The distinction is important. Attorneys seeking to overturn a provision of the new law banning convicted sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school bus stop argued that it’s virtually impossible for sex offenders to live anywhere in Georgia that doesn’t violate the law. Witnesses at the hearing testified that sex offenders could no longer reside in DeKalb County, and in much of the rest of the state, where there may be as many as 350,000 school bus stops, the attorneys said.
If true, the new law amounts to banishment, which would make it unconstitutional.
2006-07-19 14:28:22 · 6 answers · asked by nk_rso 3 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
http://www.schr.org/aboutthecenter/pressreleases/HB1059_litigation/NewsArticles/news_hb1059_fdr02.htm
2006-07-19 14:28:51 · update #1
It's not the first truly dumb but "feel good" law that's been promoted.
A true sexual predator ( I'm sorry to say) has the right to live somewhere, since the courts didn't kill him or lock him up.
But it's easy to get that label - just have a relationship with your wife before she's whatever the local age law allows.
Trust, but watch carefully, eh?
2006-07-19 14:37:08 · answer #1 · answered by whoknew 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Wow, I didn't know Georgia was such a small state.
If we use the pi x radius squared, then that is something like 72 ineligible acres per bus stop. That times 350,000 bus stops is over 25 million acres. Divided by 640 acres per square mile, that is 39,421 square miles. The state is some 57,919 square miles of land area. I guess there are still places where a lot of sex offenders can therefore live, but I guess there are a lot of folks that really don't want them there, which I can understand.
I still find it hard to believe that there would be much room to complain when someone who would do the things these people did would find it abundantly clear that they are not welcome to live near where their victims of choice congregate.
2006-07-19 14:49:42 · answer #2 · answered by Rabbit 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If it violates the law, it should be revoked. You ask a well tricked out question.
If we slip down that slippery slope and ignore the violation this time......then there would be a lot more "slippery slope" laws proposed and passed ( knowingly ) unconstitutionally.
parents would feel it should over looked. x-convicts would argue that the prison sentence was punishment for the crime and so is this banishment .
2006-07-19 14:48:34 · answer #3 · answered by biz owner 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, the Constitution does not provide for free or unrestricted access to everywhere. If the attorneys can prove that there is a reasonable danger to these children that is directly linked to their proximity to sexual offenders, they will probably win.
2006-07-19 14:35:54 · answer #4 · answered by snoweagleltd 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that depends on who is looking at the laws.
2006-07-19 14:32:17 · answer #5 · answered by cheeky chic 379 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
MAYBE THEY WILL START THEIR OWN CITY AND GET THEM ALL IN ONE SPOT.(INTERESTING)
2006-07-19 14:32:51 · answer #6 · answered by thumper 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋