Monday, February 20, 2006

Kulongoski hates kids

Family Watchdog
Unfortunately, Oregon does not currently publicize the registered sex offenders living within the state. Consequently, we are unable to provide any information about Oregon's sex offender population.

In discussions with Oregon state officials, we learned that Oregon does plan to provide a web-based registry of its sex offenders. Their planned implementation date is July 1, 2006.

We will eagerly await the introduction of Oregon's online sex offender registry. As soon as Oregon data is available, we will provide it to Family Watchdog visitors.

So Kulongoski went three years without "putting children first" when it comes to their safety. The only reason we have a sex offender registry even coming is thanks to my representative Jerry Krummel (and others) who put together a bill to establish one.

But this is something that I believe could have been done by executive order or simply a directive to the Department of Corrrections. Kulongoski failed Oregon's children.

(The title of this post is going to be my continued play on Randy Leanard's favorite accusation towards conservatives, if you catch him on Lars' show you know what I'm talking about)

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Kulongoski has failed Kulongoski.

Once Neil's and Vera's strings were cut the puppet can't come in out of the rain.

Pitiful dupe that he is/was . . . or is/was he a stooge?

Now, lets see if Jim Hill can dance under the Limbo bar.

My bet is he can't.

Daniel said...

It's pretty sad to see challengers line up to go against the incumbent of their own party. Actually it's not sad when they are democrats.

BEAR said...

with all the recent pandering Major Kook has done, and still loses his party's endorsement.....Bwaahaha! As G.B. Shaw observed, Maj. K. is floundering in an "ecstasy of mendacity."

Sue K. said...

Yeah, pretty bad when your own party goes against you. The name Howard Dean comes to mind. I bet most Dems would like to be rid of him too. Thank God for that scream!!

Sue K. said...

Why does Kulongoski not want Jessica's law?

BEAR said...

Word is that Kate Brown, Peter Courtney and Maj. Kandyass were and are listening closely to their "non-traditional gender" constituency. Just a rumor. As partial birth abortion is seen by the left as a right to privacy issue, and fought tooth and talon, so do the lefties fight against protecting our kids. They can't stand any limits on sicko behavior. Maj. teddy won't take a public position, but prefers to hide behind the party hacks.

Anonymous said...

"We will eagerly await the introduction of Oregon's online sex offender registry. As soon as Oregon data is available, we will provide it to Family Watchdog visitors."

I can't await this eagerly...they are only going to make available the names of the "violent" or "highest at risk of re-offending" sex offenders...not ALL of them that are currently available on the lists.

http://www.oregon.gov/OSP/SOR/whats_new.shtml
"House Bill 3486 - Public Internet Site
On September 6, 2005, Governor Kulongoski signed this bill into law. It mandates the posting of predatory sex offenders to a public internet site, who are determined to present the highest risk of reoffending or are found to be a sexually violent dangerous offender (defined under ORS 144.635)."

Quote from Bill O'Reilly's show on Feb 20th...
"Right now, California's 85,000 registered sex offenders out on the street -- 85,000! And the California Department of Corrections says 50 percent of sex offenders released from prison 2001 went back to prison within three years --half of them."


Of course, that 50% are just the ones that got caught...


Currently if you would like a list, the list of offenders, both on and off supervision, can be obtained by calling the Oregon State Police at 503-378-3725 Extension 4429.

Max said...

http://www.criminalcheck.com/

has listings of sex offenders by zip code. I don't know if it is entirely complete.

Ric said...

My concern is about what defines a 'sexual' preditor.

There are men out there with that label who in no way touched a child, or exposed a child in any sexual way. However the laws are so broad as to catch them up.

That being said, if you have a good definition, then once they are convicted post their names and pictures and addresses on the public square. Which today is the internet.

I would oppose this for those merely arrested or charged with these crimes - innocent until proven.

Anonymous said...

Quote from Ric:
"There are men out there with that label who in no way touched a child, or exposed a child in any sexual way. However the laws are so broad as to catch them up."

Can you give us an example?


Max...
CriminalCheck.com's OFF-SUPERVISION list for 97223 is up to date, according to the list I received from the state on 1/27/06.

However, it DOES NOT list the names of the ones that are ON SUPERVISION (as of 1/27/06 in zip code 97223, there were 40.)