Should sex offenders be allowed on school property?

Question

http://beta.comcast.net/news/articles/national/2007/10/03/Sex.Offenders.Schools/

I was reading this article and I thought:
If someone commits a crime, the repercussions of that crime should reverberate through the rest of their lives. This guy was convicted of rape. He should have thought about the consequences such as not being able to be on school property and what not before he raped that person. The person who was raped has to deal with that for the rest of their lives. Why shouldn't he? Instead of complaining about not being able to participate more as a parent he should reflect more on his crime.

I don't care how old he was when he RAPED somebody. He can have all the rehabilitation in the world. But in committing his crime he forfeits certain rights that should never be restored. Can you ever restore security to the person who was raped? So if someone was raped when they were 15 or 16 they're no longer a victim? Just because someone is young doesn't mean that can't discern between right and wrong. The act of raping someone is calculated because it's not over in 2 minutes, its planned and brutal. I'm all about rehabilitation, but I'm also about reprucussions.

Answer 1

never

Answer 2

I think that when someone commits a crime that warrants a tag of sex offender then that is the tag that we in society have asked to be placed on a person....if those of us that don't like the tag want it to be changed then we need to push through laws that change it.

Until then it appears that each school district has some wiggle room as to whether or not they want to enforce the ban across the board or to make exceptions with specific individuals permitting them to be on school grounds. Obviously in such cases the school board assumes personal and collective responsibility for their actions.

I can see where some person may be convicted of a crime that labels them with a sexual offender tag and the circumstances of that even while justified under the law may have some issues with it, such as the rape conviction of an 18 year old perpetrated on a 17 year old girlfriend who were caught in the "act" by the 17 year olds parent's. Yes, there are situations out there...cases that quite possibly should not have earned the defendant the sexual offender tag but the prosecutor not having charging choices may have had to stick with the charges to follow the law (that we as society have asked for).

In this particular case the 28 year old was convicted of rape two years ago....making him 26....he also served time...has since given up drinking and such...which leads me to believe that the rape charge and subsequent conviction was justified and if the school board in his area does not allow him to participate in school functions....too bad Jack....should have thought about that a couple of years ago BEFORE YOU RAPED!!!!

Answer 3

This is one of the problems when jurisdictions adopt a "zero tolerance policy" that lumps entire groups of people into a huge category and subjects them to some restriction that may not be appropriate. Many in the article cited state that they are starting from such a point, but that the policy may need to be "tweaked" to accommodate persons like the one in the article. I agree.

Ken, just a note. It says the 28 year old served time for a 2005 rape conviction. Unless it took a good deal of time to get the conviction, he was older than a teen when the crime was committed.

Answer 4

The answer is depends on the person concern. If he works in school and his records are kept or hidden for that matter to the authority then he shouldn't be working inside the school ground. But even if the person is convicted of rape and had payed for his crime and he happens to be in school for some reason, there is no prohibition on the law to barred someone coming inside the school because he is a convicted rapist. The law is discriminatory in nature which suppose to be not that kind.

The only safeguard parents should do is guard your own kids while in school ground. Yes the rapist must reflect more on his crime, but some people donot reflect on them instead keep on doing it if not caught. So the best thing is be vigilant and keep a watchful eye.

Answer 5

I think most of the answerers didn't read the article. This demonstrates a difficult problem with regard to sex offenders. This particular offender was convicted of rape when he was 15 or 16. He went on to a productive life and now has a job and a family. He wants to attend his children's school activities.

We want to encourage rehabilitation wherever possible but we also need to protect our children from predators. A balance must be found between the two.

PS I could not find mittleider on any sex offender registry. That is strange.

Answer 6

I agree with you.
He can still be an effective father without attending school functions. Though I can't see how a man who would rape someone would be a good father. The rape happened in 2005, that's very recent and too soon to believe that a man has "'turned a new leaf'.


Edit: Food for thought: When deciding if he should be allowed on school property, should it matter if he raped an adult or a child??

Answer 7

That has been a hot topic in the State where I live. School districts are struggling with it. The problem isn't the sex offender that isn't a parent. They aren't allow on school property or even school activities held off site, such as football games.

The problem is, when the offender is a parent. To allow them to attend a child's conference or performance is a difficult situation.

What's happening here is that they need to get written permission from the school superintendent. In some cases they even to have a chaperon to attend.

The non-parent offender is NOT allowed.

Answer 8

I read the story - and while I feel for a man who appears to have gotten his life on track........I still don't think he deserves the right to be on school property.

Every day in this country millions of people live their lives within the confines of the law - those who cannot live with the law and commit heinous acts (rape, child molestation, etc) have to realize that in doing so they lose certain rights.

Here's an odd thing -- a convicted killer out of jail could go to his child's school functions........does that seem anymore right or wrong?

Answer 9

In some cases it is ridiculous, like when an 18 year old boy has consensual sex with his 17 year old girlfriend, one of her parents finds out, and the boy ends up having to live as a 'sex offender' even though they pose no danger to anyone.

There are other cases like this too - but unfortunately the line has to be drawn somewhere. They shouldn't allow rapists or child molesters anywhere near a school (and they don't) but they probably need to rewrite the laws to keep people who maybe made bad decisions, but who are not a risk, from being caught up in situations like this.

Answer 10

I totally agree with you!!! He should have thought of the repercussions before hand, but a lot of these sickos don't think with the head on their shoulders just the one between their legs. I don't think he should ever be near a school- his fault. The person he raped has to deal with it everyday for the rest of her life, so should he, the Big A$$! Good question by the way.

Answer 11

While I can possibly (emphasis on POSSIBLY) symathize with this specific individuals situation, I do agree with you that this is a consequence that he must now face as a result of his actions. You are very on point with the fact that this will never go away for his victim why should it for him.

He can apply for a pardon within the time limit the law allows him and beyond that, well no...I say he is SOL.

We also all need to remember that just because you are a sex offender does not mean you are a child molester.