You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Culture Wars
ACLU: Let Freedom Reign -- For Released Sex Offenders
2005-09-02
Welcome to the neighborhood, brought to you by ACLU.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Washington has challenged a new Issaquah ordinance that tightly restricts where sex offenders may live, calling it inconsistent with state law and unlikely to improve public safety. The national civil-rights advocacy group filed suit in King County Superior Court yesterday on behalf of Level 3 sex offender Kyle Lewis, 28, and his mother, Mary Lou Lewis. The ordinance, the suit claims, wrongfully imposes additional punishment on individuals who already have been punished under state law. "Laws that make it virtually impossible for sex offenders to find housing do not make us safer. Society is not safer if former offenders live on the street," ACLU of Washington executive director Kathleen Taylor said in a news release.

The ordinance is the first of its kind in Washington, and it is being studied by other municipalities. It goes further than a new state law that restricts offenders convicted of specific sex crimes against children — and who are still under supervision of the state Department of Corrections — from living within 880 feet of school grounds. That, along with a grievance from Kyle Lewis, prompted the ACLU to act, said spokesman Doug Honig. "It's possible that other cities would start passing laws like this, and we think clearly this is an area that the state controls, in terms of setting punishments for sex offenders," Honig said.

The group wants an injunction that would bar enforcement of the ordinance, which was to take effect today. The ordinance restricts Level 2 and Level 3 sex offenders — considered to have a moderate and high risk, respectively, of reoffending — from living within 1,000 feet of schools and day-care facilities. The City Council adopted it Aug. 15, after residents protested the move of Lewis and Level 2 sex offender John Weber into Lewis' mother's home in the Squak Mountain neighborhood in June.
Posted by:Captain America

#8  "The ordinance, the suit claims, wrongfully imposes additional punishment on individuals who already have been punished under state law."

Problem: Sentencing includes releasing Pedophiles.
Solution: Sentencing makes 'em Dead-ophiles
Posted by: Hyper   2005-09-02 16:10  

#7  I say just CUT IT OFF!!!!!!
Posted by: ARMYGUY   2005-09-02 15:37  

#6  This is a specious argument: convicted pedophiles should be sentenced to life in prison without parole.

I'm serious. One of the reasons why we have prisons is to protect innocent people from predators. Research tells us that pedophiles, at least presently, can't be reformed -- once a pedophile, always a pedophile. The only known proven treatment is castration, physical or chemical, and the ACLU considers that 'cruel'.

So we have to balance the rights of a convicted pedophile to walk the playgrounds streets again versus the rights of a child, really multiple children, to live without be molested. That seems like an easy decision to me, but I'm just a conservative.
Posted by: Steve White   2005-09-02 13:00  

#5  ACLU = Another Child Left Unprotected
Posted by: Gir   2005-09-02 09:58  

#4  Where's Kathleen Taylor live? Let's find out, build an apartment building next store and move them all in there.
Posted by: tu3031   2005-09-02 09:32  

#3  Hey, I heard there are a couple of slots open now in Bellingham.....

(Bellingham Wa. is where a couple of sex offenders were bumped off a week or so ago. I know kind of sick humor but its early in the morning here....).
Posted by: CrazyFool   2005-09-02 03:28  

#2  Our county wanted to put a 100 bed facility for teenage sex offenders near us and close to our schools. The site they chose was a very remote place that would be hard to watch and was backed up against some areas where kids played and hiked. This was their answer to not having group homes within the city. I know not in my backyard. We finally got it stopped based on the fact that it was too remote and didn't have good transportation or medical facilities close enough.
Posted by: Jan   2005-09-02 03:27  

#1  un f***ing believable. It's not all about the kids though after all.
Posted by: Jan   2005-09-02 03:02  

00:00