Registry Ineffectiveness
Three decades of research shows public registries are ineffective at preventing sexual harm and may increase risk.
Public Registries Are Ineffective in Preventing Harm
Public registries are defended as a tool to protect children from strangers who pose a high risk. Yet the United States Department of Justice reports that 93% of sexual offenses against children are committed by family members or close acquaintances — and by first-time offenders who would not have been on any registry.
An American Psychological Association analysis noted: “Despite the public perception that sex offenders are strangers stalking playgrounds and other areas where children congregate, the majority of offenses occur in the victim’s home or the home of a friend, neighbor, or relative.”
The Evidence Against Registries
- 93% of child sexual abuse is committed by someone known to the child — family members, acquaintances, or trusted adults — not strangers on a registry.
- 95% of sexual offenses are committed by someone not on any registry.
- State corrections data consistently lists recidivism rates for sexual offenses as the lowest classification of crime tracked.
- Individuals convicted of CSAM-related charges have remarkably low reoffense rates, with a significant portion of rearrests due to administrative registry violations, not new offenses.
- Three decades of research shows registries are both punitive in practice and ineffective at protecting communities.
Colorado’s Registry System
- Colorado’s sex offense registry is governed by the Colorado Sex Offender Registration Act (CRS 16-22-103), which requires registration for all individuals convicted of a sexual offense — using an offense-based classification system rather than an individualized risk assessment.
- Registration periods range from 10 years to lifetime depending on the offense, with re-registration required quarterly, semi-annually, or annually (CRS 16-22-108).
- The registry is maintained as a publicly searchable database by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CRS 16-22-113), exposing registrants to vigilantism, housing discrimination, and employment barriers.
- Under CRS 16-22-110, individuals can petition for removal from the registry — but the process is costly, requires legal representation, and success is not guaranteed even for low-risk individuals who have completed treatment.
A Call for Registry Reform
Evidence-based practices, including validated risk assessments, are essential for ensuring community safety while promoting effective rehabilitation. Colorado’s offense-based approach should be reformed to a risk-based model, similar to the approach adopted by a growing number of states including Arkansas, California, Georgia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, and Washington.
Judges should have the discretion to make individualized assessments of what sentence is appropriate based on the circumstances of the case and the person being sentenced. Sentencing and registration requirements should not be a one-size-fits-all policy.
Learn More
Reform the Registry
Help us advocate for a risk-based, evidence-driven approach to community safety in Colorado.