Meth registry idea bad for California, officials say

0 Comments | Oakland Tribune, Sep 15, 2006 | by Roman Gokhman, STAFF WRITER

Web sites to identify those convicted of manufacturing methamphetamine would not work in California, law enforcement officials and elected officials said Thursday.

"There's more effective ways to combat methamphetamine than public registries," said state Sen. Liz Figueroa, D-Fremont. "You need to go out and educate people. You have to encourage treatments."

Methamphetamine can be made anywhere with ordinary household items.

Toxic fumes, a byproduct created in illegal meth labs, is poisonous to residents living near meth labs for years after a lab is closed down.

Four Midwest states have started online registries, similar to sex offender lists, where residents can find out if their neighbors have been convicted of creating or selling the drug. Legislators in six other states, including Oregon and Washington are considering similar measures.

California is not considering a meth registry.

Tennessee created the first meth registry in December 2005, and three other states have followed suit: Minnesota, Illinois and Montana, which lists those convicted of running labs on its sexual and violent offender registry.

Tennessee Bureau of Investigation spokeswoman Jennifer Johnson said a governor-appointed task force came up with the idea a couple of years ago as a response to the state having the second-highest ratio of meth labs in the country.

"It's an informational tool more than anything else," Johnson said. "So that (residents) could be aware that these people have done this in the past."

Tennessee officials believe the Web site has been one of several reasons that the number of labs raided by authorities has dropped by 50 percent.

"It's hard to say how much the registry has played into that," she said. "There are a significant number of hits on that page every day."

The state's Web site lists the offender's name, birth date and convictions of crimes. Usually, no photographs or home addresses are posted.

Johnson said that meth dealers, makers and users show a high recidivism rate, making them more likely to get out of jail and back to a life of crime.

Livermore Police Chief Steve Krull said he has not done any research about the registries in other states, but that anything that could result in fewer meth crimes and labs should be looked at.

But if the point behind the registry is simply to inform people about their neighbors, "I'm not sure what benefit that would be," Krull said.

Krull said that before he would decide whether to back such a registry, he would want to see the exact language of the proposed legislation.

Figeroa said that taxpayers' money should be used to fight the supply and demand of meth and increase jail sentences, not tell people about former meth manufacturers.

"You can't win a war on drugs without getting rid of the demand," she said.

Critics said the registries serve no real purpose and violate civil rights by punishing a person twice for the same crime.

"They served their time and are presumably not a danger to society," said Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, a national advocate against the country's "war on drugs."

"The big drawback is that it makes it difficult for former meth offenders to get their lives back in order," Piper said.

He said that money should be spent on treatment and that California is a national example of dealing with meth because of Proposition 36, which offers non-violent offenders a chance at treatment instead of jail time.

San Ramon Police Chief Scott Holder agreed.

"Why a meth registry?" he asked. "Why not a heroin registry? Why not an alcohol registry?

"That's taking government too far," he said.