People who work with children or vulnerable people already need Garda vetting. Sex offenders are barred from working with children already.

You are right about the witch-hunting: a few years ago a paediatrician’s home was attacked in the UK because people confused “paediatrician” with “paedophile”.

Andrew, the new law is carefully worded to ensure that someting like that does not happen. Relevent information will only be disclosed on a confidential basis to parents where the parents have raised concerns regarding an individual

Denis, you cannot ensure that this information remains confidential. How are you going to stop the parent from telling all of their friends and neighbours, resulting in a person who has served their time in prison being completely shunned by their community?

If an ex-offender is shunned everywhere he goes, how is he ever going to live a normal life and become a contributing member of society? Your proposal will only serve to make ex-offenders more dangerous by not allowing them to return to normal society.

James the law allows the Gardaí to disclose information of sex offenders to the parents of children and vulnerable adults IF they believe that child is at risk. This information is disclosed in confidence and if this is breached, the parent themselves are breaking the law.
The reality is that in most cases, in smaller communities, where there is a greater risk of direct action if a predator is exposed, many people in the community have their suspicions, yet sadly parents are the last to know.
Furthermore, if they are not a risk to the community, then checking them out in a formalised way will allay unnecessary fears.

What research indicates that this type of legislation allays fears? Anywhere it has been introduced it has increased fears and has led to vigilantism and hysteria.

It is impractical to suggest that a parent who passes on this information is breaking the law. That would be near impossible to prove. It would be up to the prosecution to prove that the information came from the parent in question. There is no way you could prove that the only person who could possibly have passed on the information was the parent in question.
Even if you could prove that it came from a particular couple, you couldn’t prosecute both for a “crime” that only one of them committed. If neither admits it, the case falls.

This proposal blocks any chance of an ex-offender reintegrating into society and becoming a normal, law-abiding citizen.

I can predict what will happen… concerned vigilante parents will set up a ‘track the sex offenders in your neighborhood’ website, where if your name is john smith and you have a public social media profile you will be mistaken as someone else and your picture, workplace etc will be posted for all to see in the irrevocable court of internet public opinion.

The economist did a very good write up on the uselessness of such legislation including the last bill that specified those on the list, couldn’t live with 2 miles of a school, or 5 of a playground, or 3 of a school crossing. When the numbers were crunched turned out there was three streets in the country you could legally live if you were on the list.

It’s not about protecting sex offenders it’s about not making legislation to protect children descend into uselessness

What the hell do bankers and politicians have to do with child protection? Theres always one isn’t there. Grow up.

The destruction of the Welfare State perhaps?

Here is a question for you. What would you do if one of your children was on the register would you be so quick to look for this. Also what is your obsession with sex offenders you truly seem to be obsessed with them. If a person has done there time in prison and is released then they are a free citizen again and have paid there dept to society funny how people can continue to commit crime time and time again and nothing be done about it. What about people who have conviction after conviction you never seem to say anything about them. Also if you are going to bring in your Vigilante Charter well then it should apply to anyone who has committed a crime after all doesn’t it say the law is not allowed to discriminate and what about the family of the offender have you thought of them. Are you also going to be paying for any damages or bills that may occur when the vigilantes get hold of this

You have not balanced anyone’s rights in fact you have violated them. This law is discriminatory as it only applies to one section. Why not apply this law to all who have committed a crime. As I asked before would you be so quick to ask for this if one of your children were on the register and are you going to answer to the families of offenders when they are shunned and run out.
You say that there are provisions that people can not disclose any information they receive do you honestly think that is going to work and that you can prove that they did or didn’t say anything. Like anyone else who commits a crime once you leave prison after serving your sentence which is determined by a judge you are once again a free citizen.