It's about time someone stood up to this idiot and told him where to go, and lets not forget, Chris was busted for cheating on his wife, so I wonder how he'd feel if someone made him wear the Scarlet "A" on his forehead for life?
Monday, August 13, 2012
By Mark Schlueb
There are 53 sex offenders living within a quarter-mile of Tom Roseberry's front door in west Orlando, and he wants City Hall to do something about it.
As other cities and counties have passed more-restrictive rules, the number of places where sex offenders are legally allowed to live has dwindled, creating pockets of offenders in neighborhoods like the one where Roseberry lives.
- And by passing more draconian laws, you will just more the pockets somewhere else. It's not rocket science. There is also many studies out there that prove residency restrictions do not prevent or deter crime, they just exile people, force them into homelessness and joblessness, and when people become homeless and jobless, they become desperate, and some may stoop to committing more crime.
"Orlando has been slow to act," said Roseberry, president of the Spring Lake Manor Neighborhood Association. "Any time such a large number of sex offenders is allowed to move into an area with small children, it's a problem."
Pressed by Roseberry and his neighbors in nearby Rock Lake, city officials are now researching whether Orlando should adopt tougher rules. But they worry that a new rule might do more harm than good.
"It may make the situation better for some neighborhoods, but it might make it worse for other neighborhoods," Assistant City Attorney Kyle Shephard said. "There's a kind of environmental justice element to it that we have to be aware of."
- There is also the civil and human rights issues as well.
Florida law prohibits registered offenders from living within 1,000 feet of schools, day-care centers, parks and playgrounds. After a repeat sex offender murdered 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford in 2005, some cities and counties adopted buffers as large as 2,500 feet and included bus stops.
- All because one sick individual murdered a child, all must pay for his crime, that is called a scapegoat, and these laws are all about punishment, period, and thus unconstitutional, but, the Constitution isn't worth the paper and ink it's written with anymore, so anything goes now, and that's not just against sex offenders, it's for everybody! The more power the corrupt officials get, the more rights will be eradicates, including yours. It's only a matter of time.
Seminole, Lake and Hillsborough counties added an additional 300-foot "safety zone" — where registered offenders aren't allowed to cross — around places where children congregate.
Roseberry and others contend that more-restrictive residency rules in other areas have encouraged offenders to move to Orlando, and more specifically, near Rock Lake.
Residents want Orlando to go a step further and pass a so-called "cluster-buster" ordinance that would prohibit too many sex offenders in one area. Lake County adopted one in January, making it illegal for a sex offender to live within 500 feet of another offender.
- As long as you have residency restrictions, you will always have clusters, period! Eliminate the residency laws, then you won't have this problem!
That would prevent a cluster like the one in Rock Lake, where landlords have bought foreclosed houses and rented them to multiple sex offenders at a time. Nearby, the state registry indicates 38 offenders are at the extended-stay Parkwood Inn.
"You wouldn't have five people in a house — you'd have one. It would spread them out more," Roseberry said. "If you've got two or three in your neighborhood, you've got your share."
But Shephard said a court might strike down an Orlando cluster-buster if it's overly restrictive.
- Any residency restrictions is overly restrictive! For those who cannot think past the present, try to think about this. If you pass more residency laws, it will force people elsewhere, then that place will do the same, and the cycle repeats itself, until finally, the laws come crumbling down!
Lake County Attorney Sandy Minkoff said there is little legal precedent for such an ordinance and what works in Lake might not work elsewhere.
"Because we're a somewhat rural county, we feel like there are adequate places for folks to live," Minkoff said. "Clearly, if you wrote something where there was no place to live, you'd be more subject to challenge."
Even worse, a cluster-buster could have the unintended consequence of making it harder to monitor registered offenders, said Donavon Lace of Florida Action Committee, a group that advocates for relaxing the state's registry law. With no other resort, some would register their address as "transient" and live in the woods.
"Whenever you impose a restriction, those people have to go somewhere, and there is a finite number of places they can go," Lace said. "So then you have people you're trying to keep track of with no fixed address."
A working group with representatives of Orlando's police, legal, code enforcement and zoning departments is trying to come up with a solution. Ultimately, it will be up to the City Council to decide.
For homeowners in the Rock Lake area, it can't come too soon.
"I don't want what has happened to us to happen to any other neighborhood," Roseberry said. "But I do believe they should share. No one neighborhood should be a dumping ground."
- Oh, but they will, the more draconian laws you pass, the more neighborhoods it will affect. Telling people where they can and cannot live, is unconstitutional, and has always been, until the Constitution was slowly murdered!
Wait until one of the New York Posts family members are slapped with the sex offender label and forced into homelessness, then I bet they won't be so angry.
By Lucy Steigerwald
Up on Drudge is a New York Post story that wants to bring you the alarming news that sex offenders, even those convinced of truly heinous acts including raping a 9-year-old and sodomizing an 8-year-old, are allowed into city homeless shelters, even though those shelters also sometimes house families with children.
- So I guess you'd rather they sleep in a box and freeze to death? Come on, this hysteria has to stop. If they are in a homeless shelter, their are parents around, or staff around, right? So what's the problem? If they commit a crime, throw them in jail!
State sen. Jeffrey Klein (D-Bronx) made this disturbing report (and in fact initially complained about this problem four years previously) and the story quotes concerned parents who have stayed in these shelters. And the problem, tilts the Post, is that people "refuse to close loopholes" that let these ex-cons stay at the shelters. Also, "privacy laws prohibit shelter officials from alerting their residents to the predators among them." Basically, the law is tilted in an overly Samaritan fashion and that's not good.
But this is a fundamental problem that comes from the U.S.'s "S" for "sex offender" scarlet letter way of sentencing. Perhaps someone who raped a 9-year-old has no business being outside of jail. Or, if they do, after hopefully being actually guilty (nearly always a question) and serving a very long time indeed, that should be it. The notion behind the sex offender registry — first started in New Jersey in 1994 — is that sex criminals have a particularly high rate of recidivism. But that's not hard and fast. Numbers are difficult to pin down, but studies have found 5-24 percent rates (the former from a Department of Justice study over three years, the latter a Public Safety Canada study over 15 years). The high end of those numbers are similar with robbery and less severe crimes.
It's a lot easier to find sympathy for sex offenders who don't deserve punishment, namely not the horror stories of 17-year-olds that had sex with 15-year-olds and were pariahs for life. The people who actually harm children may not deserve any sympathy but the various laws — excellently critiqued by Jacob Sullum — that require them to move house, lose all privacy, or even in one extreme example, congregate in hobo camps under a bridge, since in some locations they are barred from living within 1000-odd feet from places where children reside, are not helpful. They further alienate people who have little to lose from communities. And in the most egregious examples, federal sex offenders can even be indefinitely detained if they are seen to be dangerous enough. That should disturb anyone, regardless of the guilt of these men, knowing that some have been detained for up to four years without a hearing.
- These days, due to the media hysteria and disinformation, demonizing ex-sex offenders, making them all look like pedophiles, now when someone hears the term "sex offender," they immediately think the person is a pedophile, which is most likely not the case.
Fundamentally, if you have served your time, you have served your time. And where else is someone just out of prison likely to end up but a homeless shelter? Some of these offenders need help, too. There should be a way to do that without endangering children.
I will be 65 this year. I was released from probation last Dec. Since then I have not been able to find work. I was a software engineer. I have been told that I should try to do consulting work. I have not been able to find such work either. I have been visited by the sheriffs dept 4 times in the past 3 months. I asked why and the response was it was their quarterly check. When I told them they were just here last month they said that it was the end of the last quarter and the beginning of the next quarter.
I can't seem to live in peace. They don't do anything to me except show up. I don't know what to do? I fear that if I forget to register one time I will get arrested.
But what if it was just that I forgot. I think in Nevada, they at least send you a reminder to register. I am afraid of my forgetting. Has anyone found a solution to this problem? I am looking to sell my house, which I own, and move to a retirement community.
When I did a Google search on my address, I find ME listed as a sex offender there. I can't get away from any of this. I am starting to feel panic. What about the rest of my life.
I had an acquaintance while I was in jail. He was a Chaplain. I kept in touch with him for the past 5 years. He is blind. I actually drove him from the jail to his house for the last 6 months. I really thought he cared.
However, I find out he is just like the rest. He won't ask me into his house. I gave him music on some cd's I made for him and they didn't work on his computer. I asked if I could come in to see if I could help. There was NO reply. I asked if I could take him out to dinner and again I kept getting put off.
I feel like I am at the end. I don't know what else to try.
Sorry for the self pity. I have no one else to express this to. My wife doesn't want to hear me any more. My one friend doesn't really know what to say either.
Again, sorry for the self pity.
The state Department of Corrections last week removed the names, photos and descriptions of convicts who have been free for at least one year from the state’s inmate tracking website.
- This just proves the "sex offender" registry is all about punishment. They removed these people because they say it's hard to find a job, housing, etc, due to being on the registry? Aww, if an online hit-list registry is okay for ex-sex offenders, then it should be done for all criminals.
That altered a practice of nearly 10 years, in which the names and pictures of current and former state inmates had appeared on that website for anyone to view.
The listing also included the inmate’s date of birth, the nature of the offense and the county in which it occurred, the length of the sentence and the dates on which the inmate was incarcerated and released.
Corrections officials said they had been receiving a number of complaints from ex-cons that their presence on the website was making it harder for them to find jobs.
We have a certain amount of sympathy for their plight. Consider that the goal of incarceration, besides punishment, is to reform criminals and have them become productive, law-abiding members of society after they have finished their terms. A ex-convict who cannot get a job is more likely to become desperate and angry and return to committing crimes.
- Exactly, but this all goes out the door if you wear the "sex offender" label? So this tells me, they need ex-sex offenders jobless and homeless, so some will re-offend. They need more child victims so they can keep their fear campaign going to help them get funding, votes, ratings, etc.
All that said, we don’t believe the argument about trouble in getting hired should carry the day for those convicted of the most serious crimes — murder, armed robbery, aggravated assault, etc. — and for repeat offenders.
Those who have served relatively short amounts of time for lesser nonviolent crimes don’t need to be lumped together with kidnappers, murderers and serial criminals who employers should want to know more about. After all, an employer has to consider his or her own safety and the safety of other employees.
- Well, sex offenders are all lumped together, so if it's okay to do that for one group, then it's good enough for all the rest as well.
So we believe a proper balance should be struck between the civil rights of those who have paid their debt to society and public safety. It’s really not much different than the provisions of Megan’s Law and making sure that people can learn about released sex offenders who might live or work near them. Those whose crimes are of a certain severity just don’t get the benefit of the doubt of being able to disappear entirely from the Department of Corrections website.
Gov. Chris Christie and lawmakers concerned about the general welfare of the public should exert what pressure they can on the Department of Corrections to develop a common-sense plan that, at the very least, differentiates between lifelong, hardened criminals and those convicted of minor offenses when determining whose picture and information stays on the website permanently and whose disappears after a year. It can be done.
- I agree, people should be looked at to determine who is and isn't a threat, yet all "sex offenders" are treated the same, as if they molested 100 kids and killed them all. But, an online shaming registry will do nothing to prevent or protect anybody, and no registry is needed! The employers can already do background checks, after paying a fee for it, so why do we need another draconian registry for other criminals?
Many men find themselves falsely accused by crazy, abusive, or just plain vindictive girlfriends or wives. False allegations are at epidemic levels. Restraining Orders, or sometimes called Protection from Abuse Orders, are fairly easy to obtain for abusive women with just an accusation. The consequences for the men can be devastating.
A recent study was done by looking at 10,000 police officers, media and politicians, criminal records, and it has been shown that 98% of them are closet pedophiles.
Over a 5 year term, many of those interviewed stated they had sexual thoughts towards children and young teens. They also admitted that that is why they hate sex offenders, because they see themselves in others, and they love to be harsh on them to draw attention a way from themselves.
|Cato Institute 2010 Study - Police Sex Crimes|
Many studies have been done to show that ex-sex offenders rarely re-offend sexually, and the overall recidivism rate is one of the lowest of any other criminal. So why does the media, politicians and other "non-profit" organizations continue to use lies? See the links below for more proof of their lies!
So we figured we'd make up some bogus numbers and studies to return the favor, which of course this is all not true, it was done just to make a point, which I'm sure they will also ignore.
|Cato Institute 2010 Study - Police Sex Crimes|
It was said that Mark Lunsford had child porn on his machine when Jessica went missing, but nothing was done about it because "he has been through enough" with the death of his daughter, but a crime is a crime, is it not?
Joshua Lunsford, Marks son, was also arrested for molesting a child, but received only 10 days in jail and is NOT on the sex offender registry. So I guess if you are well known, or have a well-liked father, then you can get a way with it? Sure seems like it.
And finally, John Walsh admitted to dating Reve when she was underage, but he continued anyway? So why is he not on the sex offender registry?
Why do we continue to have double standards in this country where everyone is suppose to be treated equally?
By DENISE M. BONILLA
Babylon officials plan to hold a public hearing Tuesday on a proposed law that would restrict where sex offenders live in the town.
The legislation would make it unlawful for convicted Level 2 and Level 3 registered sex offenders -- considered moderate to high risk to re-offend -- to live within 1,320 feet, or a quarter mile of any land "utilized, in whole or in part, as a school, child day-care center or day camp" as well as any land used for a park or playground.
Violators of the law would be notified by the town's Quality of Life Task Force and given 30 days to relocate. If the offender does not move, he or she would be issued a fine ranging from $250 to $2,500 and /or receive a prison sentence of up to 15 days.
The proposed legislation also targets property owners who rent, lease or sublease property to a sex offender or allow an offender to reside on their property. Violations would result in a fine of $250 to $2,500 to the property owner.
The law would not be retroactive and would not apply to Level 1 sex offenders or to offenders younger than 18 who live with a parent or guardian.
The proposed legislation is similar to Suffolk County's sex offender residency law, which also restricts offenders within a quarter-mile radius of places with children. The less stringent state sex offender law has a 1,000-foot radius and is limited to those on parole.
In 2006, Babylon became one of Long Island's only towns to map sex offender residences. Since then, town officials have expressed frustration, finding most offenders in town live in restricted areas in violation of the county code, and others never lived at the addresses they reported. In 2009, then-Town Supervisor Steve Bellone expressed concern that residency laws only drive sex offenders underground, and he released a report showing that offenders are barred from living in more than 80 percent of the town.
Town Supervisor Richard Schaffer said driving offenders underground was not a consideration when drafting the proposed law. "I think between the various agencies doing their jobs -- probation, police, the town, code enforcement -- I think that we'll be able to be as thorough as we need to be," he said.
Asked if the proposed law is designed to push sex offenders out of the town, Schaffer said, "It's an effort to make sure they're not anywhere near where they can endanger, hurt or cause harm to a young person."
The public hearing will be held at 10 a.m. in Babylon Town Hall in Lindenhurst.