Seattle Post-Intelligencer: AP – U.S. Headlines — Here’s a twist that is a variation of the old “blockbusting” scam. How do you prevent this sort of exploitation? Some hired thugs beating the crap out of the guy might work. Or is that wrong?
A day after the couple bought a home in a new subdivision, the police department distributed fliers detailing Collins’ case.
The lawsuit claims residents indicated they would move if Collins did not leave the neighborhood – and that sales came to a standstill because the developer was required to tell potential buyers about Collins.
The lawsuit also alleged Collins called the developer and offered to move for $250,000, “or he would stay there and kill their subdivision.”
related links:
Legal Guides
Well he’s got to live somewhere. Or do you think they should just execute him?
What’s wrong with this? To some degree, it is wrong to brand people with a scarlett letter for life as a “registered sex offender”.
I personally find this example of exploitation hilarious. Here is a “leper” with no right to privacy thumbing his nose at the system.
Why don’t they move these sex offenders to some place in Nevada where prostitution is legal and forbid them from moving away from the area?
Also, I have heard of some really unfair abuses of the registered sex offender thing. There was an 18 year boy charged and convicted of statutory “rape” because he had a 17 year old girlfriend and her parents had him prosecuted and his status is — drum roll please — a registered sex offender. (Yeah, like that kid deserves to be a pariah).
So — while they need to keep sicko repeat offenders at bay, there is also a need a assess risk.
The problem with the sex offender list is that EVERYONE convicted of a sex crime gets on the list. Let’s face it, merely because you’re convicted of a sex crime does not necessarily mean you’re a predator.
The list should only be used for those judged to be predators. As the list is now, it’s essentially watered down to the point of it being useless.
“Why don’t they move these sex offenders to some place in Nevada where prostitution is legal and forbid them from moving away from the area?”
Can I just say that’s one of the dumbest things I’ve heard today? It might be a joke, but if it’s not…
Prostitutes do not stop rape. Every city in the world has prostitutes and every city in the world has rape. Rape is about power and control, not sex. If sex offenders simply wanted sex they are lots of ways they could have it without committing rape.
Not to mention the fact that (I would argue) the most dangerous sex offenders are those who have abused children and they are not really going to get their fix from prostitutes. Unless, of course, your suggesting you want child prostitutes, which I’m sure you’re not.
I have mixed feelings about the registry. Yes, I think a person should only be added if their likelyhood to reoffend is high. Saying that there are 50 sex offenders (or even 10) per square mile doesn’t protect anyone. What matters is which of these people have a high likelihood of doing it again. In that case it seems warrneted, tagging a person for life. In most cases though, you do the crime, you do the time, and then you get a second chance. We all make mistakes. These people deserve to live somewhere.