MemeStreams | MemeStreams Discussion

Create an Account

This page contains all of the posts and discussion on MemeStreams referencing the following web page: Prosecutor wants death penalty for boy's slaying - CNN.com. You can find discussions on MemeStreams as you surf the web, even if you aren't a MemeStreams member, using the Threads Bookmarklet.

Prosecutor wants death penalty for boy's slaying - CNN.com
by janelane at 4:17 pm EDT, Mar 21, 2007

A Georgia law passed last year prohibits registered sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school bus stop. That would have barred the younger Edenfield from living so close, but a pending lawsuit prompted a federal judge last year to block that provision from taking effect.

Goddamn backwards state does something right and the feds step in and block it. That poor little guy might still be alive.

-janelane

RE: Prosecutor wants death penalty for boy's slaying - CNN.com
by dc0de at 9:55 pm EDT, Mar 21, 2007

Goddamn backwards state does something right and the feds step in and block it. That poor little guy might still be alive.
-janelane

Well, the problem with the law, is that it would have made several counties in Altanta a complete "Off Limits" zone, as there are bus stops in a higher density than every 1000', thereby forcing any registered sex offender (that's anyone who has been convicted of ANY sexual labeled crime in ANY state), to move out of Fulton, Dekalb, and Cobb county. This would also make the density of sexual predators, (A subset of those where were convicted of a sexual crime), increase in the OUTLYING areas, and simply pushing the problem out away from the cities, and move them out to the country. (Where there isn't enough police presence to help).

Now, the second issue, if you were convicted at the age of 18, of peeing in a public place, this would be a Sexual Crime, as Indecent Exposure is listed as a sexual crime, and you would therefore have to register under the sex crimes act.

Since the Sexual Crimes are a broad category, there is no guarantee that the 1000' exclusion zone would have saved this child, and it certainly isn't promoting a policy of 'FIXING THE PROBLEM', it simply 'MOVES THE PROBLEM' out of the way of those who don't want to deal with it. It's similar to the German practice of rousting all the homeless, and driving them 20Km outside the city every morning at 5AM... by nightfall, they're back in the city, but during the day, they're out of sight, and therefore, out of mind... They don't fix the problem, they just make it 'Appear' better.

I would love to see legislation that actually defined a sexual crime as something that actually hurt someone, and was performed in a sexual way. Rape, Child Molestation, Contributing to the delinquency of a minor - in a sexual way, etc...

There are far too many things that will get you listed as a sexual offender, such as public nudity, that are NOT sexual in nature. Nor is there any Harm in these misdemeanors, yet, we hang a scarlet letter around their necks today.

Our puritanical views are fucking us all over... and they need to be rectified first.