NEWS: Sex Offenders Barred From Florida Hurricane Shelters

The state of Florida has banned sex offenders from using public hurricane shelters and instead have allowed them to weather storms in prison meeting areas and visitor rooms. Robby Cunningham from the Department of Corrections has stated the policy was created to keep sex offenders away from children. A legal director of the Florida ACLU has said that the policy could push offenders out of the supervision of authorities



While this policy will keep these people away from children it brings to the forefront the question of justice. These people have served their sentences and are still being ostracized by authorities. It is a difficult call between the balance of saving potential child victims and peoples rights. Even sex offenders have rights and if you are going to set them free into society on the premise they won't reoffend then laws like this are wrong and take away basic human rights.


Related News Links:
www.theage.com.au
www.newszap.com
www.oscnewsgazette.com

I totally agree with your concluding comments. If they can't be trusted in society then why are they on the street period. Change the laws to give them longer sentences and then leave them alone once they are released.

[edit on 7-8-2005 by Astronomer68]

The article says offenders STILL under state supervision, if I understand correctly by law they can't be near a school or daycare centers or any place specifically set up for children within so many feet of it. These are people still under supervision, I'm assuming that is parole.
While the bleeding heart liberal in me agrees theoretically there is another part of me that has no sympathy for these people whether they served their time or not.

I totally agree with this policy. Sex offenders destroy a child's life. Most cases, the mental torture lasts a lifetime. They should either be in jail for life or if freed have restrictions placed. This policy affirms my belief.

Originally posted by hellfire3
I totally agree with this policy. Sex offenders destroy a child's life. Most cases, the mental torture lasts a lifetime. They should either be in jail for life or if freed have restrictions placed. This policy affirms my belief.

The thing is, a man who is convicted of stat. rape with a 15 year old is in some places considered a child sex offender, and one who isn't allowed to work with children, or be in their general vicinity.

I just don't think he should face the same penalties as the guy who molests twelve pre-pubescent kids.

The problem with these all-encompassing laws is that they do end up trampling all over the rights of some offenders who are being tarred with the same brush. If we're going to do this sort of thing, then we need to further categorise exactly who is being punished/monitored in this manner.

Tinkleflower.....are you saying that there is a difference between people that commit statutory rape on 15yr olds and people that molest 12 yr olds????

Originally posted by hellfire3
Tinkleflower.....are you saying that there is a difference between people that commit statutory rape on 15yr olds and people that molest 12 yr olds????

Perhaps I should have been clearer in the initial post. When I said "pre-pubescent", I was referring to the "younger than about 10" age-group (as puberty very often starts at that age; in case it was ambiguous, when I used 12 in the original post, it referred to "number of victims", not 12 years old).

Anyway. A 15 year old cannot legally consent to sex, though s/he might feel s/he's mature enough to do so; as we know though, some 15 year olds are more emotionally mature than their 20 year old counterparts. If this happens, then yes - I absolutely DO see a huge difference between that act, and a guy molesting a group of 8 year olds, for example.

Hope this clarifies

I live in Florida, I might one day have to stay in a hurricane emergency center, I do not want to be there, with all that stress and worry, during a time in which you make yourself vunerable to others, helping out neighbors and strangers, to have to worry that one of those people could be preying on my children.

I don't know how many of you know or realize what it is like to be in an emergency shelter, or what type of stress, distractions and situations face you while there. It is usually crowded, you're using public restrooms, you can't watch your things and follow your children to the bathroom and everywhere else. The last thing people need while there is the worry that one of these perverts might be watching their children.

I agree with the sheriff that proposed and would like to see this extended throughout Florida. There's no difference in these sex offenders, except that one might target my sons, while another might target your daughters.

I do respectfully disagree, worldwatcher, though I absolutely see your point.

I just think there's a world of difference between a guy who believes that the 15 year old is 18, as she claims, and the guy who (theoretically) is compelled to select 8 year old boys, for example. You know?

(fwiw, by the time I was 14, I physically resembled the average 18 year old, and I'd lie about my age with a frequency that in retrospect is, and was, alarming)

well maybe being labelled a sex offender will teach people to really get to know someone before having sex with them, such as confirming their age and not be so quick to drop their pants.

Originally posted by Astronomer68
I totally agree with your concluding comments. If they can't be trusted in society then why are they on the street period. Change the laws to give them longer sentences and then leave them alone once they are released.

These people are preadtors PERIOD. Unless you are willing to lock them up for life and I do mean life, the repeat offense rate is very high with them. What is wrong with keeping them away from children? You cannot simply turn these guys loose.

Kudos to Florida for taking firm steps after the recent tragedy that struck there in the form of a paroled sex offended. You don't let an alcholic shelter in at BevMo would you????


[edit on 8/8/05 by FredT]

Gee, consequences for their actions. Life ain't a sitcom where you're forgiven and all is well at the end of an hour.

Their victims will suffer worse than a little shelter rejection for their entire lives. I have no pity or remorse.

They victimized members of society, and rejected the very core beliefs of their society. The same core beliefs that build shelters and assist fellow humans. At that point, they rejected the benefits as well.

They should be ready to survive on their own at that point. Stockpile food, build a shelter in their basement. Be ready to survive alone, since they've figured a society's taboos are not to be respected and membership in that society too restrictive.

And, BTW, I'm a local volunteer for Red Cross Shelter Operations here. I would have absolutely no qualms enforcing this policy of exclusion.

[edit on 8-8-2005 by Phugedaboudet]

Tampa-Bay area resident here. Although my area never seems to suffer too bad during the big storms, I would definetly agree on this exlusion policy.

The big issue here is that these are NOT sex offendors who have already served their time. If any individual is currently on parole or probation, than you are currently serving their time because they are under state supervision. Even if an individual served only one or five years of prison, and then was released on parole, they are still serving time.

I would not be so much worried about these people, as I would be those who have been released from state supervision already and have continued their immoral ways unnoticed. A state of emergency would probably be a convinient opportunity for someone like that, and if they are not excluded from a fragile environment they may just take advantage of it.