Skip to comments.Subdivision Wants To Ban Sex Offenders
Posted on 08/13/2011 10:34:17 PM PDT by Slings and Arrows
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- Residents in an exclusive west Orange County subdivision want to ban registered sex offenders from moving in.
State law requires convicted sex offenders to live at least 1,000 feet from schools or playgrounds, but residents in the Keene's Pointe gated community in Windermere said they want to bump that up to 2,500 feet.
A rule like that would keep any sex offender from moving into the subdivision.
"Everybody wants this to be as safe a place as possible to raise their kids and they all recognize that this is one of the ways to do that," said HOA President Russ Blackwell.
The idea came about when residents learned that their neighbor was a registered sex offender.
The ban would apply to future residents.
Do they lean Dem in that district?
I’m not for sex offenders in any way or shape. But why lay laws, on top of laws, that already address this issue.
These people are for bigger regulation and control.
What is next?
Can’t live there unless your Soccer Mom car is valued over $50K?
All they have to do it put in some more parks, a learning center for children and they sex offenders can’t live there.
If this is a community with a Home Owners Assoc. I don’t see how you can’t get away with this. People should have the right to live however they feel fit. Having dirtbags eliminated as neighbors seems more constructive than banning Christmas displays and the American Flag.
They probably don’t want perverts being able to live near their children. They work hard, they are active in their communities, and they pay big money to live well and safely. How is it irrational that they don’t want these fiends near their children at all? They don’t pay for undesirable elements to live around them, rightly if I may be so bold as to add. Would you want these people living near you and would you prevent it if you could? I know I would gladly (not implement a law obviously) prevent them from living near me or my neighborhood if I could.
I don’t see the big government argument against people not wanting sex offenders living next door.
The only problem I have is that too many offenses fall under the sex offenders act. There have been stories in the media of guys getting sex offender status for pissing in the forest or 18 year olds for dating a 16 year old.
This happened to the son of a friend of mine. Walked out of a bar, took a leak in the parking lot, and a cop drove by just at that moment.
Looks peaceful, but is really meant to put the ‘boot on the throat’ of the law abiding citizen.
By the way, HOAs are mostly run and ruled by narrow minded folk, with nothing better to do than enact restrictions to feel power.
In CA, they use the same argument (currently 1,000 feet from a school) that you cannot carry an unloaded firearm (to the point they mean on your own property or in public site, or crossing the street to put an unloaded firearm in your auto to go to a legal place of using it).
If you get pulled over, within 1,000 feet of a School in CA and asked to declare if you have any weapons, you either lie or be honest about them (unloaded and properly stored) and still face a felony, based on the ignorance or knowledge of the Peace Officer's mood at that time.
That is my analogy on why it is not about ‘sex offenders’ (who I despise) but about the bigger picture of allowing petty interests to control the masses. That is undemocratic.
They are using this angle to move even more progressive agendas.
I think you’re missing the point. These are fat cats who don’t want sex offenders living anywhere near their children, but could give a flying —— about anyone elses. Moving sex offenders en masse to poorer neighborhoods doesn’t lessen the threat of sex offenders, just the class of their potential victims.
I agree. Many Police are lazy in the way they charge people. I say that having many LE and Fed friends who are not lazy (but those guys are getting fewer to find).
“If this is a community with a Home Owners Assoc. I dont see how you cant get away with this. People should have the right to live however they feel fit.”
From what I read, one of the main activities of a Home owners Assoc. is to deny people the right to live however they feel fit.
“Having dirtbags eliminated as neighbors seems more constructive than banning Christmas displays and the American Flag.”
Going back to your first sentence, dirtbags are people too. Heck, even you may be a dirtbag from your neighbor’s point of view.
As to the sex offender part, what did he do to earn that status? Was it more serious than taking a leak by the side of the road at midnight? More serious than streaking at a football game when he was a teen? More serious than a false accusation in family court? Do you know?
That's one of my concerns. The other is that these people are looking to modify a law covering the whole state for their own convenience. If it applies only to their community there's an equal protection issue; if it applies to the whole state there will be massive disruptions (not just of the SO's), and who-knows-what unintended consequences.
Valid points. Please see my post #13.
“I know I would gladly (not implement a law obviously) prevent them from living near me or my neighborhood if I could.”
Why not implement a law? And what would you do in the way of prevention instead of a law?
On the other hand, I know of one neighborhood just north of me drove out a sex offender by force. I think his place might have burned down (or threatened), or he was harassed. I don't remember. This sicko was the real thing and a repeat offender who liked little boys and little girls. He should have gotten life.
That's my problem with the list. Those that really do belong on the list, shouldn't be out on the street in the first place.
sounds reasonable and rational. Therefore,,,it is almost certainly against federal law.
I forgot to add. Now the special interests groups (maybe Progressive Socialists?) in CA are petitioning to move that 1,000 feet circle around schools to 2,000 feet. This is in effect, de-facto gun control over 80% of the state.
They justify this by the fact that ‘it protects children’. Forget personal liberties. Gee, have not read of any law abiding citizens shooting school children in CA, ever.
CA is one big Leftist Progressive Home Owners Association from Stalin.
===== Point Below =======
So, my analogy (ignore the fact that this is about someone has a Sex Offense) is that a minority of activists can eventually erode common sense and the masses to gain control over the masses.
Creeping Shariah Law, by people who don't see past their petty needs.
Yes, the law of unintended consequences.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.