The State of Arizona has had a searchable registered sex offender registry on-line for quite some time. The search is functional, though a bit tedious at times. Here's a screen shot for a search of my zip code:
The main problem with this site is some of the search limitations. For example, I live in the FAR east part of the zip code shown above. There is a registered sex offender about two miles from my home — in a different zip code east of mine, so they aren't shown on this map. Now I could have searched by my specific address and found this guy. But a real estate consumer doing their due diligence is more likely to search by zip code — and possibly miss something important.
Enter a better sex offender registry search. Courtesy of Vision 20/20, Inc., this search uses a far more intuitive interface than the State's website, and displays results in an easier to visualize manner. There is no cost for this service.
I found Vision 20/20's search easier to use, and much easier to visualize the results, compared to the states solution. The data set appears to be the same between the two sites, and I suspect Vision 20/20 pulls data from the State.
For our out of state readers, many other states also have sex offender registries managed by government entities (try Googling "state sex offender registry"). Vision 20/20's solution appears to work on a national level as well.
There are some out there that think it's not "fair" to publicly list sex offenders. I'm not even going to go down that road. If you don't want your picture shown next the the words "sex offender" then don't do it. I for one like to protect my wife and kids and appreciate knowing who's around. Recidivism rates (repeated violations) of sex offenders tends to be higher than it is for other criminal offenses. Here is an interesting look at recidivism in sex offenders. To be "fair and balanced", here is an article from PrisonActivist.org that claims the recidivism rate for sex offenders are over-reported and are actually "low" at "only" 13.4%.
There are approximately 11,000 registered sex offenders in Arizona. If "only" 13.4% of them commit another sex related crime, that's "only" 1,474 criminal sex offenses.
That's comforting. I think I'll keep the registry searches bookmarked and continue to supply the search sites to our clients.
Hat tip to TechCrunch!
Technorati Tags: sex offender search, Vision 20/20
Thanks for reading! We value your thoughts and opinions, so please feel free to leave a comment. Contact us if you have any questions or need help. You can also get automatic updates for this blog free via:
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to this blog via email or RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
{ 1 trackback }
{ 11 comments… read them below or add one }
Lani 08.26.07 at 1:17 pm
Regardless of where a reader stands on the “issue,” I love your ability to disarm everyone!
I praise AZ for such an amazing tool… we have great searches here but nothing as super advanced as that! ARPAIO doesn’t play around, does he?
Mica 08.26.07 at 8:34 pm
The recidivism rate is much lower than the public thinks, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. Ignorant people and certain politicians and media deliberately mislead the public to serve their various interests.
Regarding the registries - many are listed for offenses that you may have committed when younger and just got lucky that you were never placed on a registry. For example, have you ever peed in a park or mooned a sports opponent? Or had sex with an underage girlfriend? Well, you’d be a sex offender.
Then there are those CHILDREN being listed for such things as playing doctor or the most outrageous of all: a 13 year old Utah girl forced to register for having sex with a 12 year old boy. Or the two teens who took pictures of each other, e mailed them and both forced to register as “sex” offenders.
So be very careful whom you label as a sex offender. Who knows, maybe one day you will do something that is rated as a “sex” offense, or maybe one of your children will.
Then it won’t be quite so good to see YOUR or your children’s mug on that registry, will it?
I say all this because society is truly ignorant to what is happening to members of society who are getting caught up in this insanity. Society thinks that child molesters are being listed. Well, yes they are, and anyone else the fascist states can rack up as having committed a “sex” offense. They do this because they receive additional funding if their registries are larger. It’s a cynical game for additional funding.
Jay - The Phoenix Real Estate Guy 08.26.07 at 8:41 pm
Thanks for your insight Mica. No system is perfect. I for one have no desire to live near a child molester. And I see no point in protecting child molesters. I’d rather see too many people listed than none. But that’s just one person’s opinion.
I’m not an attorney, and I’m only familiar with Arizona statues regarding who is required to register as a sex offender. In Arizona, “Level 2″ and “Level 3″ offenders are required to register, not “Level 1″. I think it’s likely that those peeing in a park and mooning are Level 1 offenses and are not required to register. I highly doubt that a minor’s photo and address would be posted on the registry site.
Can you provide a link that references how government entities get more funding if they artificially inflate their registries? I’d like to further educate myself on this subject.
Nancy 09.22.07 at 10:46 am
RE: Can you provide a link that references how government entities get more funding if they artificially inflate their registries? I’d like to further educate myself on this subject.
This article will interest you. Dead people listed and infated registries = money for florida.
http://www.orlandoweekly.com/f.....sp?id=8531
Carol 12.09.07 at 9:22 pm
I just happened onto this site by accident and WOW, does it make for interesting reading.
For quite some time now I have thought that people’s thinking has run away with them concerning this issue.
It would appear that all of those people sitting home looking at porn sites on their computers are the very ones throwing stones at others doing the same thing.
While I have never gone on a porn site I do know for a fact that several of our neighbors do so and have admitted it. It was a big joke at one of the “block parties” recently. They were trying to figure out if the kids they were looking at were underage or not. That sounded suspicious to me but I didn’t call the police and turn them in.
I think people are reporting people for doing things that they themselves are doing when it comes to this issue and other forms of abuse (ie. spanking a child all of a sudden becomes child abuse).
Maybe we are going a bit to far with our finger pointing. Accusing someone of being a sex offender destroys their lives, no two ways about it. If they are guilty of contact with a child I say they should be punished, but for anything less I think we should think twice about punishment (prison).
These are just my thoughts and I don’t expect many to agree with me in todays age. We seem to be accusing people of too many things today that are somewhat innocent.
Lani 12.10.07 at 8:40 am
Interesting that the female voices chime in this way; in my opinion, it’s typically women on the witch hunt. Look, I check the registry monthly so I can show my children photos of who to steer clear of but they know not to be hateful or rude, just to avoid. That said, a friend of mine got arrested at a party at UT a few years back because at HIS house, the bathrooms were all full and he went to his back yard to pee in the bushes. The house was up the street from an elementary school and it was deemed that it was possible for a child to witness this “lewd conduct,” thus he still has to register as a freakin’ sex offender.
That said, it is still important to have a tracking system and I’m really proud of Arpaio- if only all of the nation participated accordingly, we’d have a much better time of this.
Thanks for chiming in, Carol!
Mica 12.11.07 at 7:50 pm
The federal government and the states are spending God knows how many millions and billions of dollars maintaining these registries. But for all the length of time they have been in existence, I have yet to set any empirical data (not anecdotal) that they have made any difference in preventing additional sex offenses. I understand New Jersey, the state that started this crusade, was doing some study but nothing has come out in the media.
Having taken the time to educate myself on this issue - starting in July 2006 - I can say that I have yet to run across any study that shows that x number of women or children have not been victimized by the presence of the registries. However, I have seen plenty of evidence (alas mostly anecdotal) that ex offenders and their families have been harassed by people hoping to “protect” themselves.
So I don’t support these registries. If you’re going to have them, at least be intellectually honest and state that it’s not for protection against registered sex offenders but rather to “name and shame” former offenders. Otherwise, why stop at sex offenders? Why not have all ex offenders (violent and property offenses) be listed for all the world to see? The recidivism rate for some property crimes is truly sky high, while recidivism rates for sex offenses is 5%-19%. And please don’t insult my intelligence and all those who don’t favor these registries by saying that sex offenses are somehow worse than other crimes. I would say that swindlers who steal peoples’ fortunes, drunk drivers who kill, and murderers commit crimes that have lifelong consequences for their victims. Yet I have yet to see registries for these folks.
Yarna 06.03.08 at 6:29 pm
Interesting reading. In response to the last post…you can access the vine link for most states and check out your neighbors for such other criminal offences…..as to have they kill, harmed, scamed, sold drugs..ect….As to the registeded sex offender, they are worse because they harm innocent children and destroy the lives of they children. And also if you look at all the names it is not only men who offened. Just to question why do you seem to want to protect them?
Mica 06.03.08 at 8:45 pm
Yama: Did you read my other posts? Here in California, anyone who has committed anything considered “indecent” or “sexual” is placed on Megan’s List. Since this state has been registering people since 1947, there are lots of people and many whose offense was way back with nary an offense since. that means child molesters are listed and so is everyone else. Don’t tell me that registered sex offenders are all child molesters because I know that isn’t the case at all. I don’t know about Arizona, but I do know that under the Adam Walsh Act, all “sex” offenses will be registerable, even if they were 50 years ago, like in California. Patently ridiculous, because the intent of Megan’s Law is to protect the public from people who are likely to reoffend and create additional victims. But if their offense was decades ago, it’s hard to argue that they are still dangerous.
Secondly, it’s not a matter of “protecting” them (sex offenders) as being against a state or national registry which serves no other purpose than to villify a certain group of people based on past actions. Don’t try to argue that it protects society because it does not. No registry can, and even though society thinks it’s being protected, it’s not. It’s a false sense of security based on the idea that if you know where all the former offenders are, you can protect yourself.
Secondly, it brushes EVERY offender (whether they’re tier 1, 2 or 3 as some states do) with the same broad brush: molester! It fails to distinguish between those who would re offend and those who made a one time mistake. It makes society think every offender is just waiting to snatch some child (a very popular media image) when that isn’t the case at all.
Thirdly, it utterly fails to protect the innocent against more sexual attacks. Statistics by the U.S.Department of Justice show the greatest preponderance of fresh attacks are being committed by people NOT on the list. This is especially true for child victimizations, which are nine times out of 10 committed by a non registered person already around the child. This creates a situtation in which parents are anxiously scanning the Megan’s Law site for former offenders who live nearby, while Uncle Joe or the babysitter is victimizing the child.
Fourth, it stigmatizes low risk and no risk former offenders who are unable to become productive members of society,while the true predators are hidden from public view by the low risk and no risk. For example, in many states, there is little differentiation between the 19 year old who had sex with the 17 year old and the 35 year old who had sex with the 12 year old. They’re both child molestation.
Tena Swain 07.28.08 at 5:57 pm
I agree with Mica 100 percent! My son was convicted of indecent libertires with a minor. Minor being 15, already sexually active since 14, and mother had her put on birth control because of a previous older boyfriend who was having sex with her. Only my son was the one convicted, not the other older guy. This was truly a act of vindictiveness. The parents are the ones who push to prosecute these young men, not the girls who were consenting to sex with them. Tru
Tru 08.12.08 at 5:45 pm
Mica, you are absolutely right! I wish everyone would take the time to do some of thier own research to learn more about the National Sex Offender Registry. There are thousands of people who have fallen victim to this registry and they need our help. Tru