Crestview City Council is trying to expand the state’s 1000-foot residency restriction to 1500 feet for sex offenders
The first reading and vote on the proposed ordinance for Crestview, Florida, that would extend the residency restrictions to 1500 feet were completed on September 11. The vote was unanimous to move forward with the ordinance. The second reading and final vote will be on September 25.
Council member Ryan Bullard talks of making living in Crestview City for future registrants a criminal act, also known as banishment.
The video of Bullard’s comments can be viewed at the FAC YouTube Channel. (2:15-4:30)
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
FAC has mailed 14 pages of information to the mayor and council members of Crestview. Now we need support from our members in contacting these same people to OPPOSE this ordinance. We only have until this Monday, September 25, 6 pm before the second reading and final vote.
FAC cannot do all of this alone. We also need support from our members.
https://www.cityofcrestview.org/546/Agendas-Minutes
Here is the meeting before this one that Took Place August 28th 2023 time 1:19 hour mark to 1:36 hour mark
I notice at the 3:10 mark he talks in reference to him and the sheriff deciding this is the best way, not just him. How the blank is this legal? This practice has to be stopped. There is only 88 registrants in that town surely we can send flyers to all the registrants alerting them to this human rights violation. Maybe if we establish contact with one of the 88 we then would have legal standing for council. This video shows it’s not about safety it’s about driving as many as you can off the grid into homelessness.
@Eugene
This reminds me of back in the day when black people were forced out of their homes and if they did not leave, the mobs would sneak over at night and burn the houses down, often times with the families still inside.
It reminds me of my ancestors who were forced onto reservations, and if they refused, they were shot or burned at the stake in front of their families and tribes.
You would think after all the atrocities against people over the years past, we would have learned a thing or two about humanity.
Interesting that the councilman admitted that his goal was to keep new registrants out of the town. That constitutes banishment. By comparison, the 2003 case in Alaska involved relatively minor registration requirements. Yet this decision is used to justify extremely draconian new restrictions. The Supreme Court will likely never clearly define what constitutes punishment, but leave the subject mired in ambiguity and “states’ rights.”
Even if it passes, if they make it retroactive and make people move from a home they own, all Hell should rain down on those council members in the form of lawsuits personally geared towards each of them individually.
The win should be the registered person gets the council members home at settlement. After all, the Bible does say an eye for an eye. You take away my home, I take yours. But let us all hope it never comes to that in the first place.
Can they not find some potholes they could get fixed in the city rather than harassing people just trying to live their lives.
Their group hate is nauseating!
Their hatred is a sickness! They are just like a dog pack!
I have mentioned this before:
https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/constitution
“SECTION 2. Basic rights.—All natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life and liberty, to pursue happiness, to be rewarded for industry, and to acquire, possess and protect property. No person shall be deprived of any right because of race, religion, national origin, or physical disability.”
“inalienable”–once off sanctions these right cannot be taken away.
the right to possess and protect property. Owning or renting property is literally possession of property, why let the government infringe on the right to protect your property? (You need to be at your property to protect it).
This basic right should topple the residency laws preventing any persons in the State of Florida from living wherever they want.
Does anyone know if this defense has ever been raised?
I can also see “enjoy and defend life and liberty (freedom)” and “pursue happiness” as being pertinent here. Of course they will try to use the “high and frightening” and “public safety” arguments, to which I say, “Prove It!” They need to prove their argument before they take our constitutional rights. And guess what? The data does not support their argument.
I wonder how many of that particular hate group are against the registration of gun braces. The government can say they already have precedent for retroactively applying registration schemes. It’s as easy as joining the Price Club. Maybe, if there’s a smart one or two in the group, they’ll then see that when we allow one groups rights to be trampled, we open the door for others to have their rights taken as well.