Judge throws out sex offender rules

The Des Moines Register ^ | 02/10/2004 | Mark Siebert

[Therapist]

A federal judge Monday ruled that Iowa's law prohibiting sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or child-care center is unconstitutional.

The Iowa Legislature enacted the law in 2002 in an effort to keep sexual predators away from children.

[Freedom2specul8]

AMEN! and of course, we all know that that FEDERAL RULING can affect the rest of the states..and sex offenders who want to live ahem..closer to schools etc..

[oldfart]

Most have, but even those who do remember are cowed by the thousands of 'feel-good' laws which allow criminals to sue them for protecting themselves, their families and their property.

[Jaded]

No, the law makes PERFECT sense.

[AppyPappy]

Pedophiles are not "cured" by prison. That's why.

[Freedom2specul8]

Yes, perfect sense only to nambla members!

[citizen]

O'Reilly! Paging Bill O'Reilly...

This jerk-off judge probably has a kiddie porn library at home.....Hey, it can happen....

The then main weatherman in Atlanta (Russ Minshew-WSB TV) had a car trunk full of kiddie porn mags, this was pre-internet maybe a dozen years ago.

[freedomluvr1778]

O'Reilly! Paging Bill O'Reilly...

Oh, I don't know about that. Did you happen to see last week(Friday maybe) when he had the female prosecutor from Florida on the show(via video feed)?

[Alamo-Girl]

Jeepers... Thanks for the ping!

[Freedom2specul8]

"And the recidivism rate for child molestors is actually quite low"

Got some stats to back that up?

[Freedom2specul8]

And pedophiles will tell you that they can't be cured...they have to learn to control their urges. (ha ha)

[oldfart]

I'm afraid I don't have those stats. I did read a rather extensive article in a newspaper about three years ago that did quote supposedly accurate figures. I suppose I could try to find that story, though I might not be able to provide a link

While I realize my friend may not have been entirely representative of the group, his story might shed a bit of light on the rest of them. He told how it was almost impossible to get a decent job; how he frequently felt his only recourse was to turn to some form of crime to make a living. That he eventually found both a good job and a good woman is a testimony to his preserverance. Others, perhaps not a strong as he, might be more likely to turn to petty crime and eventually to re-offend. I don't know about that nor do I pretend to, but we westerners once condemned the caste system in India. Starting our own seems somewhat barbaric to me. I believe Nathaniel Hawthorne covered that sort of thing pretty well.

[Jackie-O]

"And the recidivism rate for child molestors is actually quite low"
I find that incredible as well. I would like to see some facts or case study.

[Jackie-O]

Here's a case that will boots the "low" recidivism rate. Jury believed that he would repeat, even at age 72.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1075139/posts

[Jackie-O]

boots=boost
Slightly dyslexic today.

[freeangel]

Lets throw some cash together and rent a house on either the judges block or his grandchildrens block and move a couple of these "poor" mistreated people in and see how he feels about it then.

[oldfart]

As I pointed out earlier, I don't have the stats. But in my own experience, at the ripe age of 70 (almost), I've met a lot of people with a lot of different stories. I can't even remember the number of women I've known who said they were raped as children, by older men. The men weren't jailed in most cases and the girls grew up to be fairly normal women.

Yet nowadays, if a girl is raped, she is required to identify her attacker and maybe even testify against him. After that, she gets years of 'treatments' to help her live a normal life. Those treatments usually require her to tell and re-tell the story as many times as some social worker thinks is neccesary to effect some sort of healing. When was the last time you stuck your hand in a fire to heal a burn?

I'll try to find that article and make some sort of link to it. I'm not going to do it right now though.

[HenryLeeII]

I whole-heartedly agree with the judge's ruling because, as Article III Section 1 of the United States Constitution clearly states:

The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office. Also, U.S. District Court judge Roger Pratt shall have the power to overturn duly-enacted laws of the Iowa state legislature with the stroke of a pen.

If you don't like the ruling, introduce legislation to have the Constitution amended! </sarcasm off>

Actually, I would like to see a groundswell among the public demanding the impeachment of these judges. The Carlie Brucia case had better be a wake-up call to all Americans that even the law will not protect them from demented, lawless, anti-American left-wingers. As I've said in other replies to various threads, the judges, politicians, and lawyers that help to get sex offenders and murderers turned loose into society are accessories to whatever crimes are committed after the animals are released.

[Yeti]

It stinks of ex post facto to me.

Well, I KINDA agree.

Being on the registry is no doubt unpleasant, but it isn't done as punishment, it is done as a service to the community. RE: all the other databases you were talking about, I think they should exist for any crime that involves predation. The government has no obligation to protect predators from the natural social consequences of their actions, and hiding public records for the benefit of predators smacks of conspiracy.

The problems with the registry are many, IMO. Chief among them is that they ARE used as punishment, as is the "predator" label. An example comes to mind wherin two 13-year-olds were put on the sex offender list for having sex with eachother. Nobody was "warned" of anything by that, the purpose was to humiliate the kids publicly.

Another problem, at least locally, is that you can't really tell the difference between someone who only said no 5 times to an agressive 16-year-old, then gave in, and someone who raped a 9-year-old.

So the problems are many. But, at the same time, I have a problem with the abrogation of the social contract by which the government operates. As citizens, we say, "Okay, we'll put down our torches and pitchforks and let you handle this in a civil manner." But then this judge says, "The only way you are going to remove these predators from your midst is with lynch mobs, because I won't let you LEGALLY keep them away from your children."

I think the whole system needs work. But at least most places aren't as bad as that epicenter of corruption and criminality, SC's shameful blight: Newberry County.

[Stone Mountain]

Flame away, but I have a problem with the government telling a prisoner that they are going to be incarcerated for 10 years, having them serve their sentence, and be allegedly integrated into society only to have themselves placed on a list that was not a part of their original sentence. It stinks of ex post facto to me.

I agree with this. I think the appeal will fail...

[onyx]

Nothing like getting kicked in the teeth by another democrat judge. Pedophiles have rights, my aching a**. Yeah, rights to our children, it seems.