Introduction
There are certain crimes today, which invoke a strong personal reaction. What is your first mental image and what emotion do you first notice when you hear the term, “sex offender?” Do you picture a scary looking male stranger? Is your first emotion, anger or maybe fear? Now, what is your initial reaction when someone says that the post-sentencing laws for these offenders may be doing more harm then good in regard to current legislation passed after high profile cases. Are sexual crimes all equally heinous, justifying opinions that the offender did the crime so they should accept the consequences? I believe that these laws were created with the best of intentions. Yet, these laws are now creating alternate paths to dangerous alternatives and roadblocks to the goals they seek to achieve.
Legistation
On October 22, 1989, an 11-year-old boy named Jacob Wetterling was abducted from a small town in Minnesota (Hawkins, 2009). Jacob and his two friends rode their bikes into town to a convenience store to rent movies (Hawkins, 2009). On the way back home, a gunman stepped out of the woods, and told Jacob’s two friends to run into the woods and not look back (Yoder, 2011). Jacob, who stayed behind, has never been seen since (Yoder, 2011). A massive manhunt ensued with law enforcement from all over, however their exhausting efforts never led them to finding Jacob or his abductor. This case captured headlines all over the United States and in 1994 it prompted legislation called the Jacob Wetterling Act 42 U.S.C. §§14071, et seq. to be passed by Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton (Hawkins, 2009). This act required states to create a registry for people convicted of sex offenses or crimes against children that were accessible to police by not available to the public (Yoder, 2011). This act has since changed and expanded and would serve as the