I know how people feel about sex offenders.
I agree that sex crimes are reprehensible, especially those in which children are the victims.
Such offenders often face long prison sentences or long commitments inside mental health treatment centers. And rightfully so.
But after they are released from custody — after they have paid their dues to society — these offenders have rights just like any other American citizen. Among other things, they have a right to live wherever they choose.
I know that is difficult to hear.
Where sex offenders are concerned, people feel abhorred. People do not want to hear about sex offenders having rights. And people certainly do not want to live around sex offenders.
Whenever the subject comes up of local government restrictions on where these offenders can live, the popular response is: “We decent people should be able to keep sex offenders out of our community.”
That sort of reaction is common. In some ways, it is understandable.
It is also a violation of the U.S. Constitution.
people don’t want to live beside you in most cases because you’re tag not cause they loose all trust and dislike you I have so many friends no-one cares much except the system that created it and a few worry warts and attention seekers.
If that city council member decides to leave it on the books until a lawsuit is filed, the person filing the law suit can not only sue the city but personally sue the council member since they went out of their way to make a personal statement potentially putting the town finances into bankruptcy fighting a federal lawsuit. Things you do and say can come back to bite you in ways that can take away your career and more. Maybe they believe they would be long gone by time that suit ever reached a court and leave a future council under the gun to answers for things they never voted on.
Let’s see, “City officials now realize that with that extreme ordinance, they are violating the law.” Oh, and how did they come to that “realization?” Maybe because “A federal judge in Milwaukee ruled in 2017 that such an ordinance is unconstitutional….”
There you have it. It was okay to violate the constitution until the threat of a lawsuit was imminent. Even then, “One [idiot] alderman even has suggested leaving the unconstitutional ban on the books until a lawsuit is filed [Floriduh’s standard operating procedure].”
However, “Such a strategy would be irresponsible. Not only would it risk costing taxpayers money from losing a lawsuit, it would send the signal that Lake Geneva values political popularity more than adherence to the law.”
Well, here in Floriduh, that is not a concern. Politicians here are concerned with how good their image is. More importantly, the Floriduh Prison Industrial Complex [FDLE, states attorney, Books, GEOGroup, etc.] has deep pockets to drag out litigation for years while voices of reason are financially bled out.
Obviously no one wants a sex offender living next door. But the main problem, not mentioned in this editorial, is that residency restrictions have no effect on the safety of the community from sex offenders. That’s because 95.8% of sex offenses are perpetrated by those who have never been convicted. Those who HAVE been convicted exhibit sexual recidivism rates in the single digits, and those cases are almost never associated with residency.
That’s why referring to persons on the sex offender registry as “sex offenders,” as the editorial does, has become a misnomer. The registry does a poor job of predicting who is at risk of committing the next sex offense and causes is to let our guard down when it comes to abuse prevention.
Anyone who is considering submitting a letter to the editor (NARSOL affiliate?) is free to use this language, or not. I do thank then for having the courage for publishing an editorial that was so difficult to write.
…and if I didn’t make myself clear, when I refer above to having a “sex offender next door,” I am not referring to registrants, as the crime statistics are meant to illustrate.
Umm, If a law prohibiting someone from “Living where they want”, What’s the difference between 2000 feet and 750 feet ???? If it’s ILLEGAL ?? , Its ILLEGAL !!!! Be it 1ft or 2000 feet !!!!!!. It’s just like “OUR GOVERNMENT” to ” Only Break The Law a Little Bit” !!!!!!.
exactly man but with the 750′ ruling both sides are probably happy as one side was scared and the other glad of it.
I can certainly understand why one would not want to live around a ‘sex offender’…a person who wakes up every morning thinking about where the next victim can be found. That is the ‘picture’ that legislators, law enforcement, media hype, paranoia, and false distribution of information has left. The reality is that it is not at all that way. That is why education of the public with truth is so important. Once identified and punished, no one in his/her right mind…or family…wants to go through that again. That’s probably why recidivism is so low. Let’s face facts…we are all humans and probably have experienced sexual fantasies. Those who say they haven’t are known as liars. It’s gaining control over these fantasies and understanding the damage they can do to us as individuals and to our families that is important. There is a time and place for everything but when another person is involved its not time or place for either. We must learn to refocus our lives and establish a ‘hard’ set of principles by which to live. My faith in God and ability to find so much around me interesting has helped me establish a lifestyle where sex plays a very small to minuscule role. For that I have found much peace and can wake up each morning looking forward to the day knowing that positive activities await me. We are not what a negative activity in our lives cause us to be labeled, but what we establish our character to be. It will be obvious to those around us. It is up to us to let our politicians see our real character. It is not an easy ‘road’ but one we must not fail in.
Here is an email I sent to Mr. Williams:
Mr. Williams:
I saw your article as a link on the website of the Florida Action Committee which is a non-profit group in Florida that advocates for public safety specifically as it relates to matters concerning registered sex offenders here in Florida and nationwide.
I am a resident of Jacksonville, FL. I also have the unfortunate distinction of being a registered sex offender after being arrested in one of the ridiculous online sting operations that Florida runs down here like water which has it’s roots in getting millions of dollars from the Feds. If you would like a lead on another interesting story, there you go!
In any event, I just wanted to thank you for your courage to write such an article in your area and tackle this ridiculous issue. Residency restrictions have proven time and time again to be NOT EFFECTIVE in both preventing further harm and abuse to children and decreasing the amount of sex crimes committed. As you stated, it is a willful violation of the Constitution to basically ban and ostracize a particular group of people from living wherever they so choose. But then again, the US Government didn’t really care about the rights of American Indians in the 1800s, or the rights of Japanese Americans in the 1930s and 40s. So why is it surprising that they don’t care about our rights after we’ve served our time? It’s bad enough to be shamed when you’re arrested for a sex crime and literally lose everything you’ve ever worked for, but it’s even worse when you pay your debt to society and continue to be suppressed and kept from moving on with your life AFTER you’ve paid your dues. And state after state and city after city continue to make it virtually impossible for us to do just that.
So thank you for shedding light on this issue and bringing some common sense into the equation. Residency laws against sex offenders are nothing more than “feel good” laws to give the illusion that something is being done and kids are being kept safe. My question about that is, OK, so you’re making me lay my head down 2000 feet away from any place children congregate which is mostly during the hours of 10pm roughly until about 6 or 7am roughly when I go to work. What child is going to school or the park during those hours?? And even then, so an offender can’t live close to these areas, but can literally walk right by or even into such places during the daytime hours if they really wanted to. So even the law itself is ridiculous and does absolutely nothing to prevent any crime from being committed. And the overwhelming majority of sex crimes occur from people who are KNOWN to the victim (i.e a teacher, a relative, a mentor, a Catholic priest, etc….) So chances are a child is in more danger from someone INSIDE THE SCHOOL, than from a registered sex offender who is forced to live 2000 feet away from the school.
In any event, thank you again Mr. Williams for your article and for shedding light on this issue and the unconstitutionality of it. Have a blessed day.