Penny-wise Yet Pound-foolish

In 1607, Edward Topsell wrote: “If by covetousness or negligence, one withdraw from them their ordinary foode, he shall be penny wise, and pound foolish.” In other words, if you take resources you need in one area and you negligently spend those resources on something that you don’t need then you are penny wise yet pound foolish.

Under this paradigm current U.S. laws regarding management of known sex offenders, who have paid their imposed debt to society but are now forced to live in our communities, are clearly penny-wise yet pound-foolish.

An assessment of each mechanism individually such that potential benefits are weighed against the exorbitant cost, both in terms of law enforcement resource as well as taxpayer money, not to mention the fact that they actually work to increase rather than diminish child victims, quickly exposes that these laws take money and human resources from where they are needed and negligently spend them on something that is counterproductive to public safety. This is a textbook example of “penny-wise yet pound-foolish.”

The Sex Offender Registry is the foundation of all of these mechanisms. This mechanism is a “feel-good” law that creates the false illusion – a Red Herring if you will – that communities are safer because of the knowledge that a person living in the midst has been convicted of a sex crime. Proponents of the registry say that they want to know the identities of people living near them who are convicted sex offenders so that they can better protect themselves from those offenders. The problem with this position is on two levels. First, the only way a person could truly stop someone from harming another person is to have advanced knowledge of such criminal intent. There is no way to gain such knowledge simply by knowing a person is a convicted sex offender. The reality is that if a convicted sex offender is intent on committing another offense there is a high probability that they are not going to comply with sex offender registry requirements. This means that the mechanism only serves to make it harder on those who are intent on obeying laws and rebuilding a stable, victim-free life. Thus, the mechanism makes those otherwise low-risk offenders a greater threat. Second, there is no way a person can possess this knowledge and not react to it. There are varying degrees of vigilantism that are forced upon this entire class of people living in our communities, and the long-term emotional effects of such emotional abuse are difficult to quantify at this early stage. One thing is certain; however, and that is that those effects cannot be beneficial to public safety.

Politicos often cite recidivism rates – the percentages of offenders who commit a new crime – that are not only untrue they are the polar opposite of the true rates. The U.S. Department of Justice has conducted two lengthy studies of offenders released from prison since 1994. The first study stated a reconviction rate for new sex crimes among offenders after three years out of prison as 5.3%. A recent study indicates that number has declined to 3.3%. When you consider the total number of child sexual abuse cases and apply these recidivism rates to those numbers you come to realize that the odds of any given child even being the victim of child sexual abuse at all are so small that instilling hysteria in every child seems nearly as bad as the emotional scarring of actual sexual abuse itself. Factor in the low recidivism rates of convicted sex offenders who have completed treatment and you find that the odds are a hundredth of a percent that any given child will be molested at the hands of a registered sex offender.

Clearly this demonstrates that this mechanism is penny-wise yet pound-foolish.

Moreover, there is an inherent problem with the Sex Offender Registry as federal funding for state and local governments is tied directly to the number of offenders on the list. This breeds overzealous prosecutions, a fact which can clearly be seen in the ballooning growth of the registry. According to the numbers provided by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the number of Registered Sex Offenders in the U.S. grew from some 385,000 in late 2005 to 603,000 in early 2007. This is an increase of nearly 40% in just over a year. Also, if you study the per capita ratios of Registered Sex Offenders in medium/small sized cities compared to that of large cities you find a huge disparity that can only be attributed to this inherent overzealousness on the part of smaller prosecuting offices. Additionally, nobody seems to bat an eyebrow when Registered Sex Offenders travel on vacation and appear permanently on every registry for every address they stay – how could this possibly serve to protect anyone?

Britain just this month released a government decision to ban a public registry. The British Parliament actually conducted a ten-year study of the American registry to reach this conclusion. In the end they stated that the public simply cannot handle this information without inciting vigilante reactions.

Every expert on child safety agrees that these mechanisms are counterproductive to child and public safety. What more do we need before we demand responsible legislation?

The ancillary mechanisms associated with sex offender management in our communities are no better and include; residency restrictions, buffer zones, surgically implanted GPS chips, colored license plates, and driver’s license designations. Each of these mechanisms are also cost prohibitive and divert important human and monetary resources away from law enforcement agencies. Again, these laws are penny-wise yet pound-foolish.

It is time for American voters to stand up and demand that our lawmakers reverse these laws and implement responsible, balanced legislation in their place that focus on education, treatment, and prevention rather than on hype and hysteria and a false sense of security. It’s not too late to make this penny-wise and pound-WISER.