New subdivision bans sex offenders
A new subdivision in Kansas bans registered sex offenders from moving in. The developer said he "...got the idea for the subdivisions after he heard about a 9-year-old Florida girl, Jessica Lunsford, who was kidnapped, raped and killed -- allegedly by a registered sex offender". This is legal because the developer is not violating the Fair Housing Act. According to Community Development Executive Director Nancy Haney, "Sex offenders aren't considered one of the seven protected classes". Read the story here.
I think this is a very good idea and I would happily move into a neighborhood that does not allow sex offenders. However, that would not prohibit them from coming in from other areas in search of their next victim. I just hope this doesn't lull people into a false sense of security.
posted by angry momma @ 2:06 AM
3 comments
3 Comments:
You are very correct in your assumption that it might lull people into a false sense of security.
People have cars. They can drive. Someone who would kidnap and rape someone would most likely travel away from their home so as not to give suspicion. This is what Joseph Duncan did. He travelled to another state. The sex offender registries did not help to protect anyone.
All they do is prevent people from rebuilding their lives once they're out of jail.
Take a look at your local sex offender list. (Try to find one that uses Google Maps because they are much more effective at pinpointing people on the list.) In Southern California, for example, you cannot even read the map, it's so littered with offenders. What's the proposed idea? Put them all in the desert? Make them go off onto an island with barbed wire? If anyone out there is saying yes to this, then I'm sure they might also consider these wonderful hand-polished Jack Boots to wear with their SS uniform.
If the sex offender registry were limited to people who raped, killed, tortured, or something actually evil around those lines, and it were an epidemic, I could see the use for a registry, or perhaps a re-write of the laws to protect people... but someone who merely gives a consenting person an orgasm to someone a couple years too young by legal standards? People gotta understand there's a difference between an orgasm and killing someone, (even though the word orgasm means "little death", I doubt it's anywhere near the same... :P )
As a test it would be interesting to see what would happen if every state would adopt such laws. Hypothetically ofcourse...
In reality it would be a grave disaster. RSOs would disappear from radar (not just the people that got caught when they were making love to a 15yo when they were 17, but also the people who actually kill, maim and rape others). More people would be victimized.
Another idea could be to put every RSO in camps (history has enough examples to do it right this time).
This way children would only be attacked by people who are not on the register. First time offenders, people who have managed to dodge the law and people who are rich enough to buy off either victims or the judicial system. Truly a blessed world...
or is it?
Blessed be
JB
Interesting, but it seems more like a marketing gimmick than anything truly helpful. Another problem (besides what Rookiee mentions) is that in some states juveniles are placed on the sex offender registry (SOR).
I quickly read the story that you linked for us Angry Mamma. There was a survey and 83% thought this was a great idea. I'm not surprised, but I wonder what those people would think if they had to move because their 15-year-old son ended up on the SOR for having consensual sex with his 15-year-old girl friend. Silly you might think, but in some states (I don't know about Indiana) this happens.
Actually, I know you are busy Angry Mamma, but when you get a chance you should really take a look at Ethical Treatment for All Youth for a very sane look at how we are getting carried away with the SOR's. Many teenagers are being subjected to punishments that are way out of proportion to their supposed crimes.
I will agree with you that real rape and abuse of children is terrible (but I know there is a vast grey area of what I would consider "consensual" activity where we would disagree.) However, I think you might be as appalled as I am with how our country is treating some of its so called "juvenile sex offenders".
Thanks Angry Mamma for getting back to the blogging.
Post a Comment
<< Home