 Of all the laws being enacted to have further psychological power over registered sex offenders "Child Safety Zone Laws" are the most illogical, irrational, unreasoned laws of all!
One must wonder what kind of crime they are intended to prevent. The following two circumstances would have to occur for these laws to have a modicum of logic to them:
1) A registered sex offender would have to live within the proscribed distance of a school, day care, playground, etc.,;
2) A registered sex offender would have to leave his or her home, go to the school, day care, or playground, and take a child (without anyone seeing them), and transport (by carrying or vehicle) the child back to the offender's home (again without anyone seeing him or her);
Reason these laws out, have you ever read of such a crime happening, this writer has not. While there have been reports of someone taking a child from a school, day care, playground etc., these reports have never shown that the child was taken to a home that was within a proscribed zone such as these laws propose today. Remembering that these laws apply only to registered sex offenders.
Here is the reason why these laws are totally ineffective in preventing such a criminal act, regardless of where the offender lives, the alleged crime could still happen without these laws. So what do these laws prevent? Nothing!
The attitude of lawmakers was expressed in this Kansas City Star news article "Iowa `safety zone' law leaves sex offenders with few places to live:" by Rick Montgomery:
"The attitude (among lawmakers) is castrate them, poke their eyes out, whatever you do, it's OK, because they're sex offenders," said Fred McCaw, president of Iowa's district attorney association, to the Los Angeles Times. "But this law protects nobody."
Some politicians have said. They prevent "opportunity crimes." That also makes no sense, because the element of "opportunity" doesn't change with or without these laws.
Politicians would have the public believe the children are unsafe and not supervised when they are at school, day care, or playgrounds and need the government to protect them. When parents take their children to these places certainly, they checked to see that someone would be supervising their children while at the school day care or playground?
Politicians would also have us believe that, schools, day cares, playgrounds, etc., need a demilitarized like zone (DMZ) called a desex-offenderized zone (DSOZ), a fort like appearance to protect children while they are there. The truth of the matter is, politicians should look closer at who commits the majority of sex offenses against children, many are already within the DMZ, and they are not registered sex offenders!
COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES: Every state that has enacted or proposed these laws, have or will have, collateral consequences that are counter-productive to Megan's Law. For instance, in Oklahoma sex offenders cannot go within 300 feet of a day care school or places such as that where children are. Many sex offenders are still taking state ordered therapy in the community and cannot goto their therapy office because of these laws.
A Tenessee law effective 7-1-2003 will prevent Restorative Justice programs, by making it illegal for offenders to contact victim for LIFE! Some of these situations are families, and the law prevents them from reconciling forever.
In reality, these ill-conceived "child safety zone laws" are a spin-off of "drug-free school zone laws," in name only!
The way "drug-free school zone laws" work is, if a person sells drugs within the proscribed zones, then their sentence is enhanced. There is nothing in those laws that says, previously convicted drug offenders may not live within the proscribed zones following their crime.
Further, and this is critical, "drug-free school zone laws" apply to anyone selling drugs within the proscribed zone, not just previously convicted drug offenders. "Child safety zone laws" apply only to previously convicted sex offenders.
Should a person commit a "drug-free school zone law" crime, their sentence is somehow enhanced, a year or two added to their prison term or something like that. The point being the sentence has a beginning and an end, and the collateral consequences do not extend to the extent they would with a sex offense.
For instance, there is no registration process and all that flows from that, every year for years on end as with sex offenders; there are no proscribed residence areas that attach to the crime; drug offenders are not prevented from living with their siblings or their family if they live in a proscribed area; drug offenders are not forced to move, break leases or sell their homes if they are within the proscribed areas; drug offenders are not prohibited from working within the proscribed areas; etc.,.
Politicians want the public to believe these laws protect children, when in fact they further punish the registered sex offender and his or her family, for the rest of the sex offender's life! These laws do not provide even a modicum of safety for children that isn't already in law without them. That, by itself, proves the legislature acted to further punish, contrary to what the courts have held.
Child Safety Zone Laws are more, political laws of illusion! Feel-good vote getting legislation! We would hope that the IOWA ACLU is able to make the court see this too.
eAdvocate.
.
| » 6-26-03 Iowa:ICLU Challenges Sex Offender Banishment Law With Class Action Lawsuit!
The Iowa Civil Liberties Union has filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of several "John Doe" plaintiffs challenging the constitutionality of Iowa's law banning former sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or day care facility. The suit is believed to be the first class action suit in the nation to take on a law of this type.(Iowa ACLU News Release)
» 6-26-03 Iowa: Iowa `safety zone' law leaves sex offenders with few places to live!
A man with an ugly past recently moved out of his yellow house on Bel-Aire Road, banished by the reach of a new state law. Convicted in 1993 of "enticing away a child" and sexual abuse, the 46-year-old man and his mother bought the yellow house in February, after his release from prison.
But the law prohibits anyone convicted of a sexual offense involving a minor from living on that stretch of Bel-Aire, or virtually anywhere else in Des Moines, including all of downtown, plus the suburbs. Authorities say Iowa's largest city has fewer than a half-dozen residential pockets where convicted child molesters may legally take up residence after serving their time.
"Every city in Iowa has the same dilemma," said Des Moines Police Sgt. Barry Arnold. The dilemma is about distance -- precisely, 2,000 feet. That is the minimum distance convicted sex offenders can sleep from a school or a licensed day care center, provided the offender had not lived there before the law took effect last July. .(By Rick Montgomery, The Kansas City Star)
|
