Republican Politician Introduces Bill to Allow Sex Offenders at Schools And Playgroun

steve knight

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 28, 2009
2,596
6,958
I keep hoping they can't get any more stupid and they just keep doing it.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/02/23/bill-allow-sex-offenders-schools/
Both parties agree sex offender bill is insane.
It’s a sad fact that America is quickly becoming desensitized to the idiocy that comes out of certain politicians mouths. Honestly, what else could explain the fact that Todd Akin managed to pull nearly 40% of the vote in his state after claiming that “legitimate” rapes couldn’t lead to pregnancy? That insanity aside, though, it’s finally come to a point in American history where a Republican has brought both sides of the political spectrum together. Although, it’s not really in the way that most of us were hoping for.

“I Have never heard of such an insane law.”
In what may be deemed one of the most insane attempts at a law ever, Georgia state representative Sam Moore, a Republican out of Macedonia, GA, has put forward a bill that would literally remove the restrictions convicted sex offenders face on areas that they can be around. In fact, the new law, if passed, would allow those listed in sexual offender registries to loiter outside of schools, daycare centers, and even playgrounds.

Don’t scroll back up; you’re not reading an article from The Onion. Although, it’s going to be nice to see how they could possibly make this story anymore insane than it already is. Fortunately, Moore’s attempt at lifting these common sense restrictions has drawn ire from both Democrats and his House colleagues. The sheriff of Cherokee, a man who once said he’d never enforce any new gun regulations passed by Congress, even went as far as saying:

“In my 34 years of law enforcement I have never heard of such an insane law having been introduced.”

You would think that pressing this sex offender law forward would be a momentary lapse in judgment that a politician would quickly backpedal on, but that’s definitely not the case for Representative Moore.

Moore thinks his reasoning is sound.
Representative Moore has faced harsh criticism from all sides after proposing this legislation, but it has not wavered his resolve. He stated that the law was initially intended to prevent police from demanding that people identify themselves, and to do this, he explained, Georgia needed to get rid of loitering laws. He further went on to explain that the restrictions that sex offenders face were contained within the loitering law, and that it was best to just start fresh.

Of course, Moore didn’t make a suggestion to replace the sexual offender loitering law, and sadly, he even stated that the state needed to have a discussion over these restrictions. When asked what he thought about convicted sexual offenders being allowed at places with children, he literally said:

“I am okay with that. The reason I’m okay with that is the assumption is they have done their time. If they’re still a danger to society, they should not be free [...] Am I saying it’s not creepy? It’s definitely creepy.”

Unfortunately, it’s more than creepy. This is because there’s no real way to know whether a pedophile will continue in their criminal ways. Statistics show that 27% of untreated sex offenders will reoffend. For treated sexual offenders, this number is 19%. This means that one out of four or five sex offenders will recidivate, and the same study (PDF file) that lists these numbers points out that the likelihood of reoffending goes up when these offenders have more opportunity to do so. You know, like when they’re allowed to be around schools, daycare centers, and playgrounds.

Should we really be surprised?
Most people are surprised or flat out disgusted when they initially hear about this new attempt at a law that allows sex offenders around children, but honestly, should they be? Many members in the Republican Party, also referred to as “the party of morality,” would benefit from these types of laws. After all, former Republican Mayor Philip Giordano, who was convicted of having sexual relations with an 8 and a 10-year-old girl, would probably love this new law when he gets out of prison.

Then there’s Republican county commissioner David Swartz, who was recently released after spending time in prison for raping two girls, ages 6 and 12, that might want to head to the Peach State and hang around some playgrounds. Sadly for Donald “Buz” Lukens, a former Republican U.S. Representative convicted for paying money to a 16-year-old girl for sex, he passed away a few years before the new law would’ve done him any good.

But I digress. This is definitely an issue that both sides can likely agree on, but honestly, it wouldn’t be too surprising to think that some people would agree with the measure simply because restricting certain areas may seem like a “violation of civil liberties.” There’s no point, however, in claiming that this is a Republican issue. After all, Moore’s colleagues absolutely hated the idea, but when a party has made a name for itself over the past decade for saying and doing stupid things, they really don’t have much room left for insanity like this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

yg17

macrumors G5
Aug 1, 2004
14,888
2,480
St. Louis, MO
Stupid idea of course, but I do think a hard look needs to be taken at sex offender laws though. Someone who winds up on the sex offender registry because they were pissing in an alley behind the bar shouldn't be prevented from taking their kid to the playground.
 

Huntn

macrumors demi-god
May 5, 2008
17,089
16,624
The Misty Mountains
The Republican sounds stupid as usual. :p However, I think they should revisit these laws too. Such as, a case might be when a 17/18 year old and his 16 year old girl friend have consensual sex and the 17/18 year old is marked as a sexual predator for life. Personally I don't see that. But if there is reasonable criteria to designate a sexual predator, I don't see allowing them near schools, at all.
 

0007776

Suspended
Jul 11, 2006
6,474
8,051
Somewhere
Stupid idea of course, but I do think a hard look needs to be taken at sex offender laws though. Someone who winds up on the sex offender registry because they were pissing in an alley behind the bar shouldn't be prevented from taking their kid to the playground.
Yeah, there are plenty of problems with our sex offender laws that need to be fixed, but this isn't a good way of doing it.
 

Wild-Bill

macrumors 68030
Jan 10, 2007
2,539
605
bleep
This is the kind of thing I like to see.

The republicans have become adept at Gerry Mandering, influencing elections with money, accepting money from unsavory corporate interests, et. al.

This is the kind of crazy that will hopefully help to undo some of that.
 

lannister80

macrumors 6502
Apr 7, 2009
476
17
Chicagoland
Unpopular opinion time:

I think there should be no special restrictions on sex offenders once their parole period expires. Yes, even "real" sex offenders, not just the guys who got on the list by peeing.

This scarlet letter crap has got to stop. If they're dangerous, keep them in prison forever.
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,387
UK
Stupid idea of course, but I do think a hard look needs to be taken at sex offender laws though. Someone who winds up on the sex offender registry because they were pissing in an alley behind the bar shouldn't be prevented from taking their kid to the playground.
Yeah this is a big problem.

----------

Unpopular opinion time:

I think there should be no special restrictions on sex offenders once their parole period expires. Yes, even "real" sex offenders, not just the guys who got on the list by peeing.

This scarlet letter crap has got to stop. If they're dangerous, keep them in prison forever.
I disagree. Should people convicted of domestic violence be allowed to buy guns?
 

Tomorrow

macrumors 604
Mar 2, 2008
7,118
1,246
Always a day away
Not every sex offender is a pedophile.

Unpopular opinion time:

I think there should be no special restrictions on sex offenders once their parole period expires. Yes, even "real" sex offenders, not just the guys who got on the list by peeing.

This scarlet letter crap has got to stop. If they're dangerous, keep them in prison forever.
QFT. Sexually harassing a co-worker by playfully smacking her ass in the breakroom definitely crosses the line and makes you a douche, but it doesn't mean you want to diddle little kids.
 

0007776

Suspended
Jul 11, 2006
6,474
8,051
Somewhere
Unpopular opinion time:

I think there should be no special restrictions on sex offenders once their parole period expires. Yes, even "real" sex offenders, not just the guys who got on the list by peeing.

This scarlet letter crap has got to stop. If they're dangerous, keep them in prison forever.
I don't necessarily disagree with this, but it would require a lot of things to be changed on order for it to work. Maybe they have a sentence that they serve, and then after that they have a chance for parole every few years if they can show that they have reformed.

I would think if they got on the list for being an actual pedophile, and not just someone who was arrested for sleeping with their high school girlfriend when they are a senior in high school, that there should be a flag that comes up during a background check if they are trying to work with children though.
 

steve knight

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 28, 2009
2,596
6,958
the sex offenders registry is part of their sentence. The rate that sex offenders (not the mooning or willing underage sex kind) tend to be repeat offenders is about 25 percent over time.
 

lannister80

macrumors 6502
Apr 7, 2009
476
17
Chicagoland
I don't necessarily disagree with this, but it would require a lot of things to be changed on order for it to work. Maybe they have a sentence that they serve, and then after that they have a chance for parole every few years if they can show that they have reformed.
the sex offenders registry is part of their sentence. The rate that sex offenders (not the mooning or willing underage sex kind) tend to be repeat offenders is about 25 percent over time.
I guess I don't understand why sex offenders are "special" in this regard.

When a murderer gets out of prison (and they frequently do after, what, 25 years?), are they barred from interacting with any people at all, in case they murder them? Of course not.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
39,048
Criminal Mexi Midget
I guess I don't understand why sex offenders are "special" in this regard.

When a murderer gets out of prison (and they frequently do after, what, 25 years?), are they barred from interacting with any people at all, in case they murder them? Of course not.
because the only cure for a sex offender is a hot lead injection to the skull, we don't do that often, another cure requires a tourniquet to the neck, but we don't apply that either.
 

lannister80

macrumors 6502
Apr 7, 2009
476
17
Chicagoland
because the only cure for a sex offender is a hot lead injection to the skull, we don't do that often, another cure requires a tourniquet to the neck, but we don't apply that either.
So murder is a lesser crime in your opinion, then?

OT - The death penalty is barbaric, disgusting, and has no place in an advanced society.
 

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
As long as we are talking about political idiots at schools.

Kevin Jennings comes to mind.
 

TheHateMachine

macrumors 6502a
Sep 18, 2012
836
850
you are welcomed to house as many as you like.
If the US Government wants to pay me $35k a year per person and subsidize my building costs to expand my house, secure my house with bars/security systems, arms and guards... sure I will do it.

Hell I can even lobby at that point to eradicate the death penalty, fight against decriminalizing weed and further expand gun control laws to make sure I get even more people in my prison. You see... I don't want to fix crime. Naw, I wanna make more things illegal and have long sentences so I get paid more... ya dig?
 

rdowns

macrumors Penryn
Jul 11, 2003
27,345
12,409
If the US Government wants to pay me $35k a year per person and subsidize my building costs to expand my house, secure my house with bars/security systems, arms and guards... sure I will do it.

Hell I can even lobby at that point to eradicate the death penalty, fight against decriminalizing weed and further expand gun control laws to make sure I get even more people in my prison. You see... I don't want to fix crime. Naw, I wanna make more things illegal and have long sentences so I get paid more... ya dig?

Don't be ridiculous. You don't have to do any of those things to get paid. Most private prison contracts guarantee minimum occupancy rates.
 

thekev

macrumors 604
Aug 5, 2010
6,671
1,748
keep them behind bars forever, I can settle for that.
I'm not sure what your point is here. The point of that kind of rule is to discourage further offenses. It's there to prevent them from remaining a burden on society after release. I don't see how it's a better alternative to just kill all felons convicted of violent or sexual crimes, especially when the system of conviction is not fail-proof.
 

TheHateMachine

macrumors 6502a
Sep 18, 2012
836
850
Don't be ridiculous. You don't have to do any of those things to get paid. Most private prison contracts guarantee minimum occupancy rates.
That is honestly pretty insane that taxpayers foot the bill for unfilled private prison rooms. It is like some bizarro Priceline.com for prisons.

"When prisons can't book their rooms, you buy the extra ones and you have no choice!"