States Consider Drunk Driving, Violent Offender, and Murderer Registries

Online registries for sex offenders are searchable across the country—allowing people to find out where those convicted of sex crimes live and what their offense was. It makes the public feel safe and it gives the lawmakers who proposed and passed the bills a sort of political clout, as they seem most interested in public safety and being tough on the worst criminals of all. But, the sex offender registries have shown little if any impact on recidivism. So, why are lawmakers now suggesting states spend millions on everything from drunk drivers to fierce pets?

Maine is considering an online database of convicted drunk drivers; Illinois is debating the value of a murderer registry; and New York’s State Senate passed legislation to create a violent offenders registry 57 to 4. While all of these seem like they would keep the world a safer place, there’s little evidence to back that up.

“While the registries are attractive to politicians who want to appear tough on crime, they often do little more than spread fear and encourage vigilantism,” according to the New York Times. Studies suggest sex offender registries have had little effect on crime prevention, as only 13% of new sex crimes are committed by known sex offenders and that those crimes are about six times more likely to be committed by people who are not listed on a sex offender registry.

Many of these proposed registries are in response to noteworthy cases. Lawmakers like to pick up on the latest newsworthy case and make a movement out of it, gaining the support of the public on the tailwinds of a high profile and sometimes tragic case.

The Illinois murder registry was first proposed after a young man convicted of killing his ex-girlfriend in 1998 was released from prison. He didn’t go on to murder someone else, but the victim’s mother joined forces with lawmakers to push for a registry that would ensure people would know where he lived forever.

Would a murder registry do any good? Considering relatively few murderers are released from prison and even fewer ever go on to reoffend, it’s not likely. Murderers have the lowest rates of recidivism, with only 1.2% going on to commit another murder. And for those that do reoffend, a registry isn’t likely to stop them.

Even when you look at the registries with an open mind and can potentially see the value in knowing that a murderer lives next door, a drunk driver registry seems a bit over the top. What purpose does it serve to know that your neighbor, for instance, was convicted of drunk driving several years ago? Is there any evidence to show that such a list would keep him from doing it again? Or is this just a way for people to be nosy and for the lawmakers to seem truly interested in public safety?

With all states scrambling for cash, now seems hardly the time to create vast online databases where there is no evidence of their effectiveness. However, because it’s good for politics, lawmakers will likely pass some of these arbitrary registries. Who knows—maybe a marijuana possession registry or a speeding ticket registry could be next.

About David Matson