Judge Blocks Part of Ga. Sex Offender Law

 

By GREG BLUESTEIN

The Associated Press

Monday, June 26, 2006; 12:33 PM

 

ATLANTA -- A federal judge on Monday blocked Georgia from targeting eight individuals with its sweeping law that would bar sex offenders from living near school bus stops.

 

Many states have barred offenders from working and living near schools, but Georgia's law goes father by restricting them from living or working within 1,000 feet of a school bus stop.

 

The temporary restraining order by U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper applies only to the eight plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed by the Southern Center for Human Rights.

 

The law, due to go into effect statewide Saturday, would make it nearly impossible for Georgia's more than 10,000 registered sex offenders to live in urban and suburban areas, said Sarah Geraghty, a lawyer for the Southern Center for Human Rights. It will "banish people from their homes," she said.

 

Lawyers for the state said the law is necessary for public safety.

 

Both sides will be back in court July 11, and the plaintiffs' lawyers said they hope to persuade the judge to overturn the new bus stop limits for all sex offenders.

Washington Post

The lesson of the story: Don't molest kids

The same thing happened in Port St Lucie aout a year ago. A "sexual predator" lived drectly next to an elementary school bus stop. When word got out around the community they changed the bus stop away from the guys house.

 

I have no problems with that. I have no problems also with a law stating a sexual predator cant live by a school bus stop.

The government cannot put that type of burden on any citizen of this country. Not living near schools and the such is a fair price to pay for the crimes a predator has committed, but school bus stops are all over the place. It would be an undue burden and unconstitutional to completely alienate any member of the community to this extent.

The government cannot put that type of burden on any citizen of this country. Not living near schools and the such is a fair price to pay for the crimes a predator has committed, but school bus stops are all over the place. It would be an undue burden and unconstitutional to completely alienate any member of the community to this extent.

 

Once you rape or molest a child your rights are thrown out the window, IMO.

The government cannot put that type of burden on any citizen of this country. Not living near schools and the such is a fair price to pay for the crimes a predator has committed, but school bus stops are all over the place. It would be an undue burden and unconstitutional to completely alienate any member of the community to this extent.

 

Once you rape or molest a child your rights are thrown out the window, IMO.

 

 

I'd love to agree with that, but unfortunately our consititution doesn't agree with our personal views on this one. People say one problem with the death penalty is that ppl are often wrongfully convicted, well it applies to htis as well, and IMO this public shunning is a fate worse than death. Punishing a potentially innocent man/woman in this way is sickening

Yeah well, when you become a felon you have to forfeit some rights.

 

I pretty much don't want to make the lives of people who have raped, molested children, voyeurs, and necrophiliacs easy or allow them to just be able to go about their lives easily and opening the door for them to attack more people.

 

 

 

The government cannot put that type of burden on any citizen of this country. Not living near schools and the such is a fair price to pay for the crimes a predator has committed, but school bus stops are all over the place. It would be an undue burden and unconstitutional to completely alienate any member of the community to this extent.

 

Once you rape or molest a child your rights are thrown out the window, IMO.

 

 

I'd love to agree with that, but unfortunately our consititution doesn't agree with our personal views on this one. People say one problem with the death penalty is that ppl are often wrongfully convicted, well it applies to htis as well, and IMO this public shunning is a fate worse than death. Punishing a potentially innocent man/woman in this way is sickening

Well you need to review the 15th ammendment to the constitution.

Here's my problem with this law. If it's an issue that molestors get out of jail and molest again, maybe you need to look into longer punishments or that surgery that I've heard about. It's also a damnation of the notion that prison rehabilitates at all.

 

The thing is that this would be a punishment that extends farther than the reach of the crime, in my opinion, because bus stops are so frequent in some places that it could in effect ban molestors from living in a city.

Here's my problem with this law. If it's an issue that molestors get out of jail and molest again, maybe you need to look into longer punishments or that surgery that I've heard about. It's also a damnation of the notion that prison rehabilitates at all.

 

The thing is that this would be a punishment that extends farther than the reach of the crime, in my opinion, because bus stops are so frequent in some places that it could in effect ban molestors from living in a city.

 

 

I share in this opinon. And superman, you're thinking too generally. For example, a 21 year old that is convicted of statutory rape because he was with a 17 year old, in some jurisdictions is forced to registr as a sex offender. And hours of debate can ensue whether this young man is a sexual deviant or just a poor kid who fell in love for the wrong girl and paid for it.

Here's my problem with this law. If it's an issue that molestors get out of jail and molest again, maybe you need to look into longer punishments or that surgery that I've heard about. It's also a damnation of the notion that prison rehabilitates at all.

 

The thing is that this would be a punishment that extends farther than the reach of the crime, in my opinion, because bus stops are so frequent in some places that it could in effect ban molestors from living in a city.

 

 

I share in this opinon. And superman, you're thinking too generally. For example, a 21 year old that is convicted of statutory rape because he was with a 17 year old, in some jurisdictions is forced to registr as a sex offender. And hours of debate can ensue whether this young man is a sexual deviant or just a poor kid who fell in love for the wrong girl and paid for it.

Most states including Florida a 21 yr old can have consentual sex with a 17 yr old. I understand what you are saying but IMO sexual crimes that involve young kids are the most heinous crimes. Like in the example I made with Port St Lucie, the school board simply moved the bus stop away from the sexual predator's home.

The lesson of the story: Don't molest kids

 

 

 

I always get a kick out of people who go out of their way to defend felons.

 

Misdemeanors happen (DUI's, vandalism during the teenage years, domestic violence post -OJ) but felonies are different folks. Felonies are SERIOUS crimes done by BAD people.

 

These vermin are lucky that we allow them to even whiff freedom after they have committed these selfish and violent crimes.

 

And your concerned about them not being able to live by a bus stop?

 

 

Here's my problem with this law. If it's an issue that molestors get out of jail and molest again, maybe you need to look into longer punishments or that surgery that I've heard about. It's also a damnation of the notion that prison rehabilitates at all.

 

The thing is that this would be a punishment that extends farther than the reach of the crime, in my opinion, because bus stops are so frequent in some places that it could in effect ban molestors from living in a city.

 

 

I share in this opinon. And superman, you're thinking too generally. For example, a 21 year old that is convicted of statutory rape because he was with a 17 year old, in some jurisdictions is forced to registr as a sex offender. And hours of debate can ensue whether this young man is a sexual deviant or just a poor kid who fell in love for the wrong girl and paid for it.

 

 

 

Wrong. A "crime" like the one you have used as an example are very very rarely prosecuted by the State Attorneys Office. And convictions are even less likely based on the ages and level of consent.

 

 

Scroll through the sex offender registry, you wont find any registrants who were convicted of finger banging a 17 year old when they were 21. The registry is reserved for maggot prowlers.

Rights are inalienable, according to the ideology every single person in this nation adheres to.

Main Entry: in?alien?able

Pronunciation: (")i-'nAl-y&-n&-b&l, -'nA-lE-&-n&-

Function: adjective

Etymology: probably from French inali?nable, from in- + ali?nable alienable

: incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred

Life, Property, and Liberty (in that order) are the inalienable rights every human being has. This one would take away two of them.

 

Sorry.

Yeah, I love how some people want to care for and feel bad for some sicko who took away the innocence of a child or raped a woman.

 

OMG THEY CANT LIVE BY BUS STOPS!!!!!

 

Who cares, I have zero sympathy or remorse for someone who does these deeds. I'm not gonna shed a tear because some sicko can't live in downtown Atlanta.

 

This is part of their punishment for being a felon. This is like someone who has to go to a probation officer. It's more punishment after jail time.

Some of you clearly need to have children of your own. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this once you do so.

what if a sex offender is living away from the schools and what not and then due to expansion of schools and building more schools and as a result mroe bus stops.

 

 

the sex offender now lives near where a bus stop is, yet the sex offender was living there first.

 

 

what now?

 

slippery slope.

what if a sex offender is living away from the schools and what not and then due to expansion of schools and building more schools and as a result mroe bus stops.

 

 

the sex offender now lives near where a bus stop is, yet the sex offender was living there first.

 

 

what now?

 

slippery slope.

 

Move the "new" bus stop where a sexual predator does not live. Would you let you child go to a bus stop knowing a sexual predator is just 100 feet away?

Thing is, how many bus stops are there? In a big city there's quite a few around. How many child molestors are there? Unfortunately, quite a few. The logisitcs here doesn't work enough for the law to serve the spirit it was written for.

 

Molestors should pay gravely for their crimes, but essentially being forced into a certain type of life style even after the punishment the state has set for you has expired is spitting on the 8th amendment.

The government cannot put that type of burden on any citizen of this country. Not living near schools and the such is a fair price to pay for the crimes a predator has committed, but school bus stops are all over the place. It would be an undue burden and unconstitutional to completely alienate any member of the community to this extent.

 

You're absolutely right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's why they should keep the sick bastards in a jail cell.

That's absolutely fine. If you make sentences for molestation longer, I have zero problem with that. As far as I'm concerned jail doesn't rehabilitate so just lock them up with some books and some food for a long, long time.

 

But if you're letting them go, you can't have laws like this. They've technically served their time; it's not right to have to serve a separate sentence once your jail one is complete.

These are our proverbial children we're talking about here. Either keep these guys in jail for good, or keep bus stops away from their houses, or their houses away from bus stops, either or, I don't care. I'm all for limitations in the name of the Constitution but let's take a step back and look at how far we've gone with this here.

Dude.....they're bus stops. And you know full well our system is one that protects the accused/convicted, not the victims/potential victims. It's not going to change and it's fundamentally better that way anyways.

 

This law has no business existing if the system were doing it's job. If you want to keep them in jail, fine. If you want to let them out on parole thinking that they are fixed, then that's cool. But don't let them go and then write laws barring the "rehabilitated" from living lives that are not unnecessarily burdened by the government. Pick one and stick with it.

 

If we're going to go with the longer sentences, which I agree with, then do it. But actually do it so these horrendous laws have no need existing.

I agree with juanky, a person does their time and gets out. Thats it, the government is overtsepping its limits by contiuing this cruel and unusual punishment even after a person does their time

Cruel and unusual?

 

The crimes they committed were cruel and unusual.

 

Not being able to live by a school bus stop is not.

I find that one of the bigger problems with crime in this country involves released sexual predators, most of whom are unable to control themselves, and end up committing another crime. They need a special facility to deal with sexual predators, as I see them as being far different than an average criminal. Generally most released criminals don't have a physical/mental urge to start stealing again, but I would say that 99% of sexual predators are unable to control themselves. I have seen cases where even castration was unable to stop their urges when they were released.

Screw keeping them from bus stops

 

molesting a kid should = death penalty or castration, along with public beating and signs on their home.

 

But I am harsh compared to most