Sex-offender ban eyed near colleges Schools & Kids, posted by sue, a member of the Gunn High School community, on Aug 16, 2008 at 11:39 am
| Lawmakers and college administrators are trying to shut paroled sex offenders out of one of the few places they can still live - student neighborhoods near major U.S. universities.
“A convicted sexual felon should not be able to live next-door to your college student,” said Alabama state Rep. Jamie Ison, a Republican who sponsored a bill that would include universities under the legal definition of a school.
In Los Angeles, 60 offenders live within a mile of the University of Southern California. Nine live within a mile of Duke University in Durham, N.C. In Chicago, six can be found within a mile of Northwestern University. Within a two-mile radius of Jacksonville University in Florida are 93 paroled sex offenders. Web Link
Posted by john, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Aug 16, 2008 at 1:50 pm
I certainly support keeping sex offenders away from campuses, some students are under 18 and the 18-21yrs old are vulnerable more so with alcohol around.
There should be a technical solution such as implanting an identification chip or a GPS monitoring system.
I realize these felons have to live somewhere, probably some sort of camp would be best, far away from kids and vulnerable young people.
Posted by Ben, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Aug 17, 2008 at 7:25 am
Sharon: Sex Offenders must comply with California law. Both Stanford and Palo Alto must also comply with California law. An initiative was passed by the voters of California which says where sex offenders may and may not live. However, that does not stop an initiative regarding colleges being placed on the ballot at some future time.
Posted by tj, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Aug 17, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Sex offenders have rights. Society has rights. Balancing the two is the issue.
Felons lose their right to vote. Sex offenders lose their right to privacy. Both are the result of having been convicted of a crime in a court of law.
Whose rights demand greater protection, a young female sexually assaulted or the person convicted of sexually assaulting her?
Both have rights which should be protected in a democratic system of laws. If we must err, I would err on the side of the victim. The perpertrator chose the course of action, the victim did not. A choice which will be wrong in some cases, but right in most.
View in an RSS Reader
E-mail this topic.
Print this topic.
