TBO.com > News > Latest News Reports
- Moffitt Among Quarterfinalists For Lott Award
- Two Women Thrown From Boat When It Hits I-75 Bridge
- Judge Imposes Stay On Lethal Injections
- Poll: More Coastal Residents Would Not Evacuate For Hurricane
- Robbers In Ninja Garb Strike Hampton Inn
- Deputy Is Accused Of Domestic Battery
- 2 Men Burst Into Home, Steal More Than $7,000
- Temple Terrace Man Wounded In Shooting
- Polk Deputies Charge 17 Men After Weekend Cockfight
- Baby Dropped Off At Fire Station
- Jury Awards $21.1 Million In Wrongful Birth Case
- Deputies Investigate Bank Robbery
- Grandpa Robbed; Grandson Charged
- Composite Sketch Of Armed Carjacker Released
- Progress Village Homicide Victim ID’d
By GREG BLUESTEIN
The Associated Press
ATLANTA - A federal judge on Monday blocked Georgia from targeting eight individuals with its sweeping law that would bar sex offenders from living near school bus stops.
Many states have barred offenders from working and living near schools, but Georgia’s law goes father by restricting them from living or working within 1,000 feet of a school bus stop.
The temporary restraining order by U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper applies only to the eight plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed by the Southern Center for Human Rights.
The law, due to go into effect statewide Saturday, would make it nearly impossible for Georgia’s more than 10,000 registered sex offenders to live in urban and suburban areas, said Sarah Geraghty, a lawyer for the Southern Center for Human Rights. It will “banish people from their homes,” she said.
Lawyers for the state said the law is necessary for public safety.
Both sides will be back in court July 11, and the plaintiffs’ lawyers said they hope to persuade the judge to overturn the new bus stop limits for all sex offenders.
So, what do you think? Is the judge right?
And where should these people live? Most counties change the location of their school bus stops yearly. Does this mean they (sex offenders) need to move too? This whole thing is stupid. There are many more important issues in this country we need to be worrying about. Get a clue America.
i think georgia judges’ well some of them have lost thier minds. first with the
Ten Commandents being taken out of the courthouse, now this. if you hurt a child or try to, you should let family and friends get hold of the pervs and let them take care of the job. But I know this will never happen.I hope our country will get fed up with this crap and send a hard message to these creeps . DO IT AND DIE!!!
There are few things on this earth that offend me more than any sexual deviate that preys on the young and innocent. I am concerned that Georgia has gone after votes more than justice. Lumping all sex offenders into such a severe program does not make sense to me. I concur with Mr. Wilson that the law is too vague and does not specifically address real target...the child molesters.
My daughter is a teenager who is currently dating another teenager who is a couple of years older than she is. He treats her like an angel, takes her to church with him weekly, encourages her in school and will turn 18 years old next year. By law, if he touches her in any way other than a hand shake after that time, he could be concidered a sex offender. With the exception of one comment so far, everyone here would have him thrown away for life. Maybe people should not jump to conclusions so fast and dare to concider those grey areas.
Oh please....you could take most of the responses on this article and put them into a book “The Dumbing of America II”. This is just yet another hot button campaign issue that neo cons knew would get struck down.
Obviously a law this broad could never be implemented as it would ensnare as many innocent as guilty persons. Obviously, your daughter is in full-view of predators anytime she leaves the house....not just at a bus stop. That’s the price for living in a free country. If you can’t handle that, put a veil on her and move to Saudi Arabia. And as for deterrence, since “sexual predators” are generally mentally ill, exactly how is any law going to deter or make them think twice?
Maybe if we spent as much $$ on improving public education as we do on punishing 19 year olds who date 16 years olds we would have laws that are based on common sense.
In this country we have a constitution and a bill of rights. Ths country was also built on the premise of giving people a second chance. One of the ammendments in the constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Forbidding a person to live within 2500 feet from a school bus stop if he has committed a certain crime would seem to this “liberal” who believes in the constitution more than the bible, to fit that definition. Every society has to have it’s boogeyman. Pedophiles are this country’s. Ironically, hardcore offenders in 95 percent of the time were molested by an adult as a child but weren’t treated for the offense because society neither cares or won’t appropriate the moeny to treat them. If they do their sentence and pay for their crime originally, how, if we use the constitution as our sacred guides for laws, keep on punishing them. Seems like double jepoardy to me.
I think that its a great Idea that they cant live near any of these places.. I my self think once they prey on kids all rights should be taken away from these low life dirt bags.. Why let them have any kind of normal life??? because god knows the poor babies that they have effected will never be able to have a 100% normal life b/c of these idiots.. Personaly I say fry all of them
The inverse of this is that you allow sex offenders to live near a school bus stop! You would enforce their right to buy/rent a home next to a published bus stop? Is there a judge that would allow his daughter to step on a bus knowing there may be a predator watching?
I think life sentance for all offenders is fine with me. I hear a lot of bitching about these monsters...I’m tired of it....LIFE...LIFE ...LIFE...any sexual crime on a child (YES ANY TYPE) LIFE LIFE LIFE....Liberal’s will block it...I love to see a daycare open up by Child molsters (it within thier civil rights..right) and watch all the liberal’s kids...LOL Idiots!
I complete understand not wanting child sex offenders within a certain limit ANYWHERE there is a child. I completely agree with that 100% however, the sex offender law, and not just this one, is to vague and broad and everyone gets lumped into the same catogory. This story didn’t even state child molesters it simply said sex offenders and everyone that posted to this automatically assumed that it was referring to child molestors. What about the 18 year old that has a 16 year old girl friend and the parents turn the kid in because she is “under age”. This poor kid has a record now of a sex offender even if the girl was concenting.
I am not defending the true sex offender as I do believe that they should go away never to return but, as in life there are always grey areas.
I our laws are the problems. We should send a clear message to sex offenders that once convicted they will go to prison for life. That would make them think twice
I think this law is a very good thing, but should apply to offenders who have targeted children, not to idiots that got caught mooning others at a party or whatever. For anyone who has ever targeted children, they don’t belong in society anyway - 21 arrests this past weekend alone of wannabe online child-molesters - ‘nuff said?
I think it is great! Maybe this scum buckets will think twice before hurting anyone children. Personally I do not think that they can be reformed and should be locked up. There are to many children that get hurt or killed.
Advertisement
Posted by Selena Smith, Brunswick GA on 07/01 at 01:55 AM
I feel that the bus stop ammendment is ridiculous and the temporary restraint should affect more than just the eight plaintiffs. It has been said that there are approximately 150,00 people this will affect mostly in home displacement....What about the families of thes people? There is no where for them to live either. No law should be allowed that would mandate breaking up a family’s home. I am very concerned for people who do not fall under the judge’s ruling