Megan Kanka was so sweet, so innocent, so trusting. She believed that the only monsters of this world were those that lurked in her closet at night. She knew her mommy could scare them away, she always did. Little did she know that the monsters were not, in fact, hiding in her bedroom; they were living across the street. On a hot summer day in July, seven-year-old Megan Kanka decided that she wanted to play with her friend across the street. She told her mom exactly where she would be and her mom, without hesitation, gave her permission to go. Megan never made it to her friend’s house. Jesse Timmendequas, a twice-convicted sex offender, got to her first. He lured Megan into his house with promises of a puppy. Megan loved puppies. On that day, July 29, 1994, Jesse Timmendequas raped, beat, sodomized, and murdered the innocent child. A sadistic pedophile, Timmendequas received great pleasure out of having the strength to brutally murder a young child. Since then, "Megan Kanka" has become a household name. Lobbyists, politicians, and Megan’s own mother, Maureen Kanka, fight for a law that will provide parents with the opportunity to keep their children away from the monsters. This law is "Megan’s Law."

"Megan’s Law" consists of eleven bills that include provisions involving notification of residents that a sex offender lives in their neighborhood, mandatory registration of convicted sex offenders with their local police, DNA testing and analysis, and lifetime supervision. Because most pedophiles cannot be distinguished from the rest of the population, the law is designed to help identify the monsters and keep them in their closets. It is not, however, intended to re-punish sex offenders who have paid their debt to society. When monsters like Jesse Timmendequas choose to violate innocent and trusting children, they give up their rights as people. Society should be worried about the well being of its children, not the rights of its monsters. However, many believe that notifying residents that a sex offender lurks among them is like re-creating the hysteria that occurred in Salem two hundred years ago.

The law has overcome many obstacles as it has been repeatedly criticized for its constitutionality. Critics of the law say that, once the word goes out that there is a monster in the neighborhood there will be unjustified hysteria and convicted sex offenders, like the witches of Salem, will be unfairly persecuted by their neighbors. This raises a pertinent question. Do monsters deserve the right to privacy? Should society protect the sex offenders who rape and murder three percent of American children? Governor Christie Whitman does not believe so. When asked about her opinion of the law that has been named after a little girl, whose life could have been saved if her parents were aware of the monsters among them, Governor Whitman said, "Knowledge is power, and this is the power for people to protect themselves."

Surprisingly, the way "Megan’s Law" works in New Jersey is quite simplistic. All 4,903 New Jersey sex offenders must register with the local police, notifying the authorities of their presence in the neighborhood. Upon registration, the offender’s profile is reviewed and rated. Then authorities investigate each case and weight the risk that the offender will strike again using thirteen categories. The rating corresponds with what is called a tier level. If an offender is classified as a tier one offender, the police in his town are notified and asked to monitor him. However, he has a small risk of offending again. There are a total of 1,380 sex offenders in New Jersey who have been classified as tier one. Similarly, if an offender is classified as tier two then the local police, schools, and groups with large numbers of children, such as day care centers, are all notified of the offender’s presence. An offender who is classified as tier two has a moderate risk of repeating his offense. There have been 563 New Jersey offenders classified as tier two. Finally, an offender classified as a tier three offender is monitored at all times. In New Jersey, police go door to door within a two-mile radius of the offender’s residence and show neighbors a picture of the offender, describe him, and make the residents aware of his exact address. There are forty-six offenders in New Jersey like Jesse Timmendequas who would have been classified as a tier three offender because of the tremendous risk of repeating his offense. Residents, however, are explicitly warned that they will be prosecuted for leaking these notices to the press. In order to try to protect the offender, there are guidelines that those who receive the notification are expected to follow. Can anyone still say that this law is unconstitutional? Even Maureen Kanka herself advises New Jersey residents to "obey the guidelines." It is clear that this law maintains the offenders’ constitutional rights while protecting the innocent residents.

Even before the United States Supreme Court’s decision on February 23, 1998 to let New Jersey’s "Megan’s Law" stand, (the template for sex offender notification statutes is in effect in forty-seven states) authorities in New Jersey and all over the country began moving aggressively to alert communities of sex offenders in their midst. Since President Clinton signed a federal "Megan’s Law" requiring all states to provide some sort of notification of dangerous sex offenders on May 17, 1996, the country has banned together with the common goal of protecting America’s children from pedophiles. As a result, thousands of children, parents, employers, landlords, and neighbors have found themselves in a new, information filled world in which the sex offenders are being delivered to their front doors by police, posted on the Internet, e-mailed across campuses, displayed on telephone poles, published in newspapers, and, in New Jersey’s newest modification of the theme, sent home like report cards in the children’s backpacks. This is all an effort to, as Maureen Kanka says, "keep them away from our children." Because the Supreme Court refused to hear a case regarding the constitutionality of the law, it stands as constitutional. However, there will never be closure to the case involving Megan Kanka. A monster took the innocent child from all those who loved her and all those who never got a chance to see her beautiful, lively smile. Maureen Kanka comments, as she receives news that the law will not be ruled upon, that "the only time someone who has lost a child to murder receives closure is when they die."

Critics of the law must remember that Jesse Timmendequas stole Megan’s right to life. Does he and other monsters like him deserve the right to privacy? Does any person who takes the unmatched innocence of a child deserve to be able to be completely free of his crime as soon as he steps out of jail? A violated child lives with the crime for the rest of his life and so should the criminal himself. Children should feel safe. Parents should feel secure. "Megan’s Law" helps parents keep the monsters from emerging from their closets and preying on their innocent children.