E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSRegistered sex offenders in California are suing to block a Simi Valley law that would keep them from putting up Halloween decorations and require them to display a "No Candy or Treats" sign. WNBC's Ted Chen reports.
An attorney representing five Simi Valley sex offenders who sued the city over limits to their Halloween activities said the lawsuit will be the first of several she expects to file over such restrictions.
Lawyer Janice Bellucci heads the 18-month-old advocacy group California Reform Sex Offender Laws. On Friday, she filed a lawsuit in federal court claiming that Simi Valley's ordinance violates her clients' First Amendment rights.
The suit seeks a judge's order prohibiting enforcement of the ordinance in Simi Valley, which has 119 registered sex offenders, according to a city report. Bellucci is representing five unnamed sex offenders, three of their spouses and two minor children, she said.
The ordinance, adopted Sept. 10, prohibits registered sex offenders in the Ventura County city of about 125,000 from displaying Halloween decorations, answering the door to trick-or-treaters or having outside lighting after dark on Oct. 31.
Simi Valley councilman and LAPD officer Mike Judge said the law is modeled after similar Halloween laws enforced in other California cities, and is meant to protect children.
"This law was generated by citizens asking the City Council to do something," Judge said. "And it didn’t seem unreasonable for the City Council to take it up.
"As far as I’m concerned, our law doesn’t go as far as other laws in the state of California and it still, in our opinion, protects our children a little bit better than not having it."
Registered sex offenders are also required to post signs with on their front doors reading, in 1-inch letters, "No candy or treats at this residence." Those offenders visible to the public on the state's Megan's Law website and convicted of a crime against a child are required to post the sign.
Stay informed with the latest headlines; sign up for our newsletter
Sixty-seven of the city's offenders are listed on the website, according to a city report; the rest are convicted of misdemeanors and don't have their names on the public list.
Bellucci said the sign-posting requirement was "particularly egregious."
"We consider that to be a violation of the U.S. Constitution," Bellucci said Tuesday.
The ordinance both imposes "forced speech" – the sign – and restricts speech by prohibiting Halloween celebrations, she said.
"It's similar to Jews in Nazi Germany who had to wear the yellow star on their clothing," Bellucci said.
The Simi Valley measure is part of a trend of increasing strict restrictions on the activities of convicted sex offenders who have "paid their debt to society," Bellucci said.
Watch the Top Videos on NBCNews.com
Her organization intends to begin filing lawsuits to challenge other statutes, she said.
The office of Simi Valley City Attorney Marjorie Baxter said the city had not been served with Bellucci's complaint, so it had no comment as of Tuesday afternoon.
Baxter was quoted in the Ventura County Star, which first reported on the lawsuit, as saying: "We thoroughly researched the ordinance and I don't feel the lawsuit has any merit, and we will defend it vigorously."
At an Aug. 20 initial City Council hearing on the ordinance, a deputy city attorney told council members that "traditional trick or treat activities associated with Halloween provide have the potential to provide significant opportunities for sex offenders to victimize minors."
Also at NBCLosAngeles.com: Suit filed to fight gay conversion therapy law
Council members at that time expressed some concern about legal repercussions, as well as worries that residents who decide not to decorate will be thought by neighbors to be sex offenders.
The police chief told the council that he could find no records of a sex crime against a child on Halloween in Simi Valley.
Those who are convicted of violating the ordinance would be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a fine of up to $1,000 and/or up to six months in county jail, according to a city staff report.
California residents who have been convicted of or pleaded no contest or guilty to a sex-related offense must register with local public safety authorities. Offenders are listed on the registry for life.
More content from NBCNews.com:
- Pedestrians, bicyclists beware in New York, Los Angeles
- Veterans angle for a overdue shout out during tonight's debate
- Report: Homeland Security 'fusion' centers spy on citizens, produce 'shoddy' work
- Woman rides wild manatee in Florida, turns herself in
- Video: Dangling base jumper rescued from cliff
Leave a Comment:
To me, it just sounds like another completely un-needed un-warranted law.
It makes no sense at all if you give it just a minutes worth of thought. If I, or YOU, were a deranged @!$%#ed-up chi-mo, would you abduct a kid on your own doorstep??? Makes no sense at all, it would be far easier to roaming some neighborhood on the other side of town would it not? I hate the fact that it sounds like I'm sticking up for these pieces of @!$%# but it really doesn't make any sense.
A useless law restricting someones freedom using a theory that has never even once actually happened? I don't see the threat any different than any other day...
If a person like Jerry Sandusky served his sentence were to get out of prison, live in your neighborhood, and you had young children, would YOU want them trick or treating at his house? There is a high rate of repeat sex offenders. Talk to anyone that works with them, whether it be psychologists or criminal justice people, the whole criminal justice system approach to sex offenders is to CONTROL them/their activity after they are released from prison, NOT to cure them, because there are alot of statistics and studies that have been done over MANY years that show they cannot be cured of their sickness.
I agree that all these restrictions are a violation of the 5th admendment.
tell that to the child or children the offender messed with to get a 290 jacket in the first place.
who was thinking of that childs rights?
life, liberty and the pursuit of HAPPINESS?
certainly NOT the offender!
First off, children do not have constitutional rights. Those are for adults. Secondly, the victim of the crime does not determine the punishment of the criminal. These are emontional responses, the constitution was purposly written with complete lack of emotion.
let's see...
free candy...cool scary things...excitement...dark night...very little if ANY parental supervision...hmmmm
can you say HERE KIDDIE KIDDIE?
or is it here kitty kitty?
Lisa French was kidnapped, raped and murdered in Fond Du Lac, Wi on halloween. They found her stuffed into a garbage bag along side a road. Lisa was only 9 years old. I would make Wisconsin sick if her killer ever walked free and was around little kids ever again
"The ordinance both imposes "forced speech" – the sign – and restricts speech by prohibiting Halloween celebrations, she said.
"It's similar to Jews in Nazi Germany who had to wear the yellow star on their clothing," Bellucci said."
You have got to be kidding! How about the forcing that these monsters did on those children? Similar to Jews in Nazi Germany? Oh, I can totally see how being killed for your religious beliefs in concentration camps is the same as protecting children from you and your inability to control your terrible impulses, which, since you are a registered sex offender, you are obviously unable to do on your own. I can for sure see those similarities. Some lawyers will do anything for a buck and should be completely ashamed of themselves.
What about the "rights" of the kids? Aren't the kids entitled to go out on halloween and NOT have to fear for their safety or their innocence? IMO, sex offenders shouldn't be allowed ANYWHERE near kids. NOT even their own. They were convicted of a crime against children. They already STOLE a child's innocence, what more do they want? Sex offenders being able to interact with kids is like them having access to a buffet. Halloween is a night for children, NOT some SICK person crying about their so-called rights being voilated
Compairing the "suffering" of sex offenders to that of persecuted Jews in Nazi Germany is a bit ridiculous. Jews did not choose to be Jews they were born Jews, sex offenders chose to do whatever deviant act that got them branded a sex offender. That said some of the offenses that get people registered as a sex offender are a bit ridiculous. I think the level of restriction should be based on the level of offense.
Forcing these sex offenders to post a sign saying "No candy at this residence" is NOT a violation of their First Amendment rights, because as convicted sex offenders, they have given up their privileges. It is no different than felons being unable to possess a firearm. Are all felons going to start a class-action lawsuit now saying that their 4th Amendment rights are being violated? This is ridiculous. They committed a crime, and they need to own up to the consequences of those crimes.
And comparing sex offenders to Holocaust victims being forced to wear a yellow star? This is the most ignorant statement that I have ever read, heard, or seen in my entire life, and that lawyer should be disbarred for being so incompetent. The Jews were innocent people who were forced into concentration camps simply because of their religion. A sex offender CHOSE to commit a crime - they are NOT helpless victims who are being persecuted due to something out of their control like the Jewish people were.
This story completely and utterly pissed me off.
Not true, a felon can and usually does reapply for constitutional rights.
the simple solution is to supervise your children. We can't "child proof" the whole world.
Easy for you to say. One of the ways we protect our children is with sex offender registries. On Halloween, when children are going from house to house, why not have those people post warnings in front of their homes?
Jim- Convicted sex offenders are often listed on their state's registry for life. The fact of the matter is that while they are listed on the registries, it is because they are considered to be a potential risk to children and the public at large. Taking additional precautions when children are going to be out in large numbers is not an attempt to child proof the whole world any more than the registries themselves are. It is simply one more tool for children and their parents to utilize to ensure their safety.
Kevin- I say make them have a year round warning on their property in a prominent position so that neighbors know what they are dealing with. The sign should list their offense, that way parents know whether they were convicted of a violent sex offense or an offense against children.
Trick or Treat!
Bend over!
Sex offenders need to be categorized as to the severity of the offence, 1st degree, second degree, violent or non violent and so on. It should also be categorized as that of a pedophile meaning having the same traits of a psychopath in that the offence is without remorse or empathy for the victims.
We are handicapped in trying to punish these monsters. As I read certain post like the one from Chris, where he says the Offenders should have rights, I disagree totally. I feel this is to be treated as felony assault and being it is perpetrated against victims who cannot protect themselves, it is the most brutal sort of abuse.
If the classification is a 1st degree with violence, it should be treated and judged as a murder would be because I, as a social worker, have seen the experience literally take the child's life away. They are still breathing, but are forever changed in that the person who was there before the assault is gone forever. What remains is an empty shell that will never be able to have normal relations or trust another person fully.
I have seen women who were systematically abused as a child grow up have children and provide those children to her rapist father. She gives her children to the monster that abused her and had total control over her then, now, and forever. Her children will also grow up believing this is normal behavior and will perpetrate the process. Certain religions also use this same type of child abuse as a normal behavior within their cultures as with arranged marriages for children.
My feelings are that Child abusers do not have any rights once they cross that line and take away a child's innocence.
Certain cultures in the world say that girls as young as 13 can be married and have children, perhaps that should be the line where the grey area of right and wrong comes into play since we are the"melting pot" of the world.
Statutory rape, for example is where the child is a willing partner, but under laws is too young to consent. (Correct me if I am wrong) Most people are sexually active long before that, and I am not saying it is alright, but the punishment for that abuse should be much less than a 1st degree pedophile.
I believe a 1st degree pedophile should be castrated and made a Eunuch immediately in order to retain their freedom and some of their rights as a citizen. Death penalty should be strongly considered as immediate punishment. Part of our problems within the legal system is all of the time a person spends on death row. people like the shooter in Colorado, needs immediate death because he maliciously murdered numerous innocent people without remorse. He was caught in the act and he needs to die. The taxpayers do not need to make lawyers rich or famous.
By the simple act of showing compassion for the people that prey on children, we are inadvertently desensitizing ourselves to grow accustomed to having them walk in our communities. It is like getting used to looking into a mirror and seeing that ugly /hairy mole grow on your chin. After a while you hardly even notice it.
Child abusers and pedophiles need to celebrate without the presence of children lest we grow tired of their predisposition to garner the attention of children. I say "SNIP SNIP" and all of your trouble goes away.
I recently researched Eunuchs and was amazed at how they held high post in governments and social standing. India still practices it and perhaps we should look at it for the protection of our children.
Lazarus
What is the problem with these lawyers? These people are convicted sex offenders. They should not be allowed anywhere near children. Too bad if they have to be stuck at home on October 31. They are convicted criminals and have lost some of their rights as a result.
By the way, comparing sex offenders to Jewish victims of Adolf Hitler is really insulting to Jews. Being jewish does not make one a criminal. Being a sex offender does.
My kids don't celebrate Halloween and for us, it's for religious reasons. Even without that, I just can't help thinking that with all the warnings about the dangers of Halloween that are given every year, it's just not worth the trouble.
Sex offenders comparing themselves to Jews? WTH? The Jews were innocent, sex offenders have been convicted of a sexual related offense. As liberal as California is (Arnold likes this) they should dismiss this case and not waste the taxpayer dollars.
They're comparing a label forced on them by the government to a label forced on another group of people by another government.
Jim, they get the label because they are sex offenders. They have already been tried and convicted of a crime. Being one religion or another is not a crime. Being a sex offender is a crime. They are a danger to everyone else in society so a warning label is quite appropriate and necessary.
Jim - the label 'sex offender' is not FORCED on anyone. It is earned through their behavior. If you don't want to be labeled as a sex offender, don't commit sexual offenses. It is really that simple. It is mind boggling how many people are willing to spend their time defending the "rights" of people who have been convicted of sex crimes.
Great law! It should be expanded to cover the entire nation. Only it should have an exception - if these pedophiles really want to decorate and be festive, they should have to use signs that say "I like to sexually assault children," and they can use as many as they want. And they can even be orange and black.
Sex offenders cannot be rehabilitated. They are always going to want to do what gets them off, and many of them won't be able to control their compulsions. I say castrate the bastards on the first conviction, shoot them in the head if it ever happens again.
Sexual predators are being prevented from abducting neighborhood children off their front porches and burying them in the back yard. Boo effing hoo.
In California, a 15 year old boy can have sex with a 14 year old girl and it's not considered statutory rape it's considered child molestation with anyone 14 years or younger. Tell me the boy is more responsible than the girl and deserves to be a registered sex offender for his entire life? Then 15 years down the road when he has a normal life a family and children of his own, lets make his life worse because now he can't celebrate Halloween with his family. Also he has to expose his whole family to further ridicule.
I will concede the point that there should be different categories of sex offenders and that their classification should determine their punishment. I do see the distinction between two children having (consensual )sex and an adult abusing a child or an actual rape being committed.
That being said, it is not about gender, it is about age and the legal right to consent. Apparently, in California, a 14 year old has no legal right to consent to sex with someone older than themselves. If it was a 15 year old girl having sex with a 14 year old boy, she would face the same legal repercussions. There is no double standard. And parents properly educating their children about the consequences regarding sex at that age can prevent a lot of those problems. Not all of them, but a lot.
The bottom line is that most people would rather see a handful of these kinds of offenders miss out on trick or treating than see the rest of the dangerous, violent offenders be served children on a platter on October 31st. I still believe the law is a great idea, and if it saves the life or innocence of even a single child, it is well worth it.
(And why shouldn't a person who commits the crime of child molestation when they are a minor have to deal with the consequences for the rest of their lives? If you murder someone as a 14 or 15 year old, there is a fairly good chance you will spend the rest of your life in prison for your crime. Actions have consequences, and the laws are set up to protect people, not pander to criminals decades after their crimes are committed.)
The difference between Jews in Nazi Germany who had to wear the star and registered sex offenders is clear; the Jews were just normal law- abiding citizens who were being persecuted because of bigotry whereas the sex offenders are convicted criminals who have hurt children. Halloween being a night when many children are running around after dark knocking on strangers' doors, it really is only prudent to warn them of potential danger. Not displaying decorations seems to be taking it a bit far, but who cares if their rights are "infringed upon"? Whatever it takes to keep them from having another chance to hurt a child, or to be tempted in to it, is worth it. Never thought I'd agree with anything coming out of California - are pigs flying?
Three points.
1. Well apparently from some of the posts, we need to make sure that now the pedophiles get their civil rights also. Or at least some time in the immediate future.
2. Once a ped always a ped. the reason the do not surive in prison is that the rate of child molestation average of prisoners is 90%.
3. they only did it once. It was their first time. Do you remember Sandusky? Penn State? Sandusky was indicted in 2011 on 52 counts of child molestation dating from 1994 to 2009, though the abuse may have dated as far back as the 1970s. Gotta give you credit. They only got him on 8 counts for 8 DIFFERANT BOYS.
Well make it 4. obviously you have never been molested.
5. This country is not going to hell its already there. When you serve your sentence for murder you are released, with the hope that you will not murder anyone. Well that does not work. When you are charged with robbery you are released with the hope that you will not rob anyone again. That does not work either. Course maybe Charlie Manson outa be released. I mean what he has not had anyone killed anyone for 30 or 40 years?
Actually, I think rape/sexual offenses are WORSE than murder. Murder victims aren't judged, aren't put on trial for being at the wrong place at the wrong time, and can't be forced into a sentence of 18 years and nine months like certain Congressmen want. This'll all be a moot point soon, as under Romney and Ryan, no sexual offenses will be prosecuted.
Personally, I think letting any child molestor out of prison at any time is beyond stupid. They can't be fixed, and will always be drawn toward children. They LIKE destroying children and can't think of anything beyond their own pleasure.
The police cheif says in simi valley there are no sex offfenders. So what's the argument? Second off if they are offended becuase they can't play child games, maybe they should have thought about that before they became a sex predator, best thing they should do if they are a registered sex offender is shoot themsevles in @!$%#ing head and do a the world a favor
Umm, aren't parents of young kids supervising trick or treaters? I did with mine! Even if old enough to be out alone, many parents are out. Be kind of hard for a molester to do anything with that many witnesses.
Just make them appear not home. Turn off the light, and don't answer the door. But a sign? No, too much.
But really, the law needs to change as to what offenses should get your name on "the list".
Should only be child sex offenders. Only pedophiles target children. Those who rape adults generally don't go after kids too. And a woman flashing her boobs, or a drunk peeing outside is NOT a sex offender! Sorry, but he/she is NOT! Guilty of bad or no judgement maybe, but that's all. If someone takes a whiz outside, they usually are turned away from the direction of where others may be, doing their best to not let their willie be seen. Come on government, let's get this right!
Sure parents should be watching their trick or treaters. I never let mine go out without me or their dad - even though they are getting old enough to be pi$$ed off by my presence. That being said, not all parents do, and the law is a great extra layer of protection for kids.
As for the sign, it doesn't say "hey, we're all a bunch of molesters in here, stay away." It just says no candy. What is the point of all of the other actions if the sex offender's porch is still full of kids?
I do agree that their should be a better classification system for sex offenders and distinctions made regarding those who have committed violent sex crimes and/or crimes against children vs. those whose crimes were not so extreme (Sex between a 14 and 15 year old, for example. Or between a 17 and 20 year old. Those kinds of things.) Such a system is not in use at this point, however, and if some sex offenders that aren't as big of a risk have to miss out on Halloween festivities to protect children in the community, so be it.
I also think that it should apply to more than just pedophiles - violent offenders against people of any age should be kept out of the mix as well. Let's keep the moms safe, too.
elisem: It goes further than just consentual sex between minors.
From The Economist website article August 6th, 2009:
"Every American state keeps a register of sex offenders. California has had one since 1947, but most states started theirs in the 1990s. Many people assume that anyone listed on a sex-offender registry must be a rapist or a child molester. But most states spread the net much more widely. A report by Sarah Tofte of Human Rights Watch, a pressure group, found that at least five states required men to register if they were caught visiting prostitutes. At least 13 required it for urinating in public (in two of which, only if a child was present). No fewer than 29 states required registration for teenagers who had consensual sex with another teenager. And 32 states registered flashers and streakers."
Sorry but if you're not supervising your children when they trick or treat you are not being a responsible parent period. It's not just your kids' safety that you should have in mind as there are many other things that could happen to them while out on their own trick or treating other than a run in with a sex offender, but it's also the rights of others that could be violated by juvenile vandals running around unsupervised on Halloween night. Parents need to start being parents.
Andrew - As I previously stated, there SHOULD be a better classification system utilized with regard to the sex offender registry, and all "sex crimes" should not be created equally. Unfortunately, that is not the case. That being said, if a handful of the the people who are restricted in their Halloween behavior were never a threat to children in the first place, too bad. Their inconvenience is a small price to pay to help ensure that children get a little more protection than usual on a night when they would otherwise have been particularly vulnerable. If civil rights attorneys and activists want to get involved, they should be petitioning for a better classification system within the sex offender registry and for sex offenders who are non-violent and/or who don't pose a known threat to children to be exempted from certain penalties, such as this one we are discussing - as opposed to simply saying this ordinance violates the civil rights of the sex offenders. Boo hoo for the sex offenders, protecting children should come first.
AJD - Yep, parents SHOULD supervise their kids when they are trick or treating. But that doesn't mean that the government shouldn't step in and also protect them from known sex offenders, too. Parents shouldn't abuse their children, either, but it happens. And if it does, there are laws in place to help remove their from the situation. Your argument is that if their parents don't watch them that they should somehow be free game??
And I have to clarify - are you really comparing sexual molestation of children to the egging or TPing of asomeone's house?? Really???
Andrew - As I previously stated, there SHOULD be a better classification system utilized with regard to the sex offender registry, and all "sex crimes" should not be created equally. Unfortunately, that is not the case. That being said, if a handful of the the people who are restricted in their Halloween behavior were never a threat to children in the first place, too bad. Their inconvenience is a small price to pay to help ensure that children get a little more protection than usual on a night when they would otherwise have been particularly vulnerable.-- Elisem, do you actually know what restrictions sex offenders have in terms of what they can and cannot do?? Would you wish that same thing upon someone whose crime doesn't fit the sex offender profile?? Are you the type of person who would want to ruin someone's life and livelihood because that person had some kind of indiscretionary moment which wouldn't even stand up to the smell test of sex offender?? It's one thing to mention the "small price to pay", until it is you, or someone you know that has been casted as a sex offender. When that happens to you or someone you know, will you be outraged at your life being ruined, saying that this is unfair?? Or would you say that your own indiscretion is"a small price to pay"....or as you put it "too bad."
Andrew- If these people are listed in the sex offender registry, they have committed a sex offense and fall within the sex offender profile. The majority of crimes committed could be classified as momentary indiscretions. Just because it was something they would probably never do again doesn't mean that the crime was committed and that the person clearly has it in them to commit that kind of crime. If it comes to protecting a sex offender - of any flavor - or protecting children, I am going to err on the side of protecting children every time. Like I said, there should be a better classification system for sex offenders because all sex crimes are clearly not created equal. Until that time, however, I would much rather see low risk offenders miss Halloween than high right offenders be allowed to hand out candy to unsuspecting children. And if it were me or someone I knew, I would think the same way. I would think my inconvenience was a small price to pay to help ensure that violent sex offenders and child sex offenders were being kept away from kids on the one night per year that they run around after dark knocking on random doors.
Andrew- If these people are listed in the sex offender registry, they have committed a sex offense and fall within the sex offender profile. And if it were me or someone I knew, I would think the same way. I would think my inconvenience was a small price to pay-- So public urination, skinny dipping in a lake, girlfriends sending boyfriends nude pictures, flashers and streakers......these folks fall under your idea/profile of a "sex offender"?? Are you seriously worried about a person busted for public urination answering the door during trick or treating?? I guess that girl that sent the nude pictures of herself is also a threat to trick or treaters everywhere?? She could scare the bejesus out of the kids if she has a cell phone with a pic of herself in the buff. And don't get me started on how big a threat those flashers, streakers, and skinny dippers are to young children. My first question to you was if you knew what kind of restrictions ACTUAL sex offenders have to deal with?? This is more than just dealing with Halloween: this is a lifetime issue. An issue that for many people I've described do not deserve to have their livelihoods ruined forever over acts such as what I've listed. An acutal pedophile, child molester, child rapist?? They should be on the registry and/or in jail. Absolutely 100%. I also believe in protecting kids from these people. Someone coming out of a bar drunk, decides to take a whizz on the side of the building?? Two teenage kids going skinny dipping in a pond or lake?? Maybe you should stop and think about that one if your kid was one of the two teenage kids caught skinny dipping and put on the sex offender registry. You said it wouldn't bother you, or inconvienence you, etc. I doubt you would feel that way if that shoe was on your foot. You could very much be inconvienenced if people knew about your kid and the sex offender registry he or she was on. You could end up being collateral damage. That would be your price to pay for your kid's indiscretion. Could also ruin your life too. Too bad, isn't it??? Being the parent of a skinny-dipping registered sex offender??
Like I said, there should be a better classification system for sex offenders because all sex crimes are clearly not created equal.-- But isn't that what you've done by classifying those crimes that at most should be misdemeanors be classified as sex crimes?? Throwing out the baby with the bath water?? The "better classification system" you mention shouldn't even be a better classification system. Simply put, pedophiles, child molesters, child rapists, and anybody who does harm in any way, shape, or form to a child, should be on the sex offender registry. Not public urinators, teenagers who are sexting other teenagers, skinny dippers, streakers, flashers, or any type of indiscretion which doesn't in any way fit any definiton of a sex offender/sex crime. Should they be punished?? Yes, but not by putting them on a sex offender registry and ruining their livelihoods forever. Misdemeanors, with some kind of punishment like fines or counseling, or community service is the better solution for these folks. Not a lifetime of being told where you can or cannot live, whether you can or cannot celebrate a holiday like everybody else does, having law enforcement follow your every move, and report your address for others to see (and harass you as well).
In California, a 15 year old boy can have sex with a 14 year old girl and it's not considered statutory rape it's considered child molestation with anyone 14 years or younger. Tell me the boy is more responsible than the girl and deserves to be a registered sex offender for his entire life? Then 15 years down the road when he has a normal life a family and children of his own, lets make his life worse because now he can't celebrate Halloween with his family. Also he has to expose his whole family to further ridicule.
Sex Offenders gave up their rights when they TOOK the rights from their victims. Sex offenders are lucky we don't put them on an island with no way off and leave them for dead. That's what I would like to do with them. What about our rights as parents to have a safe and predator free Halloween. Do the crime. Do the time. This crime is for LIFE. I personally think it should be a death sentence. If I had it my way. At the very least I think all sex offenders should be tracked 24/7 by a GPS stuck so far into their body they will never dig it out and I think they should have to put a sign out where they live and I could go as far as to say they should tattoo PREDATOR on their forehead. I think society has been VERY accommodating to these animals.
Rachel Fraser
You know what would really prevent the human garbage that likes to touch little kids from offending again? A bullet between the eyes. Or even cheaper? A rope. It can be reused. There is no cure and no rehabilitation. Once a perv always a perv. What a joke. Obviously the crazy broad representing them has never been or had one of her children touched by a monster.
You know what would really prevent these pieces of human garbage from offending again? A bullet between the eyes, or the cheaper option-a reusable rope. There is no cure or rehabilitation. Once a perv, always a perv. The crazy broad defending them is just as bad as they are, and has obviously never been or never had her children be touched by a monster. If she wants these human sh*t bags to have the right to hand out candy to kids, then she can take her own kids to their nasty doorway!
Don't take your kids treat or treating. It is a dangerous activity, a pagan ritual, and just plain stupid. Then you don't have to worry about predators. And if you do, aren't you with them? What is a sex offender going to do with you standing there? Also, some of these sex offenders are not pedophiles. There are other kinds of sex offenses.
Trick or treating is fun for children, not stupid. And Halloween is no more pagan than xmas, dude. It was celebrated as far back as ancient Babylon - then as the feast of the Son of Isis. It was adopted by xians when they began thumping their way across the world, but it originated long before jesus was ever even imagined. Not that whether or not a Halloween is pagan should have anything to do with it.
And I love how you think taking privileges away from children to ensure that sex offenders don't get their itty bitty feelings hurt is the way to go.
Whether parents are with their kids or not, the law is a great added layer of protection. Screw the sex offenders civil rights, what about the civil rights of those of us who have never committed a sex crime to enjoy a holiday with out kids? What about the rights of our kids??
And I realize that not all sex offenders are child sex offenders or violent sex offenders. But clarifying that distinction is an entirely different story than protecting kids on Halloween.
There are times when the Bill of Rights can be damned inconvenient, and unpopular. It is the law of the land however, and I do not want to surrender it. It is one of the greatest gifts that our founding fathers gave us. I believe that these people have a point, that their First Amendment rights are being violated. The point of the law is to protect children. However, a noble intent does not exempt a law from the US Constitution.
Where in the bill of rights does it guarantee a sex offender the right to trick or treat or decorate their home in a manner inviting to unsuspecting children?? These sex offenders are already listed on a publicly searchable directory. IMO, they should all have signs in their yard 24/7/365 that clearly indicate that the home is occupied by a registered sex offender. The signs could even indicate the nature of their offense, that way passers by would know whether they were child pornographers or simply misunderstood flashers.
This kind of problem could be solved if violent sex offenders and child sex offenders were adequately punished for their crimes. In that case, they would never interact with the rest of society again, and people wouldn't have to worry about their children being assaulted by repeat sex offenders for doing nothing more than trick or treating.
I truly can't believe that there are so many people on here who are defending the 'rights' of child sex offenders. It makes you wonder who they really are behind the anonymity of their screen name and why they are so concerned about the 'rights' of sex offenders to lure children to their porches on Halloween...
Where? The First Amendment. Duh. I defend everyone's rights. That is because I love the United States Constitution and the great quality of life it has given us in this country.
for god's sake, doesn't that woman know that once a pedophile, always a pedophile. i hope if this is approved, mothers and fathers will accompany their kids as they go trick or treating even for older youth who are in high school. better yet, have a local movie theatre with donations from parents and others concerned about the safety of the children ages 2 and up have a movie shown for their age group and put police security on all the doors and for the older kids, sponsor a dance at the local high school after the movie and have chaperones at the school including school teachers, principals, parents and police to ensure the middle and high school kids have a great halloween. also, kids can bring their trick or treat bags to the movies and get treats provided by all concerned parents, citizens and others who want to contribute to this endeavor. just a suggestion to keep your kids away from the pedophiles on halloween. give janice a trick or treat bag filled with condoms so she can provide safe sex with those wanting to have halloween with kids. tell her to wear pampers - might just turn the sex offender on thinking she is a baby in disguise. get a life janice and do something important before you end up in hell with all those catholic priests who victimized kids.