I'm so glad this article has been printed. The best part of the article is "Should some offenders, like those convicted of statutory rape or even in some rare instances a teen who posts naked pictures of herself on the Internet, be classified the same as violent offenders like rapists child predators?"
This COMMENT is in response to a front page article, a letter to the editor, and a segment done on the Newscenter 25 recently. Not all sex offenders has hurt or raped a child. It is discriminating to say all of the sex offenders are direct threat to our children. There are so many different situations for example, such as a young love when the guy was 18 and the girl was 17 and the parents found out and reported it. Or what about in the old days when our grandparents had our parents at the age of 15 or 16? Is that rape too? I understand about HIGH risk offenders and offenders that have hurt a child. I do agree that they should be stricter with them about where they live. I have two children of my own and I would feel uncomfortable living next to a HIGH risk offender. I would die before letting my child get hurt. There are also a lot of bad people who never get reported to authorities, how will we know about them? What I’m trying to get across here is that just because a person is slapped with the label “Sex Offender” and required to report address changes and update TX DL every year doesn’t mean that person is a bad person. All these cases have different circumstances and it doesn’t give anyone the right to say that ALL sex offenders should be removed from the city. It is already a requirement for offenders that are still on probation or parole to live at least a 1000 feet from a school zone. What should be done is that High risk offenders on probation or not, should not be allowed to live anywhere within 2000 feet of a school, daycare, or parks. You cannot kick all 172 sex offenders out of town, it isn’t logical and it’s against the constitution.
Newsletter
I'm so glad this article has been printed. The best part of the article is "Should some offenders, like those convicted of statutory rape or even in some rare instances a teen who posts naked pictures of herself on the Internet, be classified the same as violent offenders like rapists child predators?"
This COMMENT is in response to a front page article, a letter to the editor, and a segment done on the Newscenter 25 recently. Not all sex offenders has hurt or raped a child. It is discriminating to say all of the sex offenders are direct threat to our children. There are so many different situations for example, such as a young love when the guy was 18 and the girl was 17 and the parents found out and reported it. Or what about in the old days when our grandparents had our parents at the age of 15 or 16? Is that rape too?
I understand about HIGH risk offenders and offenders that have hurt a child. I do agree that they should be stricter with them about where they live. I have two children of my own and I would feel uncomfortable living next to a HIGH risk offender. I would die before letting my child get hurt. There are also a lot of bad people who never get reported to authorities, how will we know about them?
What I’m trying to get across here is that just because a person is slapped with the label “Sex Offender” and required to report address changes and update TX DL every year doesn’t mean that person is a bad person. All these cases have different circumstances and it doesn’t give anyone the right to say that ALL sex offenders should be removed from the city.
It is already a requirement for offenders that are still on probation or parole to live at least a 1000 feet from a school zone. What should be done is that High risk offenders on probation or not, should not be allowed to live anywhere within 2000 feet of a school, daycare, or parks. You cannot kick all 172 sex offenders out of town, it isn’t logical and it’s against the constitution.