Reader Steve Murphy, who remembers the lively discussion about special license plates for offenders that raged on Nobody's Business this past weekend, kindly sent me a link to this story:
Lawmakers in Ohio said on Wednesday they want to force convicted sex offenders to use a fluorescent-green license plate on their cars so they can be easily identified. A Republican and a Democrat in the state legislature in Columbus have joined forces to propose the law, which echoes measures in several U.S. states that require convicted drunken drivers to use a yellow, pink or red plate on their cars. "The fluorescent-green license plate will make the most egregious sex offenders easily identifiable," state Democratic Rep. Michael DeBose said in a statement.
Police said the green plates would allow them to track sex offenders, who are already required to register with the local sheriff's office and are prohibited from living within 1,000 feet of a school. "It will give Ohio families a great peace of mind knowing that their children will be able to recognize where this danger exists," Summit County Sheriff Drew Alexander said. Alexander joined the politicians at a news conference in Columbus, the state capital, to praise the proposed law.
Opponents of the proposed law argue the use of a special plate would stigmatize everyone who shared the offender's car — including their spouse or children.
Yes, that's one important counter-argument.
A second one would be — and I thank a prescient Martin Owens for pointing it out — that the initiative opens the door to branding and tagging other offenders in similar ways, or the same offenders in different ways, or both.
Will we have fuchsia license plates for people convicted of marijuana possession? Aqua plates for drivers caught for not wearing seatbelts, or for speeding, or for smoking a cigarette with their kids in the backseat? How about red plates for activists with a rap sheet for civil disobedience?
And if it's fine to issue special plates to sex offenders, how will we recognize these fiends after they get out of the car? The plates are useless at that point, so we should probably require some visual warning to be worn at all times. Perhaps a yellow star would work?
A third reason to oppose the Ohio proposal is that the measure is unlikely to promote law and order. Quite the contrary. It doesn't take an overly vivid imagination to understand that the cars and their drivers (whether the driver is actually the perp or just unlucky enough to be the perp's spouse or brother or child) will frequently be the target of vandals and violent bullies unable to resist the fun of teaching sex offenders a lesson. The secondary result is that it's as good as certain that cars with fluorescent-green license plates will be uninsurable. So what Michael DeBose and his Republican comrade-in-arms are proposing is a law that (a) increases the number of uninsured vehicles; (b) encourages vigilante vandalism; and (c) paints a conspicuous fluorescent-green bull's eye on every convicted sex offender in Ohio who has already done his or her time — which strikes me as tantamount to a state-sanctioned invitation to assault.
If you think I'm exaggerating, check out the lovely mission a man named Stephen A. Marshall carried out in my neck of the woods last year. And remind yourself that one of Marshall's victims, a young man called William Elliott, was hardly a violent pedophile. Elliott was on the sex offender list for no other reason than that he'd slept with his girlfriend a couple of weeks before she turned 16.
The Ohio lawmakers don't care about the likes of William Elliott. In fact, in the name of public safety and under the guise of justice, they're happy to deliver even non-violent offenders to a lynch mob, with all too predictable results.


I think your third point is the most compelling.
The first thing that sprung to mind when I read that was that child abusers etc. are treated as a "different class" of prisoner while they are in prison. Not by the guards, but by the other prisoners. I wouldn't expect that to change among people who are not in prison. Religious pro-lifers kill doctors. I don't think it's too hard to imagine that there are people who would target sex offenders.
It also doesn't make much sense to say that we sentence offenders to "rehabilitation facilities" and then continue to punish them for behavior displayed prior to the "rehabilitation". That's what I've got a problem with in this case, but arguing based on principles never seems to work all that well...
Posted by: rj | Thursday, March 01, 2007 at 05:20 PM
Not to mention that the image of "sex offender" that generally pops to mind is often times different than the reality. Many people are forced to register as sex offenders when their worst offense may have been being a 17 year old boy who had sex with his 15 year old girlfriend. Should they be forced to drive around with a green license plate til they die?
Posted by: Nick | Thursday, March 01, 2007 at 05:31 PM
There's nothing more seductive than the prospect of taking extreme measures in " a good cause". I weary of good people and their thoughtless extremes. Let's have government by some genuine bad bastards for a change. At least when their appetites are sated they might let the rest of us alone.
But the Army of God's urge to oppress everyone else never sleeps...
Tip of the hat to Rogier for noting my earlier arguments...
Posted by: Martin Owens | Thursday, March 01, 2007 at 07:31 PM
You have a point this needs to stop. I cant have a normal life myself and FYI I am not a pedophile or a repeat offender. It has been over 7 years since my "crime"
and while I wont excuse it nor do I ask others too. The simple truth is I lost my mind (I have A lonnng mental health history) and unfortunently I went in the direction of an SO and not say cuting myself or seing little green men. I spent over 3 years in the prison system
(raped and assulted) and I spent almost 3 in a State Hospital in an Sexoffender Treatment program,passed with flying colors.Did I meantion I was a juvinile offender? What I am saying is this is a VERY grey subject despite what people want to make of it. The persecution needs to stop! What about a black SO who is legaly segragated aginst because of the no SO in 1000 ft BS,because that is what it is. Or with this OHIO stuff,not to far till they make us wear little yellow six-pointed stars everywhere.Sound Familler? Don't think that won't happen in the US, Hello puritan Scarlet letters, or try telling that to the 100000s of Japenese-Americans and others rounded up and put in interment camps in the U.S. during WWII. Bottom line be warned this can and will happen to you too. The laws with SOs set the legal presedent.
For your readers cheak out this website
for some enlightenment on this subject.
I can't give the link becase of comment spam but the website is Legal Issues and Court Cases:affecting Sex Offenders at geocities,google it and you should find it.
like SOs national repeat offence rate 3.5% for Child Molesters
as per the 2003 Deparment of Justice report.
WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!!
Posted by: A FORMER SO | Friday, March 02, 2007 at 01:25 AM
I didn't know violent sex offenders could drive in prison? Hmph, who knew?!
Posted by: c.a. Marks | Monday, March 05, 2007 at 01:56 PM
Came across your blog looking for info in responding to a commenter -- this is an excellent post.
There are a couple other facets that make this proposed law wrong to me that I won't clog your comments with, but I go through them here if you're interested: http://thefifthcolumn.com/blog/?p=256
Posted by: Schadenfreude | Tuesday, March 06, 2007 at 01:55 PM