Sex Offender Notification

A Cross‐State Comparison

Bibliographic Data

ID21177355
AuthorsVictoria Simpson Beck (Russian State Agrarian Correspondence University, corresponding author), Lawrence F Travis
Year2006
Volume7
Issue4
Pages293-307
Publication date2006-09-01
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenuePolice Practice and Research (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1561-4263 • E-ISSN: 1477-271X
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/15614260600919639
OpenAlexW2009041548
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited7

Crime prevention programs have increasingly become more reliant on community involvement in policing efforts. In 1996, the federal government enacted Megan’s Law requiring states to implement community notification procedures for offenders convicted of sexually violent offenses or crimes against children, or risk losing 10% of their federal anti‐crime funding. Currently, all states have sex offender notification procedures; however, the notification process varies by state. This paper compares data from a survey of residents in Jefferson County, Kentucky, where a passive notification process is used by the state police, with data from a survey of Hamilton County, Ohio residents, where an aggressive notification process is used by the county sheriff. Study findings indicate that Ohio’s aggressive notification process is more effective in getting the word out, but that variation in the notification process does not influence the extent to which community members perceive risk of victimization, fear victimization, or engage in protective behavior

Computer security · Criminology · Family medicine · Law enforcement · Notification system · Partner notification · Political science · Sex offender · State police · Computer Science · Crime Patterns and Interventions · Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis · Law · Medicine · Psychology · Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub