musicman Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 full articleCity officials are crafting an ordinance that would restrict child sex offenders from living near places where young people commonly gather and make it a crime for anyone in such areas to rent to sex offenders.The new measure, which also would restrict some parolees or sex offenders from living together, is designed to protect the public from clusters of sex offenders or parolees.The sex crimes section of the ordinance would contain exceptions for minors or those who established a residence before the ordinance was approved. The ordinance would contain similar exceptions in the parolee section.Violations would be Class C misdemeanors, which are punishable by a fine of up to $500.The city's Legal Department also is researching a proposed provision that would set limits on the numbers of sex offenders allowed to live in apartment complexes.The ordinance is still in draft form and not scheduled for a City Council vote anytime soon. Council members at Monday's hearing asked questions about how the proposed measure would be enforced."This is one of those situations that is horrifying," said Councilman M.J. Khan. "For us to not have the children protected from these criminals and sex offenders is a travesty of society." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 "This is one of those situations that is horrifying," said Councilman M.J. Khan. "For us to not have the children protected from these criminals and sex offenders is a travesty of society."Well, this gets my vote for hyperbole of the day. It even outdid Farmer's Branch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted November 14, 2006 Author Share Posted November 14, 2006 With our crime rate increasing and shortage of manpower, who will be enforcing this? another of the White administration's feel good programs where nothing results in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbigtex56 Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 With our crime rate increasing and shortage of manpower, who will be enforcing this? another of the White administration's feel good programs where nothing results in the end.This is just plain wacky.In our unzoned city, how is one to know "where young people commonly gather"? Last I heard, young people are a mobile and fickle lot. If a sex offender signs a lease and a Chuck-E-Cheese goes up next door, is he obligated to break his lease? Maybe we should also ban red-light runners from living close to where young people commonly gather; they pose an even greater threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston1stWordOnTheMoon Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 If they would just send these bastards to the death chamber, we wouldnt be having this problem!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 If they would just send these bastards to the death chamber, we wouldnt be having this problem!!!!I assume this includes the 19 year old convicted of heavy petting with his 16 year, 11 month old girlfriend? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heights2Bastrop Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 The City of Marble Falls tried this not long ago. They included places like McDonald's and other fast food places, as well as other stores that didn't necessarily cater to kids, but that were frequented by minors. They drew circles around each and every establishment, and the entire city limits was covered, meaning no sex offender could live in Marble Falls.Now, I am all for very stiff sentences, but there has to be limits. People want to impose the death penalty for repeat offenders. That means someone could be executed for patting a couple of teens on the butt as they passed by. Criminal sexual abuse of a minor for sure, but the death penalty?Here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston1stWordOnTheMoon Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 I assume this includes the 19 year old convicted of heavy petting with his 16 year, 11 month old girlfriend?This is just stupid!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 This is just stupid!!!!!!I could not agree with you more. However, the term "Sex Offender", which requires one to register as such, includes Indecency With A Child, which can be committed by touching the privates of the another who is under 17 years old. Sex offenders also include date rapes and other offenses against adults. It even includes those convicted of Indecent exposure, which involves no contact at all, and possession of pornography, which involves no activity with a human being whatsoever.I am all for protecting children, but some of this stuff amounts to felony hysteria. Most assaults on children are actually committed by relatives! If we REALLY want to protect children, is the next step to take them all out of their parents homes? After all, that is where they are most at risk!For those who doubt me....or Heights2Bastrop's example of patting a 16 year old on the butt, here's the definition.http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/...00.htm#21.11.00 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VicMan Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 If the people really want to limit sex offenders further, I say ONLY child sex offenders who have been convicted of touching children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 You guys think this is bad? My understanding is that the State of Georgia is enforcing similar laws, and has defined school bus stops as being gathering places for minors. The prohibitive radius is large enough that there are very few places anywhere remotely near employment centers that are legal for sex offenders. The response: the sex offenders fled to Alabama...and some Georgian politicians are even straightforward in stating that that had been the intent of the legislation. Now Alabama is considering doing the same thing, if only to stem the tide of sex offenders coming to their state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Timmy Chan's Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 On the news last night I briefly saw an image of a map of Houston showing all parks and schools. When a 1,000-ft radius was placed around every park and school in Houston, there was very few places left for sex offenders to live.Is the solution to put all sex offenders in a handful of very small geographical areas? How would you feel if your home was near one of the few areas available to sex offenders?I think the best policy is to continue to educate people on who lives in their neighborhoods...and let the neighborhood police itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted November 15, 2006 Author Share Posted November 15, 2006 You guys think this is bad? My understanding is that the State of Georgia is enforcing similar laws, and has defined school bus stops as being gathering places for minors.13 news just had a story on sex offenders' proximity to bus stops. seems we have a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 13 news just had a story on sex offenders' proximity to bus stops. seems we have a problem.Yeah, this could affect a lot of people. But at least its just a City thing. When I'm talking about Georgia, I'm talking about the entire state...one that is canvased with rural school bus routes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Now Alabama is considering doing the same thing, if only to stem the tide of sex offenders coming to their state. Crimson, perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidtownCoog Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Is the solution to put all sex offenders in a handful of very small geographical areas? How would you feel if your home was near one of the few areas available to sex offenders?Search ZIP 77004.Every other mofo in the hood is a sex offender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevfiv Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Search ZIP 77004.Every other mofo in the hood is a sex offender.yeah, and 77004 is also home to the children's museum (and almost every other one).i wonder how many of those addresses are even current Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Everyone just keep your damn hands to yourself. Red, isn't there some new laws in the works pertaining to such "crimes" as your example ? To make these types of crimes listed differently ? As far as making pedophiles pay for their crimes, repeat offenders SHOULD get the death penalty. I think a new law was passed where the first offense is now a mandatory 20 year sentence. I think anyone that comes out after that, and is not rehabbed, and is caught the second time gets automatic death sentence with no chance of appeal. JMO though.I saw in my neighborhood on the Watchdog site, that there was a dirty old man down the street about 400 yds or so, I noticed a moving truck outside his house a week ago, and I believe he is gone now. Good Riddance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted November 15, 2006 Author Share Posted November 15, 2006 I saw in my neighborhood on the Watchdog site, that there was a dirty old man down the street about 400 yds or so, I noticed a moving truck outside his house a week ago, and I believe he is gone now. Good Riddance.he is gone now.......but where did he go? next door perhaps. guess he's in the unknown category til he hopefully reports back in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Everyone just keep your damn hands to yourself. Red, isn't there some new laws in the works pertaining to such "crimes" as your example ? To make these types of crimes listed differently ? As far as making pedophiles pay for their crimes, repeat offenders SHOULD get the death penalty. I think a new law was passed where the first offense is now a mandatory 20 year sentence. I think anyone that comes out after that, and is not rehabbed, and is caught the second time gets automatic death sentence with no chance of appeal. JMO though.I saw in my neighborhood on the Watchdog site, that there was a dirty old man down the street about 400 yds or so, I noticed a moving truck outside his house a week ago, and I believe he is gone now. Good Riddance.I am unaware of either of those examples you gave being the law currently. What I see is things getting more restrictive, not more common sense. Politicians use these things to inflame the voters, and it is hard to get in the way. After all, who wants to be soft on crime, or worse, sex offenders.A system of various levels of severity, similar to prisons, would be a better approach. Clearly, statutory rapists should not be treated the same as repeat child predators. And, the number of actual child predators (versus family abuse) is remarkably small. The number bears little resemblance to the hysteria promoted by the media. Hopefully, pragmatism will find its way back into the Legislature, as well as City Hall. But, with Andy Kahan out there getting his air time by overstating things, I don't see it happening soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbigtex56 Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Red, could he be referring to the "Romeo and Juliet" laws in effect in some states, where juvenile offenders are kept off the sexual offender lists? There's an interesting article about it here. This raises another question: should juvenile offenders be allowed to attend school? Because if they do, they may have to wait at bus stops.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 No Red, I think I worded my statement a little wierd. I do believe there is a new law, perhaps NOT in this state, about a minimum 20 year sentence. It was just my belief that a second offense by the same predator should result in a death penalty. Sorry.Red, I know the media may perpetuate this crime somewhat in terms of ratios, which you stated, but I think it is indeed an epidemic right now. I also think this has gone on since the dawn of time, but is just a Taboo that noone really wants to talk about, and it needs to be discussed, because it is just a vicious cycle that needs to be stopped, AT ALL COSTS ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 I know the media may perpetuate this crime somewhat in terms of ratios, which you stated, but I think it is indeed an epidemic right now.You watch too much Nancy Grace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.