Inherent here is a public misconception that, sex offenders are so dangerous to the community that they should be kept incarcerated. So Prosecutors and Judges should do that, however, prosecutors and judges do not feel that offenders are so dangerous, as they have given them a sentence according to law, and returned them to the community. The hysterical belief of dangerousness is constantly fueled by the media, political speakers and several other stakeholders who profit from the hysteria they generate.
11-23-2009 New Jersey:
WEST MILFORD is the latest town to repeal a local law that limits where sex offenders can live.
The ordinance restricted offenders from living within 2,500 feet of a school, playground or day care center. The Township Council, fearful of a costly legal challenge, followed an attorney's advice and reluctantly voted to remove the law from its books.
The about-face comes in the wake of a May ruling by the state Supreme Court, which established that municipalities should not alter or add to Megan's Law. That law requires released sex offenders to register with local police, who must notify neighbors of their presence.
More than 100 New Jersey towns had adopted additional local laws, restricting where registered sex offenders could live. Since the high court's ruling, many have rescinded them. Fair Lawn repealed its law in June, but Paramus and Wanaque still have theirs in place.
Proposals that would allow additional restrictions are currently winding through the Legislature.
As currently written, bill A-641 would allow municipalities to create their own 500-foot limits. Those ordinances would prohibit offenders from living near schools, parks, playgrounds, public libraries or day care centers. It would apply only to offenders over the age of 21, but not to those whose risk of reoffending was deemed low. A similar bill in the Senate, S-2138, has won the support of the New Jersey Prosecutor's Association. The proposals have been criticized by the state Office of the Public Defender.
As Staff Writer Barbara Williams reported, representatives from the League of Municipalities are working with Assemblywoman Pamela R. Lampitt, D-Camden, to modify the bill to establish a 500-foot rule statewide. Individual ordinances, they believe, could be more vulnerable to legal challenges.
There are several problems with residency restrictions.
They prevent released offenders from being "rehabilitated and reintegrated into the community," according to the Public Defender's Office. They do nothing to keep predators from targeting children where many spend most afternoons: on the Internet. And no matter where they live, sex offenders can easily visit sites where children congregate.
In addition, many New Jersey municipalities are so small, such restrictions would leave no neighborhood where sex offenders could live.
Plenty of their potential neighbors have no problem with that. But if these offenders are so dangerous that they cannot legally live anywhere, then prosecutors, judges and parole officers should ensure they remain in jail. If treatment and support are the most promising ways to prevent further offense, the isolation that restrictions could potentially impose could do more harm than good.
A promising state program tracks released offenders by a global positioning system, a powerful deterrent. If they don't wear the device, they can be arrested. While wearing it, their movements are recorded and can be used in a sex crime investigation. A 2007 report found that only one of 225 wearers was implicated in a new sex crime.
That's a better way to prevent released sex offenders from striking again. ..Source.. North Jersey.com
No comments:
Post a Comment