Families of Sex Offenders Unite for Freedom

Making the world a safer place through support and education

(PRWEB) August 6, 2005 -- SOSEN is pleased to announce a Families of Sex Offenders Freedom March, September 15, 2005, on Palm Bay, Florida. This march is in response to numerous announcements and considerations by this city council and others throughout Florida and indeed the United States to pass unconstitutional laws based on feel good legislation and hysteria in order to gain votes come election time.

The intent of the sex offender registry was to create a registry so people would be aware of who "might" be a danger. It was not intended as a tool to find a list of people to persecute and harass. The general public, many businesses, and now the government are using it in ways it was not originally intended to be used, in ways that do not promote public safety.

The sex offender registries and the rules which flow from them are one big experiment. There is no data showing that these additional laws (and now banishment) have or will eliminate any crime. In fact, some critics say that the registry and scarlet letters will leave offenders with no jobs, no family support, no homes and basically nothing to lose. With nothing else left in their lives to do, they may in fact end up being more apt to commit crimes.

In 1866 Justice Davis of the US Supreme Court wrote: No graver question was ever considered by this court, nor one which more nearly concerns the rights of the whole people; for it is the birthright of every American citizen when charged with crime, to be tried and punished according to law. The power of punishment is, alone through the means which the laws have provided for that purpose, and if they are ineffectual, there is an immunity from punishment, no matter how great an offender the individual may be, or how much his crimes may have shocked the sense of justice of the country, or endangered its safety. By the protection of the law human rights are secured; withdraw that protection, and they are at the mercy of wicked rulers, or the clamor of an excited people." (http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democrac/26.htm)

Although it may not seem obvious from watching the news, it is far more likely for a child to be struck by lightening or attacked by a shark than to be assaulted by a registered sex offender. Yet parents continue to let their children run outside in fields, or swim in the ocean, but if an RSO is found in their neighborhood, they harass the offender and hide their children inside. This irrational reaction is fueled by politicians who benefit by getting votes by instilling fear in the people and offering unproven and obviously useless solutions they claim, with no scientific evidence, will protect them. These measures have become so drastic that just recently a child could have died while rescuers were searching for him from the instilled fear of strangers.

This particular council supports a 2,500 foot residency restriction on offenders who have already served their time. The new law says that sex offenders who have committed crimes against children under 16 years old cannot live within 2,500 feet of schools, libraries, parks, playgrounds, day cares and churches. The State law is 1000 feet. The sex offenders to be banished have families and some their own children. Banishment laws will affect these innocent children. What affects will these laws have on them as they mature, given these laws deprive them of a stable home?

This clearly violates the constitution on many grounds including the 14th amendment. People have a right to live and travel freely once they have paid their debt to society. The 2,500 foot rule amounts to banishment. The United States constitution and the International Human Bill of Rights which the United States agreed with 'in principle' strictly prohibit.

Due Process: http://faculty.ncwc.edu/mstevens/410/410lect06.htm

Every "person" is entitled to due process. To pass a law to punish individuals for another's crime just doesn't make sense. Yet sex offenders are easy scapegoats and obviously it can be done. There are over 34,000 registered sex offenders in Florida, 555,000 in the United States. If all of these offenders were murdering children we would hear about it. Because of the recent tragic cases, which SOSEN finds very upsetting, politicians (no offense) are grandstanding that all offenders must go.

If sex offenders are banished from their homes, they will have no means of protecting their property. Technically, I hope you think upholding the State of Florida Constitution is important. The sex offenders that are targeted for persecution have served their time and should have the protections of the constitution and their government.

Florida Constitution: http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?Mode=Constitution&Submenu=3&Tab=statutes#A01S02

SECTION 2. Basic rights.--All natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life and liberty, to pursue happiness, to be rewarded for industry, and to acquire, possess and protect property; except that the ownership, inheritance, disposition and possession of real property by aliens ineligible for citizenship may be regulated or prohibited by law. No person shall be deprived of any right because of race, religion, national origin, or physical disability. History.--Am. S.J.R. 917, 1974; adopted 1974; Am. proposed by Constitution Revision Commission, Revision No. 9, 1998, filed with the Secretary of State May 5, 1998; adopted 1998

Second, this council wants to classify the beach as a park so that offenders can't live close to it. This further goes to prove that this and other councils considering this are looking for ways to push sex offenders out of their city and basically push their 'problem' on to another neighboring city until eventually all offenders live on farms, or in the ocean.

If this wasn't enough, Palm Bay is actually considering making a city ordinance that would require employers to oversee or have someone oversee offenders anytime the possibility of contact with a child occurs. This would mean the hiring of additional employees to monitor employees at all times that, in the eyes of the Palm Bay city council, a child might be in contact with the ex-offender. Once an offender has served his or her time, he/she has a right to move on with his/her life. What this will result in is the firing of all offenders in Palm Bay, and in any other city that makes this ordinance law. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is guaranteed to all citizens regardless of what you might think of them. Can Palm Bay name even one example of a convicted sex offender living near the beach kidnapping and sexually assaulting a kid? I can name literally hundreds of cases where the offender knew his victim ahead of time, and can't think of even one where an already convicted sex offender was stupid enough to go to a school, park, theme park, arcade, playground, beach or other place where children are known to congregate to pick up their victim. Not that it hasn't happened, it has I'm sure--but even the cases these laws are being considered because of didn't involve such a case. What we are doing is considering making Offender's lives impossible and at the same time tearing up healthy living environments for children.

Most sex offenders are not pedophiles, which means that they aren't likely to re offend unless we give them reason to. . .that said, take away a man's home, income, family, food, government assistance, privacy, and dignity--what is left? You just gave him or her reason to offend again-what is left to live for? Let's not forget these laws also engulf consensual sex cases between teens who were sometimes within three years of each other in age (18 YO with 15 YO), indecent exposure, felonious prostitution and several other not so dangerous people and restrict them from living their lives too. It's time to wake up, we aren't solving any problems here by banishing or hunting sex offenders, we are creating them.

    91% of sexual abuse on children is within the childs family or circle of trust. - FBI 1997
    Employment is one of the most important factors in reducing sex offender recidivism -- Kruttshmitt, Uggen, and Sheldon, 2000
    No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States -- U.S. Constitution, 1808
    96% of sex crimes committed by someone other than a previously known sex offender -- Department of Justice, 1994

Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. -- Benjamin Franklin

Think about it, if America continues down this road, who is next? Drunk Drivers, thieves, and then who?

It is SOSENs hope that you will take some of the above thoughts into consideration when you consider passage of this extraordinarily cruel and unusual ordinance. Americans should realize that they are all losing by these proposed ordinances. The sex offender registries have only ensnared people for crimes which have taken place in the past 10 years or so. If unchecked, as time goes on, many more people, perhaps persons each of you personally care about, will be entrapped in its unforgiving clutches.

Further details, as they become available shall be posted on the SOSEN web site, http://www.sosen.org/march