November 09, 2005

I'll be homeless because I don't make that much money

Some people have a lot of nerve. Those who have harmed children should have no rights period. Convicted sex offenders especially should not have access to those who they very likely would harm again.

DELAWARE, Ohio -- The U.S. District Court Monday dismissed a lawsuit filed by registered sex offenders who say the Ohio law banning sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school is unconstitutional. David Slack, one of the six registered sex offenders who filed the suit, said he cannot afford to move away from his home near Woodward Elementary School in Delaware, Ohio. "I'll be homeless because I don't make that much money," Slack said.

I don't want to hear his sorry ass stories. He's full of BS and he knows it. He wants to live near the school so he can check out the prey. It's what all sex offenders want: To have their eye candy right in front of them. If this is an issue of being homeless, then get another job asshole. Do whatever it takes to move away from the kids. The state should make him get another job! I don't condone states getting involved like that, but in these cases it wouldn't be a bad thing. Kind of like forced labor.

On Monday, the U.S. District Court dismissed his case. The court did not uphold the constitutionality of the law, but just said Slack and the other registered sex offenders did not have the legal standing to file suit. "There'd been no action taken to remove them from the place they'd been living in, or they brought it even though they weren't living within 1,000 feet of a school," Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro said. Nevertheless, Petro said he sees the case's dismissal as a victory for the state and all of its residents, NBC 4's Duarte Geraldino reported. Petro said he believes many sex offenders are likely to offend again.

1000 feet isn't that far, 1/5th of a mile. I live near two schools and the neighborhood is always busy with kids walking to and from school...I wouldn't feel content knowing a pervert lived ANYWHERE near the area. A good 6 miles is what I MIGHT feel alright with. 1000 feet? The perverts can still see the kids...and lurk and watch them as they walk by.

"I am truly sorry about what happened, but it was just one of those things. I can't explain why it happened," Slack said.

Yep...and no one wants to hear your half ass apology. It's too late for that. And it's very lame, when used in context to this lawsuit.

Supporters praised the judge's decision and said it allows the state to enforce a law that is needed to keep children safe. "This law is in place to protect children from potentially dangerous predators," Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro said in a statement. "This is a reasonable and necessary statute." The law allows city and county prosecutors across the state to seek eviction orders against hundreds - and possibly thousands - of convicted sex offenders living too close to schools. The law expands a statute that had allowed neighbors, landlords or school officials to seek evictions.

Now this is what I want to read...laws making it legal to boot these perverts right out of the area. Who wants a salivating twisted sex freak who seeks children, living in their neighborhoods, near the schools or places where kids hang out? I know this leaves little option as to where the freaks can go...and that's the point. They should be sent out to a field in the niddle of no where...

But opponents say the re-offense rate is no different for sex offenders than for other criminals and that imposing the 1,000-foot rule would be impractical and unconstitutional. In some cases, they say, the rule would be so restrictive it could result in homelessness.

That is a lie. Sex offenders often repeat their crimes, and to a higher degree of harm each time. There is a BIG difference between a person who robs a bank or sells drugs, compared to this type of criminal. I cannot believe these advocates are even trying to compare. Those who care about kids need to keep pushing these issues and demanding local governments to force the perverts into seclusion. I hate to promote that, but when it comes to welfare and safety of children, it may have to come to this.
Cross Posted @ ARS

Show Comments »