Sex offenders sue over ordinances that ban them from places


Locutus
#1
via fark:

A civil rights group that advocates on behalf of sex offenders are suing cities in California over ordinances that ban them from places. In other news there are groups that advocate on behalf of sex offenders (external - login to view)


BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KBAK/KBFX) - Wasco and Taft are among a group of California cities being sued by a civil rights group that advocates on behalf of sex offenders.

In 2006, state voters approved Jessica's Law, which bars sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or park.

Shortly after, numerous cities adopted much more restrictive local laws that prohibit sex offenders from being present in any "children's facility," such as a public library, school bus stop, or "any location that facilitates on their property classes or group activities for children."

"We believe it is a misguided and unconstitutional effort to do that," said Santa Maria attorney Janice Bellucci, president of California Reform Sex Offender Laws.

Bellucci said the group was created to give a voice to registered sex offenders.

In addition to Wasco and Taft, Shafter, Delano, Tehachapi and California City also passed similar sex offender ordinances. So far, Wasco and Taft are the only two cities in Kern County served with a lawsuit by the civil rights group.

In June, the Tehachapi City Council voted to repeal its ordinance rather than risk litigation.

more

Sex offenders sue over ordinances that ban them from places | Investigations | Bakersfield Now - News, Weather and Sports (external - login to view)
 
Praxius
+3
#2
 
QuebecCanadian
+3
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by LocutusView Post

via fark:

A civil rights group that advocates on behalf of sex offenders are suing cities in California over ordinances that ban them from places. In other news there are groups that advocate on behalf of sex offenders (external - login to view)


BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KBAK/KBFX) - Wasco and Taft are among a group of California cities being sued by a civil rights group that advocates on behalf of sex offenders.

In 2006, state voters approved Jessica's Law, which bars sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or park.

Shortly after, numerous cities adopted much more restrictive local laws that prohibit sex offenders from being present in any "children's facility," such as a public library, school bus stop, or "any location that facilitates on their property classes or group activities for children."

"We believe it is a misguided and unconstitutional effort to do that," said Santa Maria attorney Janice Bellucci, president of California Reform Sex Offender Laws.

Bellucci said the group was created to give a voice to registered sex offenders.

In addition to Wasco and Taft, Shafter, Delano, Tehachapi and California City also passed similar sex offender ordinances. So far, Wasco and Taft are the only two cities in Kern County served with a lawsuit by the civil rights group.

In June, the Tehachapi City Council voted to repeal its ordinance rather than risk litigation.

more

Sex offenders sue over ordinances that ban them from places | Investigations | Bakersfield Now - News, Weather and Sports (external - login to view)

Civil rights? How about advocating for the rights of children to be safe from convicted pedophiles!? SMFH Again!
 
lone wolf
+6
#4  Top Rated Post
I'd be willing to cut them a deal: Remove the offending appendage as a show of good faith and we'll start negotiations
 
taxslave
+1
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolfView Post

I'd be willing to cut them a deal: Remove the offending appendage as a show of good faith and we'll start negotiations

I was thinking of removal at the neck.
 
BaalsTears
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by LocutusView Post

via fark:

A civil rights group that advocates on behalf of sex offenders are suing cities in California over ordinances that ban them from places. In other news there are groups that advocate on behalf of sex offenders (external - login to view)


BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KBAK/KBFX) - Wasco and Taft are among a group of California cities being sued by a civil rights group that advocates on behalf of sex offenders.

In 2006, state voters approved Jessica's Law, which bars sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or park.

Shortly after, numerous cities adopted much more restrictive local laws that prohibit sex offenders from being present in any "children's facility," such as a public library, school bus stop, or "any location that facilitates on their property classes or group activities for children."

"We believe it is a misguided and unconstitutional effort to do that," said Santa Maria attorney Janice Bellucci, president of California Reform Sex Offender Laws.

Bellucci said the group was created to give a voice to registered sex offenders.

In addition to Wasco and Taft, Shafter, Delano, Tehachapi and California City also passed similar sex offender ordinances. So far, Wasco and Taft are the only two cities in Kern County served with a lawsuit by the civil rights group.

In June, the Tehachapi City Council voted to repeal its ordinance rather than risk litigation.

more

Sex offenders sue over ordinances that ban them from places | Investigations | Bakersfield Now - News, Weather and Sports (external - login to view)

Sex offenders are welcome in my neighborhood in California. They would be like fresh fish.
 
Sal
+1
#7
Quote:

or people such as Frank Lindsay of Grover Beach, he said the ordinances and restrictions placed on his life have made it extremely difficult to continue with his life. According to the Megan's Law website, in 1979 Lindsay pleaded guilty to lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14. He served six months in jail and was given two years probation. Lindsay went on to make a new life and opened a small business. He never committed a new sex crime again.

"The city of Pismo Beach awarded me volunteer of the year for a project I worked on for them," said Lindsay.


But when word leaked about his past, Lindsay said his landlord terminated his lease and he was forced to lay off five employees and run his business from his home. His gross earnings fell dramatically, he said. He came home one night to find a man waiting for him inside his house. The man took a hammer to Lindsay, who managed to fight him off, but Lindsay said he suffered numerous injuries. The assailant was arrested and is now in prison.

there are sometimes extenuating circumstances where emotion should be set aside and facts should be examined.
 
shadowshiv
+3
#8
You molest a child, you should be thankful that you're able to walk anywhere at all.
 
Praxius
+1
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by shadowshivView Post

You molest a child, you should be thankful that you're able to walk anywhere at all.

I'm sure someone will come along and think we're all on some sort of witch hunt towards child molesters.....

.... But we're not, because the witches have already been found and proven to be witches.

They think this sort of stuff is unfair?

Feek'EM, they should have thought about that when they diddles some kids and be so lucky as to not have a horse give them a swift kick TO THE NARRRRDDDDSSS!!!!.... and straight into a concrete wall, knocking them down to the IQ of a turnip and completely unable to be a risk to anyone except a spoonful of mushed peas.

"Aye Lak Sthooop.... Daaaeerrrrrrr."
 
shadowshiv
+1
#10
Nothing witch-hunty about it. They are simply reaping what they sowed.
 
Tecumsehsbones
+2
#11
If y'all think only dangerous pedophiles end up on the sex offender registry, y'all got a faith in government that's. . . well, kinda cute, really.
 
SLM
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by TecumsehsbonesView Post

If y'all think only dangerous pedophiles end up on the sex offender registry, y'all got a faith in government that's. . . well, kinda cute, really.

So scrap the registry. Sexually assault a child? Then spend the rest of your life behind bars. I'll sleep better at night.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

So scrap the registry. Sexually assault a child? Then spend the rest of your life behind bars. I'll sleep better at night.

I'm good with that, though I tend to favour the "long ladder, short rope" approach. Just saying all the commentary here deals with dangerous pedophiles. There's a 17-year-old kid in Virginia right now being tried for sexting a picture of his junk to his 15-year-old girlfriend after she sent him some nekkid pix. Her mom got upset. Good news is if he's convicted, he'll never be able to live in a city in the U.S. again.
 
SLM
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by TecumsehsbonesView Post

I'm good with that, though I tend to favour the "long ladder, short rope" approach. Just saying all the commentary here deals with dangerous pedophiles. There's a 17-year-old kid in Virginia right now being tried for sexting a picture of his junk to his 15-year-old girlfriend after she sent him some nekkid pix. Her mom got upset. Good news is if he's convicted, he'll never be able to live in a city in the U.S. again.

Common sense is really not a part of anyone's criminal code, is it?

There has got to be a way to frame or amend these laws to stop capturing tiny little fish in the net when it's the real predators that are the ones that need to be stopped. The only thing that's lacking is the will to do so. Panic and fear works better at motivating people when your running for office I suppose. Tough on crime is a hard sentiment to argue against, but can we at least identify what a real crime is first?
 
Tecumsehsbones
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

Common sense is really not a part of anyone's criminal code, is it?

There has got to be a way to frame or amend these laws to stop capturing tiny little fish in the net when it's the real predators that are the ones that need to be stopped. The only thing that's lacking is the will to do so. Panic and fear works better at motivating people when your running for office I suppose. Tough on crime is a hard sentiment to argue against, but can we at least identify what a real crime is first?

That used to be the job of judges. Then some folk took the handful of wildly bad decisions out of tens of thousands each year and blew 'em up into "scandals." Which made Congress and the state legislatures feel they had no choice but to, with great reluctance and sorrow, take on more power, and impose checklist rules for judges

When the rules address everything in lowest-common-denominator terms, there's no room for wisdom, or inspiration, or genius.
 
Sal
#16
well no one seemed to read the article and jumped to the opinion of every sex offender is a pedophile...kill them all...ya know...like hoards do

why deal with the facts....better to get all emotional

no wonder the world is so messed
 
taxslave
+1
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by TecumsehsbonesView Post

I'm good with that, though I tend to favour the "long ladder, short rope" approach. Just saying all the commentary here deals with dangerous pedophiles. There's a 17-year-old kid in Virginia right now being tried for sexting a picture of his junk to his 15-year-old girlfriend after she sent him some nekkid pix. Her mom got upset. Good news is if he's convicted, he'll never be able to live in a city in the U.S. again.

There is an upside to almost every situation.
 
Praxius
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by SalView Post

well no one seemed to read the article and jumped to the opinion of every sex offender is a pedophile...kill them all...ya know...like hoards do

why deal with the facts....better to get all emotional

no wonder the world is so messed

Sex Offender. What typically makes for a common sex offender?


Pedophiles are obviously one. Other serious offences are sexual assault, statutory rape, bestiality, female genital mutilation, incest and rape..... Give or rake a few depending on the culture or nation we're talking about.


All of the above seem to fit in the same category of "Twisted Fk'Tards - Don't Give a Sh*t About Their Problems"


In regards to minors sexting pictures of themselves to other minors, we have a different problem altogether, one of which I haven't ignored, but I seriously doubt the people complaining in the OP are these people and most of them fit in the first category listed above.


The problem of minors being charged for child pornography and then being put on the sex offender registry is something that certainly needs addressing especially in cases where the kid made a picture of him/herself of their own free will and sent it to their boyfriend/girlfriend..... But the complex part of this whole mess is when you need to punish those who exploit other minors and take photos of them & put them on the internet or share around the school to ruin their lives and humiliate them, which there have been plenty of cases recently.


And while there is lots to discuss on these subjects, the main subject here is towards these other fk'Wits who are registered sex offenders moaning that they have it tough after being found guilty of committing a crime like fiddling a kid or raping an adult..... Either way, they have been proven to be a danger to the public (which is why they are registered) and they have no business being near children, whom are the most vulnerable.
 
Sal
#19
so just use the big brush stroke...put everyone in the rocket and jet it out

k

highly emotionally and illogical...

but yea ya get the bad and screw the rest

k

so either you didn't read it

or you did and didn't understand it

or

you don't care one way or another as long as you get to be indignant

glad you have complete trust in the justice system
 

Similar Threads

no new posts