IndexIntroductionContextAffirmative ArgumentsRefutationOpposing ArgumentConclusionBibliographyIntroductionWith the reality that sexual predators are dangerous and extremely recidivist, it is an empirical question whether Australia should implement public sex offender registration of sexual crimes, to increase public safety and discourage crime. However, does this public notification system achieve its goal? The current debate provides an in-depth definition of both sex offender registers (SOR) and public sex offender registers (PSOR), when they were introduced and how they work. The discussion then addresses the arguments in favor of PSORs, which include increased public safety and increased response to sex offender arrests. Then there is the rebuttal and opposing arguments, which include vigilantism and recidivism. Used during the debate to strengthen the affirmative and dissenting parties are the principles of punishment; retribution, deterrence and rehabilitation, as well as the sociological theories of Emile Durkheim, Critical Perspectives and Contemporary Perspectives. Finally, the debate on whether or not Australia should adopt a public sex offender registry ends. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssayContextAn SOR is a system in several countries that allows law enforcement to record the actions of sex offenders after their sentences are concluded. The Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission maintains an online application process to manage cases and distribute registrant data across police departments (ACIC 2016). PSORs are a step above SORs and include Megan's Law in the United States, which uses the distribution of criminals' identifying and personal information and provides it to the public. Megan's Law was adopted across America in 1996, after seven-year-old Megan Kanka was sexually assaulted and killed in July 1994 by a neighbor with a history of sexual crimes against children. Since then, SORs have existed in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States, Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica, South Africa, the United Kingdom, Israel and the Republic of Ireland. While only the United States has implemented a public sex offender registry, 2012 saw several advances towards a PSOR in Western Australia. SORs and SORN procedures are applied to help law enforcement reduce sexual crimes and improve community protection. Affirmative Arguments PSOR laws focus on community protection, surrounding the idea that communities can protect themselves by notifying convicted sex offenders in the region. Supporters of PSOR argue that providing children with the knowledge and skills they need to avoid dangerous situations may be the most effective tool for protecting the public. PSORs appear to be useful in urging those who use them to be safety conscious and implement standard prevention measures. Taylor (2017) conducted an internet survey of 162 Western Australian online registry users. Approximately 67% of respondents supported an Australian PSOR, 65% believed the community had the right to know whether sex offenders resided in their neighbourhood, while 56% believed the community had the right to know the identity of all registrants. PSOR is likely the result of community members feeling empowered and capable of making informed decisions, based oninformation available. “Deterrence” as a punitive principle is often considered an economic model of social control. Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794) states "In preventing crimes it is necessary to improve and publish the laws...". Karl Marxist's sociological theory of critical perspectives implies that rules were the codified means by which one class, the rulers, kept another class in check, also believing in promoting conformity and order. Registered sex offenders are caught and detained more quickly for additional crimes than unregistered sex offenders (Schram & Milloy, 1995). This finding undoubtedly has positive effects for the protection of the public, as several reports have shown that SORN has a general deterrent impact on unconvicted and first-time sexual offenders. This is perhaps due to increased community awareness and oversight, increased policing efforts, and the perceived threat of being named and shamed on a public record. Letourneau et al. (2010) studied crime trends in South Carolina, USA, finding that SORN decreased first-time sexual crime cases by 11% from 1995 to 2005. “Deterrence” as a Principle of Punishment it is essential for rational choice approaches to crime control, as advocated by general deterrence techniques. that criminal figures are regulated by the risk of punishment. Sociological theory from contemporary perspectives argues that assessing the threat of offenders prevents and reduces their risk. Simon and Feeley's (1992, 1994) actuarial approaches state that “a key feature of actuarial justice is its dependence on the concept of risk”. Thus, informing community members about the whereabouts of convicted perpetrators reduces opportunities for crime. Rebuttal “The 'public's right to know' must be balanced with the potential social costs of Megan's Law to communities, as well as to sex offenders attempting to successfully reintegrate.” in society (Levenson & Cotter, 2005).” The implementation of SORs provokes knee-jerk reactions born of public anger about the pervasiveness of sexual violence, including the implications for the offender, their families, and consequently the public. While reducing recidivism is generally considered the goal, a crucial component of SORN involves protecting the public. While several media opinion polls have gauged support for a PSOR in Australia, fewer than one in five respondents believe this registry can prevent child sexual abuse (14%). Around 23% reported that it would help the police to identify further sex offenders and only 23% felt that the system gave them a sense of security (Daniel Morcombe Foundation, 2016). Therefore, it is an empirical question whether Australia should adopt a nationwide public sex offender registry. “Rehabilitation” as a principle of punishment focuses on changing attitudes and behavioral problems. Punishments must be structured to suit the criminal rather than the crime, with the aim of reintegrating the individual into a productive position in society (Miethe and Lu, 2005). Emile Durkheim's sociological method proposes that communities have patterns and behaviors outside of any individual, which attempt to understand the function of social facts. Restitution is critical as it repairs previous interactions that were disrupted from their typical form. Opposing Argument PSORs include several collateral consequences resulting from SORs that result in severe punishment for violators.Considering the practical challenge of being released from prison and returning to normal life, many offenders view PSORs as an additional prison sentence, resulting from the barriers that accompany these records. This negative cycle is characterized by an increase in social segregation. This is the result of an escalating moral panic, in which the community recognizes an epidemic of sex crimes which raises awareness of such predators. Previous studies have revealed that decreased social capital and impaired social ties to the community are highly associated with mental health problems and recidivism. This segregation limits the offender's ability to build and sustain relationships with friends and family, limiting the offender's ability to easily access valuable community resources. Contrary to PSORs' intention to reduce sexual offending, research has shown that it is possible to increase offenders' motivation to reoffend due to the resulting lifestyle instability, psychological and emotional harm, lack of support, isolation and shame. Taking into account labeling theory, the sexual offender label given to these individuals may lead to internalization to accept society's perception of them as a sexual predator resulting in further offending (Whitting, Day & Powell, 2014). Crime was thought to originate from internal pathological deficiencies or external social inequalities. Therefore, "rehabilitation" as a principle of punishment is often considered a defect of the individual that can be corrected while the crime is the defect. Karl Marxist's critical perspective sociological theory, argues that crimes are committed exclusively by the lower class and minorities, as the lower class is more likely to be prosecuted, caught and labeled as criminals, and treated more harshly by the criminal justice system ( CJS ). Clinical psychologists argue that environmental factors are considered relevant for reducing the risk of recidivism, lowering stress levels, obtaining employment and overcoming rejection (Whitting, Day & Powell, 2014). However, these factors are very likely to be put at risk by PSORs due to fear of retaliation against the offender and his or her family. Critics of PSORs often highlight the potential for widespread public vigilantism and concerns about the physical safety of registered sex offenders. In Britain, a popular newspaper, News of the World, began a “name and shame” crusade after the sexual assault and murder of a young girl, publishing names, addresses and photos of the perpetrators (Terry, 2015 ). This campaign resulted in a series of vigilante attacks and lynchings, resulting in arson attacks, gang assaults, and destruction of property. Policymakers and law enforcement should therefore be aware of the potential for a variety of forms of dangerous actions to occur with a PSOR and question whether Australia should adopt a public sex offender register. When societies were mostly tribal, the most dominant form of punishment was “an eye for an eye.” Therefore, the retributivist seeks the punishment that the criminal deserves, the punishment that society has the right to inflict. Michel Foucault's sociological theory of contemporary perspectives analyzes the relationship between forms of punishment and the society in which they are found. Sociologist Ulrich found that "if a group poses a risk, it is defined by this 'risk' and is marginalized and threatened with exclusion (Bull 2010: 55)." Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a custom essay, 27, 667-691.