H -°, L 6° | Tomorrow: 
H 18°, L 6°If ever there was a good time to give short shrift to principled arguments on behalf of justice, the punishment of sex offenders could very well be that time. The caricature of the typical child molester — a man with sunglasses and a mustache, peering out his window as he cruises by the local middle school — is not a figure that should, or ever will, invite sympathy.
So it is understandable that the town of De Pere, in the interest of wiping clean such a stain on the fabric of civil society, would want to impose harsher restrictions on sex offenders. De Pere’s city council passed a law this past Tuesday mandating that registered sex offenders avoid loitering within 200 feet of public parks, schools or other areas where one would conventionally expect to find children. The ordinance applies to all sex offenders and will be pertinent to them even if they are not under state supervision.
The measure is not alien to the universal human urge to defend its young — perhaps that is why the city council passed it unanimously — but the casual disregard of De Pere’s city council for the rights of society’s most detested individuals is an act of insanity all the more troublesome because it is so excusable. De Pere’s ordinance may make a city council feel good about their ability to defend a threatened community. It may make police feel as though they have the legal muscle to nip pedophilia in the bud. It is also a drastic violation of human rights.
The idea that all sex offenders — every individual who has committed a crime that is remotely sexual in nature — are a threat to children reeks of a paranoia with no interest in hearing the voice of reason. Every class of offender, whether his or her crime victimized children or not, will now be painted with the stigma of pedophilia, the most egregious brand of sexual crime it is possible to commit. And while the bitter pill of reality may be difficult to swallow, it is impossible to see how certain classes of sexual crime — with their own psychological motivations and underlying causes — can in any way make an offender more disposed to harm children than the average citizen. The drunken partygoer who became too aggressive in a moment of alcohol-induced self-confidence is no more likely to be De Pere’s next pedophile than its average inconspicuous male park-goer.
Society has the right — and the responsibility — to protect itself from any individual who would do it harm. However, if such restrictions are truly necessary, it begs the question as to why these offenders, so unworthy of loitering in parks, are worthy of living in civil society at all. Parks, above any other public area, are where someone would be most expected to “loiter.” If this amount of latitude, so willingly given to any other member of society, is denied to sex offenders, then it is challenging to see how the city council of De Pere has any true willingness to see sex offenders rehabilitated. It is not an act of insensate brutality to acknowledge that the average pedophile may very well never be fully capable of existing in society. And if that is the case, attempting to make him or her stay away from parks will do little to discourage an underlying disorder that renders an individual more fit for a prison cell than the tree-lined streets of De Pere.
One must also question whether the measure is not simply designed to drive sex offenders out of De Pere altogether, so that another town in Wisconsin can bear the proud mantle of a municipality that is friendly to sex offenders. During a discussion on the ordinance, Alderman Bob Wilmet cited his concern that De Pere could become a dumping ground for sex offenders that are fleeing neighboring areas, where ordinances are stricter. As a patchwork of local regulations concerning the conduct — and in many cases, the living circumstances — of sex offenders begins to spring up across the state, it will be increasingly difficult for them to not only find a place to live in a state that has supposedly welcomed them with hesitant arms, but to be able to travel at all without fear of violating a draconian ordinance drafted upon the whim of well-intentioned councilmen.
Sam Clegg ([email protected]) is a sophomore majoring in economics.
IP hash: f914eefc
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com
AMEN! Sex Offenders = Scapegoat!
First, let me get this out. I am totally against ANY form of abuse to any human being. And I believe anyone who murders another human being should be in prison for the rest of their life (until they die). I do not believe in the death penalty for anyone. Also, I believe that once a person has been in and out of prison and has served their probation and parole, done everything required of them, and what was signed on the “contract” when they took the plea, none of this should be required of them, none of it. The state cannot tear up a contract like this, which they are basically doing, it’s unconstitutional. Many people, if they had known they would be faced with all this, they would have NOT taken a plea deal. And the courts are very aware of this and this is why they made it retroactive; thus violating ex-post facto laws! They should be allowed to get on with their life as if nothing happened. I’m not saying for it to be removed from their record, but, the crime should be removed from public view and background checks, they should not have any more restrictions, shaming, etc. If they commit another crime, then they face a lot more punishment, like everything else is treated.
When are we going to move away from being “TOUGH ON CRIME” and move to being “SMART ON CRIME?” If you locked every single sex offender up, at this moment, or killed every one of them, do you think the problem is over? No, more will follow.
I’ve heard many people say “If these laws protect one child, then they are worth it!” And at the same time, if millions are tortured, it’s ok. Offenders are losing their homes, jobs, families, and children and cannot find new jobs or homes due to the insanity of these laws. The families are also made into outcasts for associating with or being related to an ex-offender and their own children are harassed and bullied at schools due to a family member being an ex-offender.
I know these laws are a sensitive issue, but as all issues, they must be discussed and we must come up with a valid solution that will work. The laws, as they exist now, DO NOT WORK! People are always saying they cause unintended consequences. These laws have been on the books for years now, so nothing is unintended anymore. When are we going to set aside fear, hate, rage and anger and come up with a real solution? History has proven that these feelings NEVER get good laws passed but only create bad ones that punish and torture many people. These knee-jerk reactions to a slim number of high-profile crimes, like Adam Walsh and Jessica Lunsford, MUST STOP!
When an ex-offender is forced to move from his/her home, thus having to sell it, cannot find another home within the law due to the residency “buffer” zones, get fired from their jobs due to being on the registry, cannot find a new job due to being on the registry, their husband/wife lose their jobs due to a significant other being on the registry, their children lose their friends and are harassed and bullied in school due to a family member being on the registry, thus destroying the children’s lives, ex-offenders are forced into homelessness and to live under bridges, harassed by police, neighbors and probation/parole officers, have to wear “I’m a sex offender T-shirt” or have a neon green license plate on ALL their cars, have “sex offender” on their drivers license and forced to renew their licenses every year, forced from shelters during tornadoes or hurricanes, cannot give blood at some places due to being discriminated against for being on the sex offender registry, denied housing due to being on the registry, signs placed in their yards inviting harassment and ridicule from the neighbors, forced to move when the neighbors start picketing outside the ex-offenders home, the list is endless.
I THINK THIS IS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT, BEYOND THE EXTREME!
IP hash: 4e2f938f
Thank you, thank you, thank you! At last somebody is realizing that there is a serious issue here. Not every ‘sex offender’ is out there looking for little children to munch on. Those monsters that are after our young are more likely to be on the internet than ‘crusing by the local middle school.’ Sam-please continue to let the world know there is a serious issue here and keeping all sex offenders profiled and locked in their houses is NOT going to solve it.
IP hash: f914eefc
And studies show that 90% or more of all sexual crimes, occur in the victims own home, and 90% or more of all sex crimes are committed by those NOT on the registry.
So you should be looking out for the unknown pervert in your own family.
http://sexoffenderstudies.blogspot.com/
IP hash: 8ef0458b
Your writings have insight into a realm that which politicians know about, but refuse to answer to. Votes are what keeps them in a paycheck, as without their tax-payer funded jobs, they would be used car salesmen in some back alley dive.
Government, local, state, or national, will continue to push this until they have everyone on some sort of restriction or another. Currently you have the SO registry, and there are initiatives in several states to put violent law breakers on registries of their own. There is also talk on the west coast to mandate registries for drunk drivers.
This is what the sex offender community has been saying the entire time. When an offender is caught, punish them. But when we have served our time, allow us to go back into the citizenry of the United States without restrictions. We still pay taxes, we still must work, support our families, abide by the laws, everything a non-registered person has to do.
What people refuse to see is that a very high percentage of people on the registry are one time offenders, some teen-aged lovers that did nothing more than have consensual sex with their girlfriend or boyfriend. only 3to5 % of all registered sexual offenders are multiple offenders, or will re-offend. These are the ones you need to watch. The rest will never offend again, with or without the restrictions. And if you don’t believe that, you need to read all of the studies regarding this topic. Get a clue America, as up to this point, you are showing your ignorance.
IP hash: c0ed2370
Most sex offenses, nearly 90% are committed within families or by those trusted individuals close to the families. The idea of the “stranger danger” is true and is real, but it makes up only a very small portion of those who commit sex crimes. Also since nearly 90% of all new sex offenses are committed by people that have never committed a sex offense before, basing laws that target former offenders, those who have already served their sentence and are integrating back into our society, seems like political grandstanding to me that deceive the public into believing that you are protecting children when in fact you are actually putting far mjore children at risk.
In His service Tigger
IP hash: 0fab450b
Thank you, Mr. Clegg for adding your voice of reason to a topic so fraught with myths and fears that “even the brave dare not go”. I would love it if more people would be able to answer the question, “What EXACTLY is a Sex Offender?” It wold blow the public’s mind to learn just how much they have been duped into believing they are “protecting their children”. Mr. Clegg, in the vast percentage of these cases, these ARE their children! And parents ought to understand just how many behaviors once thought of as “naughty” are now being prosecuted as “Criminal”. I can well understand the fear of anyone about a sadistic, psycopathic kidnapper of kids, but to allow the public to believe that every Sex Offender fits that description is in itself deceptive. These laws, most especially the publc notification, and the coming Adam Walsh Act will cost Billions of dollars, and that is just the beginning! Wait 5 or 10 years, and see what it cost then! And these laws offer only false security. What is even worse is how gleefully the public will deny liberty to someone who has served their time, while not for one minute questioning how their own liberites will be denied by accepting this predicate. Loss of Liberty for ONE, is Loss of Liberty for ALL! What better way to willingly forfeit our Constitutional Guarantees than to start by deliberately alarming the public into panic over the safety of their children, while violating the rights of those who are demonized by public condemnation? If you, or your readers would like to learn more about “What EXACTLY is a Sex Offender?, and the Billion Dollar Boondogle the taxpayers are being bilked to support, just ask. Check out www.sosen.us and you will discover numerous links to other sites,ststistics, legitimate studies and actual stories of the destruction of families and liberties for millions of innocent people. I pray we can help your loved one not to become one of them.
IP hash: 2f84b59e
Surely these modern-day lepers will not have to pay the taxes to support parks they cannot go to or schools they cannot attend! Is this consitutional? Or doesn’t that document matter anymore? Does the government give out handbooks listing each city and state and what freedoms each have taken away from one select group? This reeks of intellectual vapidity and emotional fear-mongering. Terrorists are surely treated more humanely.
IP hash: 0c98e3d7
nice pix
IP hash: 225bea98
Fantastically well written article Sam. Its not easy to stick up for such a stereotypically despised category of people that are - on the whole - not well understood by the general public in their definition and their actuality.