have planned (“City’s East side Renaissance Spreads”). We

Registration of sex offenders is mandatory under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA). It provides the general qualifications of one to be registered as a sex offender. It requires registered sex offenders to give updated information on their addresses, place of work or school and to make physical appearances at legible offices to verify the updates. SORNA determines the information that a registered sex offender should submit and makes it available to the public (SMART).

The two most important variables that influenced their decision were crime level and educational quality. It was also determined that neighborhoods with a large population of Asian or Hispanic residents did not affect the respondent’s likelihood of purchasing a home. However, given a population of more black residents in the neighborhood, there was a negative effect on the respondents’ decision, although educational quality, crime rate, and housing value still remained important factors. When respondents were told the racial composition was 15% black or less, one-quarter of whites said they would be very likely to buy the house, but when the percentage increased to 65% or more, virtually no whites said they would be very likely to buy the house. It is important to note the study also found that the higher the percentage of nonwhites in the respondent’s fiend group, the more likely they were to buy a house with a higher percentage of minorities. Another important finding of the experiment is the increased negative effect of an increasing population of blacks when the respondent had a child under 18, as opposed to when others did

“Recently, some studies suggest an opposite effect, that long-term neighborhood dwellers are less likely to leave a gentrifying neighborhood than a non-gentrifying one, and that some of those who move out can actually capitalize on the move” (Hilbert, 2016). Hilbert indicates that gentrification can also be positive in the sense that residents can capitalize on the move due to the increase of property

As in many similar multi-level analyses, this study suffered from the crude measures of neighborhood exposures by using census tracts’ indicators (4). Neighborhood characteristics were retrieved from the 1990 U.S. Census. Thus, they may inaccurately represent neighborhood context during the relevant time-period (1995-1996), as it is possible that these characteristics may have changed over time. One methodological barrier in neighborhood studies is the correlation between neighborhood variables (5). To overcome this barrier, they summarized the four indicators (% black, % poverty, violent crime rate, and % boarded-up housing) into one index variable. While this approach is methodologically correct, it became difficult to understand which aspects of neighborhood context affected the outcome, which limited the relevance of study findings to real-life

Sellers living in Sonoma already know the area’s climate is attractive to home buyers and the region’s effort to manage its community’s housing development has added further value to living in the quiet and country like setting. Many residents avoid the commute establishing professions within the community’s industry while others commute to the bigger more populated cities.

As shown in Table 1, mixed land use has a positive effect on the residential location choice only in Group 1 but negative in other groups, indicating that young people prefer the location where the diversity index of land is high. This is because such location provides more diverse opportunities of jobs, recreation, and shops to the young. High residential density has a significant and negative effect on residential location choice in all groups, and the average building age also has a significant and negative effect on household residential location decision in Groups 1 and 2 but not in group 3, which implies that younger people prefer new building. Namely, while older people tend to live in their old housing continuously, young people prefer newly constructed housing.