Monday, March 10, 2008

Also from California

In Long Beach, California, an apartment building near two day care centers and a middle school is housing 12-15 registered sex offenders. According to some reports the building owner receives money from the Federal Government as an incentive to house them.

Perhaps California lawmakers can briefly tear themselves away from the pursuit of the evil home schoolers to see whether our Federal Government is using our tax dollars to place child sex predators in apartments near buildings where children are required to be.

[Note: compiled from several sources; if anyone has more details on this subject, I would be interested in reading them]


Anonymous said...

I don't think I am with you on this one, Robert. It is difficult to find a spot in the continental U.S. that isn't near two day care centers and a public school. So where to "put" the sex offenders? Some might suggest a penal colony in some uninhabited island.

But then I have seen a listing a what some "sex offenders" are guilty of, and then I have to admit there but for the grace of God go I. Some were convicted of comitting private acts, with their spouses, in public places, say on a golf course in the middle of the night. One man was convicted for an act committed with his very slightly under-age girlfriend, now his wife and mother of their several children.

And many if not most sex offenders seem to be guilty of something similar. Poor judgment, rather than predatory sexual behavior. I think we first need to re-define what a sex offense is, and then start worrying about TRUE sex offenders. As it is, MANY people are being stigmatized who shouldn't be.

This is Terre, BTW.

R. L. Vaughn said...

Actually we are in agreement about some of the flaws of the sex offender's list. An 18 year guy who had consensual sex with his 16 year old girlfriend is guilty of immorality. BUT he shouldn't be on a list with some old person who abused an unsuspecting and unwilling child. This is a big flaw.

As far as REAL sex predators, I would have no problem with a penal colony in some uninhabited island. In some cases I might even support the death penalty.

The issue I am addressing, though, is in my opinion another of the flaws with the sex offender's list. The government first puts them on the list -- which causes them to the problem finding housing -- THEN uses taxpayer money to give building owners an incentive to house them. And the day care centers and public school proximity may create a problem in some area. But, if I were a betting man, I would bet that the government bureau/entity/whatever that is overseeing this probably (1) doesn't carefully check to see whether they can find an area away but these but rather jump at opportunities that present themselves, and (2) probably don't differentiate between different types of sex offenders in relation to whether they are placed near day care centers and public schools. Adults who prey on small children surely shouldn't be deliberately housed in these areas when some other place could be found, should they?

So, I agree with you that we need to better define or re-define what a sex offense is. But I don't agree with the way the government is handling the situation mentioned in the post.

Thanks for the thoughts.

R. L. Vaughn said...

I should add that an 18 year guy who had consensual sex with his 16 year old girlfriend is not only guilty of immorality -- in many states he may have committed statutory rape. But I still don't think that should get him on the same list with some old person who abuses unsuspecting children.