Sunday, April 15, 2007
Editorial: Forcing sex offenders underground
Residency requirements for convicted sex offenders serve a sound purpose, but not when the rules are unduly restrictive.
From the RoundTable blog
Read the latest entries
Backlash to states' progressively strict housing rules for convicted sex offenders was building long before the recent news of five offenders forced by Florida's residency requirements to live under a highway bridge in Miami.
Much as we want to shrug "So what?" and save our sympathy for the victims, these requirements have become so restrictive in some states as to make it nearly impossible for offenders to re-enter society after their release.
Such requirements, however well-intended, have limited offenders' access to jobs, transportation and treatment programs. One of the five offenders living under the Julia Tuttle Causeway in Miami has to walk to a nearby convenience store to charge his electronic monitoring device. There are no power outlets under the noisy highway.
That kind of extreme only increases the chances of sex offenders returning to the very activity that landed them, well, under a bridge, calling a cardboard mat and belongings in plastic bags "home."
And so, the backlash.
According to Stateline.org -- an independent news Web site of the Pew Research Center -- laws in about a half-dozen states barring sex offenders from living near parks, schools and child care centers are being challenged by ex-offenders who claim the laws unconstitutionally penalize them.
In Iowa, where residency requirements are among the toughest in the country, the number of sex offenders moving out of state has increased since a law that bars offenders from living within 2,000 feet of schools and child care centers took effect in 2005. Law enforcement officials have found increased difficulty in tracking sex offenders as a result.
In Illinois, Minnesota and New Jersey, challenges against sex-offender residential requirements are pending in state courts. Requirements enacted by Georgia last summer face a federal class-action lawsuit.
The 2005 horrific murder of 9-year-old Florida resident Jessica Lunsford at the hands of a convicted sex offender created fear palpable enough to fuel the push nationwide for measures that keep sex offenders at a distance, whether it be 1,000 feet or 2,500 feet away from places where children congregate. In Virginia, that distance is 500 feet.
The primary concern should be for the innocent victims. But requirements that drive sex offenders who have served their time underground or across state lines, where they may not be properly supervised, is not in the best interest of public safety.
