Seeing as, contrary to popular belief, most sex offenders are not likely to reoffend, I say that once they spend their time in jail and "pay" for their crime so to say, they should pass a rehab and management class and be integrated back into society if deemed safe. People who commit MURDER don't even have the harsh punishment that sex offenders do. I think the registry is a good idea for high risk or repeat offenders but for most people on the registry it is undo punishment. Do you know they are putting people as young as TWELVE years old the the sex offender registry now? Do you know that if you are in a park and you *really* have to go and you pee on a tree and a kid sees you then you can be forced to register as a sex offender for the rest of your life? People need to read and realise these FACTS before jumping on the media hype band wagon. Am I a sex offender? No I am not but I have seen quite a few of them be healed and grow and become different people. It is possible to reform many sex offenders. I just don't think it is fair that people who steal cars can live next to car lots and not be on a "theft" list; that people on parol for murder can live anywhere they want! and not be on a "killer" list; that people who abuse animals can own animals again and live next to a shelter on not be on an "animal abuser" list. AND whose to say those people dont have a high risk of offending! Sooner or later we are all going to be on somebody's stupid list and not be allowed to live anywhere in our own United States. Today its the sex offenders, tomorrow its all of us. What happened to the United States being free, founded under God and his principals of forgivness?
2006-07-13 19:35:54
·
answer #1
·
answered by Adriene 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
i don't think of the regulation has to require the position of living, particularly that's the proximity to the faculty zone consisting of go walks even as in use with the help of little ones or interior college hours. No allowance is made for being at living house till required with the help of the courtroom or jurisdiction.
2016-11-02 00:46:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I depends, where I live it's 1100 yards. But it also depends on the type of offender they are, if their victim wasn't a child then I don't think the restriction applies.
2006-07-13 15:19:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by helleonwheels 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe different states have different distancd requirements, you should check your local sex offender lists to find out, most state police websites have a list of sex offenders, where they live, and should probably have a way to find out the min. distance they can be from a school/daycare/park
2006-07-13 14:38:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by thirteen_fox 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
100 miles in my book. Cruel, yes... but if they're going to offend again, I sure as heck don't want them remotely near my child.
2006-07-13 14:38:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by tougeu 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
i say put them all on a island in the middle of the pacific ocean
2006-07-13 14:39:57
·
answer #6
·
answered by Kevin R 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
10 feet.
2006-07-13 15:14:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by Ross 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
In my opinion I do not believe they should be allowed to live!!! Such a horrifying crime they all should fry!!!
2006-07-13 14:38:57
·
answer #8
·
answered by spawanee 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
i believe it is at least 1,000 yards but i think they should be sent to a island where there are no children.
2006-07-13 14:40:21
·
answer #9
·
answered by ladyrebel 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
atleast 25miles... they have no right to be neir any kid who has potential to be a victom...but tht will never happen
2006-07-13 16:34:50
·
answer #10
·
answered by popeye 3
·
0⤊
0⤋