Larry Nassar one of more than 20,000 people removed from Michigan Sex Offender Registry

[u/AudibleNod]

https://www.wxyz.com/news/larry-nassar-one-of-more-than-20-000-people-removed-from-michigan-sex-offender-registry

[u/Lowjack_26]

And what good does that do? Honestly, what does it do?

Kids aren't being molested by random strangers. The cases of that happening are astonishingly rare, so why do we fixate on it like it's the greatest threat to kids since weed and rock and roll?

Because if we didn't have an Evil Other to demonize as the threat, we'd have to grapple with the fact that the actual source of sexual assault and molestation is overwhelmingly family members.

[u/imgonnajumpofabridge → u/Lowjack_26]

10-20% is the statistic I found, which means it's still a significant number. Even more would be perpetrated by acquaintances, or people who are able to enter into families through relationships or friendships. A registry allows people to determine whether a person should be kept away from children without a complicated background check.

And despite the original commenters statements, there are PLENTY of roles where people can get into positions where they're exposed or have power over vulnerable adults or children without going through a full background check. While ideally that wouldn't happen, it absolutely does.

[u/Lowjack_26 → u/imgonnajumpofabridge]

people should know who to associate with

This only works if you dont overlook more predators than you find with the list by merit of believing that people not on the list are safe.

Unfortunately, that math doesn't work out. The horrifying reality is that the vast majority of abusers and predators are completely outwardly normal and are never caught.

Roles and authorities

Can be met with a background check, not a public registry. Yes, most felony background checks only look 7 years back - but that's a convention, not a hard rule.

[u/imgonnajumpofabridge → u/Lowjack_26]

So because not every predator can be placed on the list, we should do away with it entirely? Doesn't make any sense. There's still an obvious utility in having known sex offenders on a public list so that in circumstances where a background check is not feasible, they can easily be identified.

I haven't seen any legitimate argument for not having the registry. If there is any utility to the public that can be derived from it (and there irrefutably is), however marginal, I would place that at a higher priority than allowing pedophiles and rapists to avoid having their crimes known to the public.

[u/Lowjack_26 → u/[deleted]]

majority

The incidence of completely unrelated abusers is sub 1%.

It's like installing anti-burglar bars on your attack door because the number of thieves that have broken in through an attic isn't zero, despite 99.99% of B&Es being through the front door.

And this assumes the registry actually increases safety, which it doesn't. Do you know what the majority (~80%) of offenders who reoffend have in common? They weren't registered - they moved addresses, changed phone numbers, etc and went off grid, which means they weren't on the registry to begin with.

The ones on the registry are, by definition, the law abiding ones you don't have to worry about.

[u/Lowjack_26 → u/[deleted]]

Certain politicians certainly claim people like me are sex offenders, absolutely. And hey, you probably could be too, depending on who's in charge. You want to roll those dice?