Sell porn and become a registered sex offender.

Once again the “sex offender” laws are proving themselves to be a threat to liberty. In addition, they make reoffending more likely when it comes to real offenders while snagging huge numbers of people who clearly are not sex offenders in any clinical sense of the word.

Let us take this example from the state of Ohio.

A new law there has now declared that anyone who sells an item later deemed to be “obscene” must register as a sex offender.

Now consider that there is no actual legal definition of “obscene”. An item is considered obscene only if a prosecutor can convince a jury that is obscene. So the only way to know that what you have is “illegal” is to be convicted of having an illegal item. There is no way to know what the law says in advance because the law is nebulous and undefined. It is obscene if something called “community standards” are violated but no one knows what community standards are or how to define it.

Under this Ohio law a store clerk might sell a copy of Hustler magazine to someone and then find, six months later, that some jury decided that issue violated the undefinable “community standards”. At that point the store clerk becomes a sex offender and is listed on the sex registry.

I have long argued that the politicians are intentionally expanding “sex offender” into more and more areas, where it doesn’t belong, in order to expand their powers. And as long as panicky people react with moral horror at the mere mention of the term “sex offender” the longer it will be that the politicians get away with this. “Sex offender” like “terrorists” or “global warming” are terms meant to shut off the critical faculties, and encourage emotional, unthinking reactions. Terrify the people and they will comply.

A woman who runs a Hustler shop is suing trying to overturn the law. She says she is terrified that they might decide she had an “obscene” video in her shop and that she would be punished as a sex offender. By the way, she can’t take items anywhere to get a legal appraisal as to whether they are “obscene” or not. There is no definition she can look up and no state official who will help give her guidelines. She just has to take her risks under the law.

Under the absurd Ohio law she could go to prison for one year and be a “registered sex offender” for 15 years. And once that happens the law has numerous ways to arrest her again. Once you are classified as a “sex offender” it becomes almost impossible for you to not violate the law. Consider the case of Cedric Bradshaw.

Cedric Bradshaw is going to jail for life. His offense was that he didn’t register as a sex offender. And his sex offense? He had just turned 19 years old and he was dating a 15 year old. Even through there was barely an age difference between them the law says he was now an adult and she wasn’t. So having sex with her made him a “sex offender” and he went to prison for it.

When he was released he ordered to join the Sex Offenders Registry so that would-be vigilantes could harass him. After he was released he had to register at his home address. He moved in with his sister and registered as required. The state ordered him to move since her home was too close to a recreation center. Bradshaw had to find a new home and reregister.

He then went to live with his aunt and he registered again. The state then ordered him to move again because sex offenders are not allowed within 1,000 feet of a church. (WTF!) At this point Bradshaw was figuring it was nigh unto impossible to satisfy the law --- which is what the politicians want.

A friend then spoke to one Edgar Moore, who said Bradshaw could have the spare bedroom at his place. So once again Bradshaw went down and registered the new address. But two things happened that he didn’t count on. One is that he accidentally transposed two of the numbers in the address. And the other was that he had trouble reaching Moore after he registered.

The police went to check the new address, to make sure it complied with the almost laws regulating where Bradshaw could live. They discovered the address was incorrect. They were able to figure out the actual address when they realized the numbers were merely transposed. So they went to see Moore. But since Bradshaw had been unable to reach Moore to set up the move-in date he was not there yet. As far as the police were concerned that meant Bradshaw had not complied with the law.

So Bradshaw was arrested for failure to register as a sex offender. Of course he had registered twice before and been told he had to move each time and then start all over again. He made a mistake the third time and was unable to move in fast enough because he couldn’t reach Moore. No matter. The law is the law and it must be obeyed -- no matter how impossible.

Bradshaw turned himself in. He waved his right to a jury trial figuring the judge would understand things best. As Bradshaw’s attorney said, “the man tried to do what he was supposed to do, and the statute and its rigid requirements got in his way”. Bradshaw was found guilty and under the absurd laws from the Theocratic Republic of Georgia he was sentenced to prison -- for life.

Not long ago I had the opportunity to read the “conditions” for one “sex offender” on parole. He was required to live in specific city and could not travel more than 25 miles in any direction. But his residence had to be in this medium sized city. Another provision was that he was forbidden to live in any part of the city where children would reside. (Remember his “victim” was not considered a child in most states.) Consider your own town for a moment, can you think of any neighborhood which was entirely devoid of children? Basically the requirements were impossible to obey.

Janet Allison previously had a four-bedroom home which she occupied with her children. Like many parents she discovered her 15-year-old teenaged daughter was pregnant with the child of her 17-year-old boyfriend. Allison concluded that it was best that her daughter and the father try to create a stable home environment for the child. She allowed the father to move into her home. Allison was the one arrested and charged with “being party to child molestation”. She was convicted and forced to register as a sex offender. Yet she didn’t touch anyone. She was trying to encourage her daughter and the father of her daughter’s child to settle down and build a family.

These laws are so widely applied that you can’t be sure what it means if someone’s name appears on the sex offenders list. In some states taking a piss at the side of the road is sufficient cause to be added to the registry. But these laws make it harder for the released prisoner to find a stable home or employment. In fact, it is acknowledged that it is harder for them to seek counselling in order to deal with whatever issues they may have. This sort of instability, according to experts, increases the likelihood of the prisoner reoffending. Contrary to popular myths the reoffending rate for sex offenders has been relatively low. But as more and more released offenders find themselves in unstable, stress-filled environments more of them will resort to their previous patter. Virtually everyone who deals with sex offenders admits that is the case. So these laws are NOT protecting children. They are increasing the chance that children will be victimized.

These sorts of laws may be very bad public policy. But they are good politics. When the Iowa legislature held hearings on such laws Sen. Keith Kreiman, chairman of the Judiciary Committee said “it is very politically risky to even hold hearings.” Legislatures who question the validity of such legislation, or who point out that is counterproductive are often accused of being pro-molestation or “soft on crime”. Once again the political solution and the best solution are worlds apart but in the end politics wins out. The only thing that will change it is when more and more people realize that the laws actually don’t make the world a safer place and that they are doing far more harm than good.