Sex Offender Laws

WSB TV's website today has a report of the aftermath of a bill initiated by Georgia State Senate Majority Leader Jerry Keen and passed into law by that very assembly. This is a recent law stating that convicted sex offenders cannot live within 1000 feet of any church, school, or school bus stop. The report goes on to state that several counties' law enforcement agencies have issued and carried out warrants for these convicted sex offenders who have not complied with the new law and have not moved out of this new lawful range of said edifices. It has also stated that an unnamed judge in Atlanta has stopped, for an unknown amount of time, the carrying out of this law in respect to the bus stop provision. The report says the reason for this ruling is that it would force many people from their homes and compel those opposed to the law to argue its constitutionality.

I, having children, like the comfort of knowing that a sex offender cannot reside within 1000 feet of my childrens' schools or bus stops. I enjoy the peace of mind that comes with believing that the government is moving in the direction of protecting innocent children from the possibility of being accosted by these obviously abnormal individuals. Wouldn't any of us like to think that our children are safe when they leave our arms in the morning for school? My question is at what point does our comfort infringe upon civil rights? Is it just for our government to step on many peoples rights while looking out for the rights of others? Are we a nation of hypocrites in which our criminal rights system is extensive in protecting the criminal while our civil rights system is extensive in punishing them?

Let us ponder on this subject in respect to logic and reason. What we're doing here is telling those who have committed a crime and completed their sentence that they are limited in the choices where they will reside for the remainder of their law abiding days. We, those who have not been caught breaking any laws, then, are saying that, not only are we better than you who have been caught committing a heinous offense, but we also will call upon the government and their fire power to ensure that you and your household, no matter if you never commit that exact offense again, shall never have the same freedoms as the rest of us in respect to your place of dwelling again. This is not just by any standard. We as parents are responsible for protecting our children. The government is only responsible for punishing people who break laws when they break them.

Neal Boortz, a nationally syndicated radio host based in Atlanta, related a story to his listening base of a lady who had been convicted for statuatory rape at 17 because she had consentual sexual intercourse with her 15 year old boyfriend at the time. The law provided that she could not legally perform such act and convicted her for breaking this law. She now, because she is a convicted sex offender, cannot live within 1000 feet of any church, school, or school bus stop. This is not a just assessment by our judicial branch of an already broken law created by our legislative branch. In other words, maybe the source of our problem isn't the amount of legislation over criminals after exiting the punishment system but the punishment system itself. Instead of making laws to fit criminals back into society, we should amend or upheave our current punishment system.

Our government enjoys legislative and judicial liberties that infringe on civil liberties in a manner that is constant and overbearing. We as the citizens who elect these unqualified and overly lobbied aristocrats should stand up for our rights as humans first and then as American citizens and put a stop to the government's playing as our parents.