Police map out where sex offenders can live
 

Link

Wow...harsh. I'm not really sure how I feel about this. I mean, on one hand a large part of me wants to just say "Fuck 'em. Tough shit, Chester.". But, on the other hand, if you back an animal too far into a corner...it's gonna bite. If these guys are left with nowhere to live...then what?
Don't want a sex offender around...just open up a day care.
ahhhh...I just picked up on this part "Only offenders who lived at their current addresses before July 1, 2002, or before a school or day care center was built are exempt from the law." So, it is grandfathered. But, then again...doesn't that take the teeth out of law?

what if someone lives near an emptry stor front... then a day care moves in....it is in no way fair to make the convicted person move. they did the crime they payed the time so now dont screw them more.


sure its a good idea to not allow them to live close to these areas ( i guess ) but if someone alread livs there and a schpol or day care wants to move in the daycare or school should be told its not allowed

"Only offenders who lived at their current addresses before July 1, 2002, or before a school or day care center was built are exempt from the law."

maybe im paronoid but this says before 2002 so if they opened up a place now wouldit still be grandfathered?

I'm dealing with something similar; I'm an environmental consultant, and one of my clients produces asphalt. We have this new regulation:
I've also seen similar regulations regarding the siting of adult businesses. There ain't much left when you draw those circles on a map. Regulations like this are just a way to ban an activity while pretending that you aren't banning it.

Maybe instead of deciding where they can and can't live after they were released from prison...since they are clearly still such a danger to society that they must have restrictions placed on their available locations for residing...

WE SHOULD JUST KEEP THEM IN FREAKING PRISON.

There are few things that get me riled up like this...policitcally popular, feel good, do nothing solutions.

-bear

Hmmm....I wonder what they do about hotels? Because if I was a molester and didn't want to live in Molesterville, I'd rent a hotel by the week.

Anyways, is just the bad touchers, or all sex offenders? I'm a little worried about the idea of having all the molesters and rapists confined in some seedy part of town.

I don't see a clear cut solution to this one, but I think these laws will be struck down in their present form if they exclude that much of the city, or else we have to accept changing the mission of our penal system away from reform.

seriously.. how many types of these threads do we need? They always end up going in the same direction.. 50% say "fuck em, they should die"; 50% say "they are human served their time yada yada".

BOR: Nothing against you man.. but I've just seen this way too many times.

IMO on the OP-- I can see both sides of the coin. Sure they shouldn't live close by those places.. but that should be automatic. There should be enough room for all people (including felons) to reside calmly. This is the reason why I want the entire database system and other areas pertaining to these types of people changed. The last sentence states:"I have no sympathy for them," she said. "They waived their civil rights the minute they committed a crime against a child." ---not all people on the sex offender registry are pedophiles or child molestors.

amazingly, i'm with gucci...a friend of mine is considered a 'sex offender' bc he mooned a police officer while drunk. I'm not joking, he had to change his major from music ed to business bc sex offenders are barred from teaching, from what i understand.


now, i do think that the law has good intentions, but i don't see how it can be fair, sadly enough.

definitely a conflicted issue.

I know some states (Ohio and AZ. being 2) have differing degrees of sex offenses, whjich is what should be done.

I mean mooning a cop, streaking and being drunk at a bar and feeling a woman up (all can be sex offenses, unless plea bargained down), are totally different and far far less dangerous than child molestation.

I have no fear of living next to a streaker, or some man or woman that were caught having sex in a public place, or even a prostitute (which in Ohio prostitution and soliciting (paying for one) can be tried as a sex offense, but are usually plea bargained into bigger fines)...... none of those matter or affect my life.

I DO however have a problem with living near child molesters.... however, what's to stop one from driving 1 mile or 20 and picking up his/her victim?

See, this is what I was talking about, when I made this statement; "Don't want a sex offender around...just open up a day care. ". Theoreticaly, all a community would have to do is open daycare centers in strategic locations throughout the community, and...viola...no sex offenders can live in the community, due to Iowa State Law.
Only Ely, Bertram and Fairfax, city officials are taking it one step further by instituting "ghettos", where offenders are, in effect, quarantined.

But from what I understand if the offenders were previous residing at an address that later, because of a new child care facility was within the specified bounderies he would be exempt. I am curious as to if the law differentiates between child molestors and a kid who had simply sex with his girlfriend a couple days after he turned 18.

I could see this being a protection against repeat child molestors who move INTO a neighborhood frequented by children.

It would be a nice law to have in our city as there are scads of child molesters and sexual predators living in our midst. I am aware of a convicted 2nd dregree sexual predator who lived only a block away from our previous address. I am also aware of one within only a few blocks of our current home. I would want NEITHER near my child EVER. I have heard or read what the charges were and they weren't minor. I am actually surprised they aren't still in jail but unfortuantely that's a flaw in the system. Why not make laws to protect us from the failures of the system?

Fuck me, I thought there for a second that maybe they were talking about L.A. or something. Then I thought, "well, they're in Iowa, how hard can it be to find a place?" To make sure my geography of Iowa is correct, I got a map of it:

http://www.cnn.com/WEATHER/9905/17/i...iowa.logan.jpg

Seems to me that there are plenty of places to around Des Moines, like maybe THE WHOLE FUCKING STATE. There's nothing there. If they don't want to move, maybe they should have thought abount not being sex offenders. Hot damn.

Ah...but it's not just a Des Moines city ordinance...it's a state law.
I'm not so sure that I don't agree with you. I'm just wondering if "herding" them into "approved" locations is the way to go.

Yeah let's just go ahead and re-instate the Scarlet Letter while we're at it :rolleyes: I'm all for child molestors and predators and violent rapists to be branded; what I'm not for is the 18 year old kid who had sex with his 15/16 year old girlfriend, or people mooning cops or people who didn't really harm anyone being branded. This whole "fuck sex offenders" thing is really crazy. I'm not condoning what they did.. I'm just asking- At what point do they stop being sex offenders and start being just a regular member of society? Never? After they are off the database? The current system is such bollocks.

I like the idea of "herding" them into "approved" locations such as "prisons." Like bear said, if these people still pose a danger to society, why are we letting them out of jail? Why do they not get longer sentances? Society obviously thinks they are still a threat, thats why we have laws like this popping up. But our system still releases them into the public, while they are still regarded as a danger. Why are they even being released?

Until they fix the sentances that let these people back into the public every state should legislate this law and then build a day care center every half a mile across the county. Then they would have to go back to jail for breaking the law. Problem solved?

you pose just as much of a danger as they do.

If they truly do still pose a danger, then I have no problem, at all, of keeping them in prison. And, for the sake of clarification here, I'm refering to rapists and molesters, not the kid mooning the cop, or the 18yr old banging his 16yr old GF. Although...he did know that she was underage. Oh well...that's a whole 'nother thread.

All I'm saying is that when they showed a map of Council Bluffs Iowa, on the local news the other night, after they had finished overlapping all of the circles around schools and daycare centers...there was a remarkably small "approved" area. Now, for the sake of argument, let's say that you lived within that "approved" area. If absolutely...nothing...else, it's gonna kill your property values.

I don't think the law should prohibit me, a 19 year old guy, from banging a 17 year old girl. That's not right. They shouldn't count in this shit. The title of sex offender should only be given to true peterasses.

ahhh but herein lies the dilema.. the law *does* say that's illegal (unless your state has a lower age of consent). So, this is why I have a problem with lumping all "sex offenders" together and everyone automatically assuming sex offender = pedophile. Say you bang a chick at a club and it turns out she's 17, guess what.. if mommy tells the magitrate, you're gonna be a sex offender. Did you rape, molest or hurt anyone? Nope, but now in the eyes of society.. you have.

Who says laws can't change???