Submitted by CHARLES MANOLAKOS, Mar 12, 2007 10:36

We are dealing with very serious issues when it comes to housing sex offenders. We MUST protect our children and our communities. We must also protect the rights of EVERY American who chooses to live under the laws of this great country of ours----The United States.

Sex offenders have done their time in jail and have been released back into society. While living in society, they have the right to be protected under the same blanket of security and enjoy the same rights WE enjoy as Americans, granted to us by long and hard fought battles of our forefathers. They have done their time and should be able to live in a house without being 'torched' while they sleep, be able to go walking to the store without rocks being thrown at them, and also be able to apply for and secure employment without repeatedly being turned down (except where there is a high risk based on their offense).

If there were 6 people who just moved into a house down the street from you and were all convicts, say two kidnappers, two murderers, one arsonist and one burglar and let's say they all did at least 15 years of jail time and just got released from prison, how would you feel? Yet, with current laws, most communities would have no laws in place to prevent this from happening. But, if 6 sex offenders moved in the same house there are all types of laws most communities, or counties, or states have in place to regulate where sex offenders can and cannot live. Do you see the imbalance here?

We also must minimize the chance of a sex offender recommitting another offense. I truly believe that this issue will never be adequately or properly addressed at local, county, or even state level. This issue MUST be addressed at a federal level. At a federal level we will be better able to insure that the restrictions placed on sex offenders are equal in every state, and fair to both the community and to the offender. We will also be able to address the issue of constitutionality. We must insure that any law implemented is constitutional. Some laws were not and have been overturned. We must level the playing field. We cannot let politicians undermine our civil rights by instilling fear in the general public's mind when it comes to sex offenders while robbing us of our rights.

Politicians are stirring up the communities so that they can benefit with more votes. Most of them do not even live in or even close to YOUR neighborhood! They live in areas that you and I will probably never be able to afford. They instill fear in your minds to get your votes. It takes a very worthy politician to look out for EVERY person's concern, rich or poor, Black or White, Hispanic or Asian.

Just because a sex offender doesn't live within 1000 or 2000 feet of a school doesn't mean he will not pose a danger to your child or even to YOU and ME! Not all sex offenders are child predators, most are not. Some are homosexual, some are heterosexual, some are white, some are black, and some are females. Interesting? You bet! Just because a sex offender doesn't live near a school or park doesn't mean he can't drive to the school and pick up HIS child, or walk by or through the park just to enjoy the scenery, or to ride his bicycle through the park YOUR child is playing in, or to go to the toy store where you sent YOUR child in to pick out a toy while you are parking the car.

To date, I am not aware of one study done that proves that where a sex offender lives has any direct bearing on whether there is a greater chance of him recommitting a sexual offense. Also, keep in mind that MOST sexual offenses are committed by someone the victim knows and usually not by a stranger. So, how do residency laws help minimize the recommitting of a sexual offense by anyone? Also, statistically, sex offenders recommit at a lesser level than that of other types of offenders.

Generally speaking, residency laws which are being passed now are only driving the sex offender population deeper into more rural and less populated areas. We don't want sex offenders hiding in the woods; we want to know where they are! We are making it more difficult for agencies to counsel and provide services to these offenders by making them travel to the outskirts of society and populated areas. The sex offender population would be easier served by these agencies if the clients were 'clustered' closer together in populated areas where they can be easily monitored. Also, many professionals believe that several offenders in the same house sets up a self-policing arena among the offenders. Since there would be peer pressure by the majority of the group to follow the rules of the house; to obey restrictions placed on them regarding curfews and possession of sexually explicit materials, the chance of re-offending would be greatly reduced.

One state is even trying to push laws for 'castration'. What happened to OUR RIGHTS! What's next? If you plead guilty or are convicted of stealing from the store, do you get your hand cut off? Should the old guy who stole a steak from Pathmark who had no money and was hungry get his hand amputated? Come on America! WAKE UP! Preserve your rights!

We must focus on more regulated MONITORING and COUNSELING of sex offenders rather than residency restrictions. If social workers, case managers, and parole officers were REQUIRED to have weekly monitoring and reporting of the sex offender population (on a federal level) I believe this would decrease the incidence of a sex offender recommitting a sexual offense. These workers should also be able to report any problems in the house involving persons OTHER than their specific clients (read on).

I also truly believe that 'clustering' 4-6 sex offenders in one house also provides for better monitoring and 'keeps them on their toes'. It is also easier to tell a child to avoid passing this one house than it is to tell a child to avoid passing six different houses. It is much better to have six case managers come on different days to monitor their client (and also to check out the rest of the house and make reports), than to have a sex offender monitored once per week living alone in a different house on the outskirts of civilization. There must be some additional authority given to these case managers to be able to report on someone else's client if they see something in the house that is not appropriate, such as drugs or liquor, even though it may not belong to their client.

SO, ------politicians, ------stop with the smoke screen! STOP giving us a false sense of security! Just because Mr. or Ms. Sex Offender lives 1000 or 2000 feet from a park or school doesn't mean my child or the rest of the community is any safer! These laws are only beneficial, from a safety viewpoint, if they are specifically targeted for 'Pedophile predators' only, otherwise they serve no benefit to society other than to persecute ALL sex offenders by classifying them into one group, which they are not. Oh, it may help keep property values artificially high, if the other surrounding communities didn't have these laws in place. This entire process is 'Legal redlining', 'Discrimination', 'Legal steering', call it what you want, it's all the same. What's next? If you are convicted of auto theft you will not be permitted to live near a parking lot, shopping center with a parking lot, school with a parking lot, a car dealership, etc... If you are convicted of stealing a candy bar you will not be permitted to live near a candy store, supermarket, newsstand, or cookie factory. This can go on and on.

I personally challenge anyone to show statistics that prove otherwise! Instead---pass laws that protect our children and our communities by closer and stricter monitoring and counseling of sex offenders, while at the same time preserving their rights too! Who knows, --maybe OUR rights will be compromised next! DO YOUR JOBS-POLITICIANS! Address this issue on a FEDERAL LEVEL and get the funds and regulations in place to properly monitor, counsel, house, and employ this population!

THE PRESERVATION OF OUR RIGHTS DEMANDS WE TAKE THIS POSITION!

OUR FUTURE DEPENDS ON IT!

Charles Manolakos

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.