The following new report appeared this past weekend at the Savannah Now Online web site, our response follows:
### Quote ###
Effingham woman rallies to evict sex offender
Eric Curl | Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 12:30 am
Lakeside Farms resident Tammy Blackmon has been leading a charge to rid her Effingham County neighborhood of a convicted sex offender.
Blackmon has been at it ever since she learned in early April the offender had moved behind her house and failed to register with county officials. She said she and other neighborhood residents are concerned their new neighbor poses a threat to their children.
Melinda Lee Moore was arrested April 24 by Effingham County sheriff's deputies after she moved into a home at (editor’s note: the paper published this woman’s address, we removed it for her safety) and subsequently was accused of failing to register as a sex offender in Effingham County. She is out of jail on bond, awaiting trial.
Past convictions
In 1995, records show, Moore pleaded guilty to five counts of child molestation and one count of sexual battery. In 1999, she was sentenced to 18 months in a detention center for violating her parole by providing alcohol to a minor.
Blackmon said she and other Lakeside Farms residents have hung more than 200 posters throughout the neighborhood identifying Moore as a sex offender.
Moore filed a harassment report against Blackmon in April after the fliers were posted.
Moore could not be reached for comment because her telephone would not accept incoming calls.
Blackmon said Moore should be ousted from the neighborhood because of her proximity to two school bus stops.
A Georgia law still on the books has made it illegal for sex offenders to reside within 1,000 yards of areas where children congregate. That includes school bus stops. Moore lives about 500 yards from two bus stops on Zeigler Road.
However, Effingham County Sheriff Jimmy McDuffie said he and his deputies cannot enforce the law covering bus stops because the Georgia Supreme Court has ruled it unconstitutional.
And with nearly every sheriff in the state being sued by a north Georgia sex offender who was forced to move, the situation has grown even more problematic, he said.
In addition, McDuffie said, at least 54 of the 68 registered sex offenders in Effingham County reside within 1,000 yards of a school bus stop, and he does not have the manpower or the resources to make them all move, even if he could do so under the law.
Tough to keep up
Adding to the challenge is the department's difficulty in handling all the paperwork involved in tracking offenders.
The sheriff's department is required to keep updated lists of sex offenders at the department as well as at the county's schools, the county administrative building and the libraries.
McDuffie said the department also has a hard time verifying that sex offenders actually live at their registered addresses.
He said he had to take all of his criminal investigators off their investigations Thursday just to get caught up on the verifications.
McDuffie has explained the situation to the Effingham County Commission and said he is asking for funds to pay for a sex offender registrar in next year's budget. But, the sheriff said, commissioners have indicated the new position would not be approved because it cannot be funded.
"I see it as a safety issue more so than just a position," McDuffie said. "This is a serious situation."
http://savannahnow.com/node/306921
Corrections
1A | Local News
Tuesday, June 19, 2007 at 12:30 am
Georgia law states sex offenders must not reside within 1,000 feet of areas where children congregate. The law has been put on hold pending a decision by Judge Clarence Cooper of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. An article on Page 1B in Sunday's editions contained incorrect information.
http://savannahnow.com/node/307729
### End Quote ###
Our Reply to:
Eric Curl-Effingham Now Reporter
eric.curl@savannahnow.com
Wayne Hodgin-Effingham Now Editor
wayne.hodgin@savannahnow.com
Susan Catron-Executive Editor Savannah Morning News
susan.catron@savannahnow.com
Gale Baldwin-Managing Editor Savannah Morning News
gale.baldwin@savannahnow.com
Dear Savannah Now Staff,
First, I truly appreciate your report on this issue, however, we need to get past the myths and misinformation and speak to the truth and facts. Second, your original report (http://savannahnow.com/node/306921) was FILLED with misinformation and your correction (http://savannahnow.com/node/307729 ) was even more egregious. The School Bus Stop provision of HB1059 is the ONLY part of the law that has been stopped by Judge Cooper. ALL other provisions are in full force. I would suggest you contact the Southern Center for Human Rights to find out the FACTS regarding the lawsuit. Finally, are you aware that FEDERAL law prohibits the use of the Sex Offender Registry to "threaten, intimidate, or harass any individual including registrants or family members”? God forbid any thing happens to Ms. Moore, however due to this report, Savannah Now and Ms. Blackmon could be held responsible. Perhaps you would consider part of the following missive for an editorial comment or better yet, an honest and fair follow up report.
Let's consider the merits of our current state and national sex offender registry system, along with all state and local proximity (safety zone) laws.
When Megan's and Jacob's Laws were originally passed, there was a decided lack of empirical evidence to support or question the effectiveness of these laws. Now, state and local governments, for easy political gain and against the advice of experts in criminal justice, behavior therapy, and law enforcement, are attempting to a write harsher laws than their neighboring cities or states.
This trend is now banishing an entire class of people as we find new laws that exclude EVERYONE on the registries, regardless of charge, along with their wives, children, parents, and siblings, from living within in these supposed safety zones.
The overwhelming evidence and statistics, as provided by the U.S. Department of Justice, state correctional studies, local law enforcement, and treatment experts, show that residency restrictions or safety (proximity) zones have not proven to enhance public safety and in fact have let to unintended consequences for communities and the innocent family members of intra-familial offenders.
In a statement regarding the effectiveness of Iowa's Sex Offender Registry and Proximity laws, Sgt. Bryce Smith, who has charge of monitoring the registry in Scott County said; "If the 2,000-foot rule had been in effect 10 years ago, I can't think of a single case from our files that would have been any different."
Let's look at a five-tiered risk level system, which allows offenders to earn the right to return to society. It separates risk level in an understandable fashion, making enforcement more efficient and community notification more understandable. It allows jurists to consider the merits of each individual case and rule appropriately. Additionally, parents (notice the onus is on the parents not the government) will know how safe their neighborhoods are and better able to educate their children who to avoid.
Let us return control of criminal justice to the courts, correctional officials, and therapists, and support amending current laws that go beyond the original intent of monitoring the most dangerous and high-risk individuals. We need to set right these egregious laws that obviously usurp the Constitution and provide additional punishment for a single group of people as well as their families. We need to recognize these laws are morally, ethically, and legally wrong, and put us on a very slippery slope by banishing an entire class of people along with their wives, children, parents, and siblings from our cities, towns, and villages, making them pariahs. We need to acknowledge we are creating a group of second-class citizens and this alone is dangerous ground.
Join me in calling for a National Sex Offender Policy Forum. This would help state and local governments formulate workable, cost effective laws that protect the rights of all citizens. Forums should include mental health professionals, jurist, law enforcement and corrections personnel, victims and their families, offenders and their families.
I invite you to read The Impact of Residency Restrictions on Sex Offenders and Correctional Management Practices: A Literature Review; by Marcus Nieto, Senior Research Specialist and Professor David Jung, Public Law Research Institute, Hastings Law School. Additionally, pick up a copy of Failure to Protect - America's Sexual Predator Laws and the Rise of the Preventative State, by Eric S. Janus, Vice-Dean, William Mitchell College of Law.
At the end of the day, we must move toward a Restorative Justice model, as our current retributive justice paradigm, is failing all families and children, except for the wealthy.
Additionally, the legislative rule over our courts and the privatization of our prison system must end. For the sake of our children's future, let's support real solutions, and not depend on the government to do it for us. We can and must do better. It is up to parents to educate themselves, protect their children and it is crucial our news outlets begin to report this issue in a fair and accurate manner.
I pray you step up to this challenge. For more information, visit the Sex Offender Solutions Network.
Sincerely yours,
Sex Offender Solutions Network
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Thursday, June 7, 2007
Judge correct to uphold sex-offender residency law
The following appeared in the Palm Beach Post, Letters to the Editor section. The Sex Offenders Solutions Network posted a reply (which follows) to this article.
Judge correct to uphold sex-offender residency law
Thursday, June 07, 2007
I read with great interest two articles, "Residence limits keep sex offenders on move" (May 19), regarding sex offenders, as well as "Sex offender law passes muster, judge rules" (May 22), involving the judge's decision in that matter.
I am an outspoken advocate on behalf of victims of sexual violence. My daughter was sexually abused for many years by a nanny who now is in prison. I also serve as pro-bono counsel to the Florida Council Against Sexual Violence. I am responsible for proposing and successfully lobbying for many changes in Florida law over the past six years. I have made many appearances before city and county commissions on the residence restrictions the two articles were written about.
I don't ever hold residence restrictions out as an end-all cure-all related to stopping sexual offenders and predators involving their sexually deviant behavior; however, I do believe that the adoption of residence restrictions is a piece of the puzzle. Elected officials have a responsibility under the Constitution to protect the health, safety and welfare of all citizens and not simply those of the criminal element of our society and, in particular, those who have been convicted of sexually deviant behavior.
Zoning laws in Florida long have required that bars and taverns be 2,500 feet or more from churches, schools, synagogues, day-care centers and the like. Why would anyone find fault with requiring sex offenders to live at least 2,500 feet away from where we know children congregate? While I recognize that these sexually deviant individuals can get in their car and drive anywhere, and we cannot stop that under the Constitution, we don't need them peering down from their homes and apartments onto the playgrounds, schools, day-care centers and school bus stops at our children so that they can scout out their next possible victim. I don't care if they have to live under a bridge or if they have to live somewhere outside Florida. I do care about protecting our children.
This is not emotional, knee-jerk advocacy; it is well-thought-out. I do not agree with Lynn University Assistant Professor Jill Levenson, who is cited in the May 19 article, as she sees these issues only on behalf of the sexual offenders and predators. I have read and researched as much as most experts, and I know these laws will do something to help protect our children. It is the aggregation of federal, state and local ordinances that make our communities safer.
I commend Palm Beach County Judge Paul Damico for understanding the rights of all citizens as it relates to protecting everyone's health, safety and welfare under the Constitution as he ruled the county ordinance constitutional.
RONALD L. BOOK
Aventura
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/opinion/content/opinion/epaper/2007/06/07/letterfile_0607.html
Reply by the Sex Offender Solutions Network:
Judge correct to uphold sex-offender residency law – revisited:
Contrary to what some and Judge Damico believe, there is not one shred of evidence that Residency Restrictions, as currently written, has saved a child.
While many believe these restrictions work, the experts in Law Enforcement, Sex Offender Management, and Therapy do not. A recent Amicus Brief filed in the Supreme Court of Ohio, was submitted by the following organizations: the Jacob Wetterling Foundation, the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA), the Iowa County Attorneys Association, the Iowa State Sheriffs & Deputies Association, the Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault and the Rosenthal Institute for Justice at the University of Cincinnati College of Law.
The amicus brief argues three things: (1) that there is no evidence that sex offender residence restrictions protect children from sexual abuse; (2) that such laws are driven by fear, not facts; and (3) that these laws potentially increase the risk of harm to children by giving parents and their children a false sense of security and by driving sex offenders "underground," where they are more difficult to monitor by law enforcement.
We advocate returning the Sex Offender Registry to its original intent, tracking the most dangerous and predatory offenders and absconders. We also need to implement a 5 Tier Risk Level System. This will make a more effective monitoring tool for law enforcement. Finally, we need a National Sex Offender Public Policy Forum to address this issue. Everything else is emotional, knee-jerk advocacy.
sosolutionsnetwork.org
In our reply above, we did not address the statements by Mr. Book where he lumps all sex offenders in one category, something that makes women and children less safe. It is obvious that his research did not include the entire scope of the problem, otherwise he would have not used the term “sex offender” with the phrase “these sexually deviant individuals.”
Nor did we mention these laws also affect the wives, children, parents, and siblings of sex offenders. Are they not worthy of basic Constitutional protections? Where are our so-called “family values” if we believe it is OK to make second-class citizens out of these family members?
Additionally, we did not mention Mr. Book is a professional lobbyist, NOT an expert in Sex Offender Management and Treatment, Law Enforcement, Probation Officer, Defense Attorney or has any know expertise in any field related to the Sex Offender issue. (Click here to view his Lobbying Practice.)
We ask one question, is Cox News (who owns the Palm Beach Post) more interested in advertising dollars and circulation or are they more interested in keeping women and children SAFE?
Apparently, they are more interested in the former. This egregious betrayal of the public trust by our media needs to be addressed if we are to see a solution to the problem.
Therefore, we call on all citizens of the United States to boycott Cox News and their advertisers, until they begin to report this issue in a fair, honest, and accurate manner. If they will not listen to reason, perhaps they will listen to their shareholders.
If you are tired of the media using this issue to advance their bottom line, send your comments to:
Bill Rose, Managing Editor
bill_rose@pbpost.com
Tim Burke, Deputy Managing Editor
tim_burke@pbpost.com
Bill Greer, Assistant Managing Editor/Projects
bill_greer@pbpost.com
###
Judge correct to uphold sex-offender residency law
Thursday, June 07, 2007
I read with great interest two articles, "Residence limits keep sex offenders on move" (May 19), regarding sex offenders, as well as "Sex offender law passes muster, judge rules" (May 22), involving the judge's decision in that matter.
I am an outspoken advocate on behalf of victims of sexual violence. My daughter was sexually abused for many years by a nanny who now is in prison. I also serve as pro-bono counsel to the Florida Council Against Sexual Violence. I am responsible for proposing and successfully lobbying for many changes in Florida law over the past six years. I have made many appearances before city and county commissions on the residence restrictions the two articles were written about.
I don't ever hold residence restrictions out as an end-all cure-all related to stopping sexual offenders and predators involving their sexually deviant behavior; however, I do believe that the adoption of residence restrictions is a piece of the puzzle. Elected officials have a responsibility under the Constitution to protect the health, safety and welfare of all citizens and not simply those of the criminal element of our society and, in particular, those who have been convicted of sexually deviant behavior.
Zoning laws in Florida long have required that bars and taverns be 2,500 feet or more from churches, schools, synagogues, day-care centers and the like. Why would anyone find fault with requiring sex offenders to live at least 2,500 feet away from where we know children congregate? While I recognize that these sexually deviant individuals can get in their car and drive anywhere, and we cannot stop that under the Constitution, we don't need them peering down from their homes and apartments onto the playgrounds, schools, day-care centers and school bus stops at our children so that they can scout out their next possible victim. I don't care if they have to live under a bridge or if they have to live somewhere outside Florida. I do care about protecting our children.
This is not emotional, knee-jerk advocacy; it is well-thought-out. I do not agree with Lynn University Assistant Professor Jill Levenson, who is cited in the May 19 article, as she sees these issues only on behalf of the sexual offenders and predators. I have read and researched as much as most experts, and I know these laws will do something to help protect our children. It is the aggregation of federal, state and local ordinances that make our communities safer.
I commend Palm Beach County Judge Paul Damico for understanding the rights of all citizens as it relates to protecting everyone's health, safety and welfare under the Constitution as he ruled the county ordinance constitutional.
RONALD L. BOOK
Aventura
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/opinion/content/opinion/epaper/2007/06/07/letterfile_0607.html
Reply by the Sex Offender Solutions Network:
Judge correct to uphold sex-offender residency law – revisited:
Contrary to what some and Judge Damico believe, there is not one shred of evidence that Residency Restrictions, as currently written, has saved a child.
While many believe these restrictions work, the experts in Law Enforcement, Sex Offender Management, and Therapy do not. A recent Amicus Brief filed in the Supreme Court of Ohio, was submitted by the following organizations: the Jacob Wetterling Foundation, the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA), the Iowa County Attorneys Association, the Iowa State Sheriffs & Deputies Association, the Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault and the Rosenthal Institute for Justice at the University of Cincinnati College of Law.
The amicus brief argues three things: (1) that there is no evidence that sex offender residence restrictions protect children from sexual abuse; (2) that such laws are driven by fear, not facts; and (3) that these laws potentially increase the risk of harm to children by giving parents and their children a false sense of security and by driving sex offenders "underground," where they are more difficult to monitor by law enforcement.
We advocate returning the Sex Offender Registry to its original intent, tracking the most dangerous and predatory offenders and absconders. We also need to implement a 5 Tier Risk Level System. This will make a more effective monitoring tool for law enforcement. Finally, we need a National Sex Offender Public Policy Forum to address this issue. Everything else is emotional, knee-jerk advocacy.
sosolutionsnetwork.org
In our reply above, we did not address the statements by Mr. Book where he lumps all sex offenders in one category, something that makes women and children less safe. It is obvious that his research did not include the entire scope of the problem, otherwise he would have not used the term “sex offender” with the phrase “these sexually deviant individuals.”
Nor did we mention these laws also affect the wives, children, parents, and siblings of sex offenders. Are they not worthy of basic Constitutional protections? Where are our so-called “family values” if we believe it is OK to make second-class citizens out of these family members?
Additionally, we did not mention Mr. Book is a professional lobbyist, NOT an expert in Sex Offender Management and Treatment, Law Enforcement, Probation Officer, Defense Attorney or has any know expertise in any field related to the Sex Offender issue. (Click here to view his Lobbying Practice.)
We ask one question, is Cox News (who owns the Palm Beach Post) more interested in advertising dollars and circulation or are they more interested in keeping women and children SAFE?
Apparently, they are more interested in the former. This egregious betrayal of the public trust by our media needs to be addressed if we are to see a solution to the problem.
Therefore, we call on all citizens of the United States to boycott Cox News and their advertisers, until they begin to report this issue in a fair, honest, and accurate manner. If they will not listen to reason, perhaps they will listen to their shareholders.
If you are tired of the media using this issue to advance their bottom line, send your comments to:
Bill Rose, Managing Editor
bill_rose@pbpost.com
Tim Burke, Deputy Managing Editor
tim_burke@pbpost.com
Bill Greer, Assistant Managing Editor/Projects
bill_greer@pbpost.com
###
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Politician Plays the Sex Offender Card - AGAIN
Monday, April 9th, the AP reported the disapproval rating for the U.S. Congress has jumped to 57%. In response, Senator Charles Schumer, being the good politician he is, holds a press conference and announces his NEW PLAN to KEEP CHILDREN SAFE. More smoke and mirrors, and nothing more. Below is the news article about his legislation, followed by a letter we sent to Sen.Schumer.
###
Schumer promotes new child porn laws
The Ithaca Journal - Ithaca, NY
By Monique Lewis
Gannett News Service
BINGHAMTON — U.S. Sen. Charles E. Schumer announced two proposed federal laws Monday aimed at eliminating Internet solicitation of children and youths for sexual acts.
Schumer, D-N.Y., stopped in Binghamton on Monday on a statewide campaign to promote the bills — the KIDS Act and SAFE Act, that combined via an enhanced Internet tracking system will thwart registered sex offenders and others from using the Web for transmitting child pornography and soliciting children.
The KIDS Act, or Keeping the Internet Devoid of Sexual-Predators Act, would require all levels of convicted sex offenders to provide their e-mail addresses, instant message screen-names and other Internet information to law enforcement for the National Sex Offender Registry. Violators will face significant jail time, Schumer said.
There are more than 900 registered sex offenders living in the Southern Tier, according to the New York State Department of Criminal Justice Services.
“That's a lot,” Schumer said. “But that's just the registered ones. There are some who don't register and other (offenders) who come from out of state. The Internet is the method of choice with which they find their victims.”
Therefore, a second bill coined Securing Adolescents From Exploitation-Online Act (SAFE Act), would require Internet Service Providers to report any user who is engaging in online sexual activity aimed at locating children and youths to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, Schumer said.
The legislation will give law enforcement another avenue to fight the problem, Broome County District Attorney Gerald Mollen said.
Even if an Internet user or convicted sex offender changed their e-mail address and name with an ISP, or switched ISPs, they can still be caught because the legislation would require ISPs to report all illegal sexual activity aimed at children, according to Schumer's office.
However, James Little, of Endicott, suggested the federal government mandate computer manufacturers install products that prevent children from accessing inappropriate Web sites and require parents to setup a password.
“There's just a huge exposure to kids on the Internet and it's going to be difficult to control that,” Little said. “It's the parents that are going to have to prevent the trouble that their kids are getting into.”
But the government can't fully rely parental responsibility, especially given the social atmosphere in which parents can't be at home all the time to monitor their child's Internet activity, Schumer said.
“The Internet companies who don't cooperate get the book slammed on them too,” Schumer added.
ISPs who don't report such activity would be fined $50,000 per incident per person for the first violation, and the fines increase per violation, Schumer said. ISPs will be absolved from any potential lawsuits, he said.
There would be federal funding issued to local law enforcement agencies to implement the law, he said.
Schumer said he expects Congress to approve both bills in the summer and be implemented by the fall.
mlewis@pressconnects.com
http://www.theithacajournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070410/NEWS01/704100338
###
10 April, 2007
Dear Senator Schumer,
Again, we find politicians attempting to recover from falling approval ratings (Associated Press-Ipsos poll on public attitudes about Congress, conducted April 2-4; showed that 57% DISAPPROVE of the way Congress is handling its job) by playing the “tough on sex offender” card. Your proposed KIDS and SAFE Acts are nothing more than smoke and mirrors.
We believe you not only know this, you should apologize to your constituents. Like previous laws, this one is rooted in myths, and misconceptions in place of facts and truths. Americans, especially our children deserve better.
Chris Hansen of Dateline quotes “1 in 5 online teenagers are approached about sex.” However, he never tells you the truth. The survey, a DOJ study, he uses shows that in over 70% of the time, other teenagers, not adults trolling the internet for sex, are approaching each other.
Recently, an FBI report charged that reporters were distorting the facts with fear-driven stories about monsters preying on children. The FBI, in fact, insists that child abductions by strangers actually have declined. In the 1980s, the number of such child abductions averaged annually about 200 to 300, according to the FBI. In 2000, the number of cases dropped to 93 compared with 134 in 1999 and 115 in 1998, when the FBI first began tracking these statistics.
A report to the Unites States Senate Judiciary Committee by SOhopeful International stated, “It is because of these misunderstandings about the real nature of sex crimes, victims of sex crimes and sex offenders that Federal and some State governments are spending large sums for ineffective policies that do not increase public safety.” If registration is the answer, why do we see an eight percent increase in the registry each year? If safety zones (banishment) are the answer, why are children still being abused? These measures are only feel good legislation, which have proven ineffective, and are continued punishment, not regulation.
The public needs to be more concerned about high-risk sex offenders and absconders, not the low risk offenders who are working hard to comply with their probation and therapy guidelines or the former offenders who have finished their sentence and have remained offence free since. Additionally, hysteria created by media misinformation and political hyperbole has a devastating and demoralizing effect on the families of low-risk offenders, including the unintended practice of revealing the identity of victims of intra-familial abuse, traumatizing children a second time.
The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, 2007 Report of the Sex Offender Policy Task Force states, “The recent wave of sex offender legislation is based upon emotion and myths about sex offenders which are not supported by valid research or evidence. Legislation in this area should be based upon facts and valid evidence. The NACDL encourages criminal defense lawyers, prosecutors, and legislators to oppose legislation based upon myth and public emotion. In doing so we can ensure both public safety and due process.”
Why are we all in deep denial about this problem? As long as citizens rely on uninformed politicians, the misinformed media and myths about sex offenders, all children remain at risk. We need to come to terms with our denial and seek real solutions, and we need to do it today. How many more Christopher’s, Jessica’s, Dylan’s, Megan’s, Polly’s, and Jacob’s have to die before we WAKE UP?
If you really want to make children safer, then take the lead and call for a National Sex Offender Policy Forum. Forums should include mental health professionals, jurists, law enforcement and corrections personnel, victims and their families, offenders and their families. Then Federal, state and local governments can better formulate workable, cost effective laws that protect the rights of all citizens.
What’s right is right and what’s wrong is wrong, in lieu of fostering a fearful witch-hunt mentality for votes, our elected officials should step up to this societal challenge. They should strive to dispel the myths and create the environment for policy and subsequent legislation to succeed, creating a safe society for all.
At the end of the day, we are all responsible; we are all involved in the safety of our families and have an investment in the outcome of this discussion. Educate yourself, protect your children, please have a staffer visit http://www.sosnet.pbwiki.com and report to you with their findings.
Sincerely yours,
The Sex Offender Solutions Network
###
Schumer promotes new child porn laws
The Ithaca Journal - Ithaca, NY
By Monique Lewis
Gannett News Service
BINGHAMTON — U.S. Sen. Charles E. Schumer announced two proposed federal laws Monday aimed at eliminating Internet solicitation of children and youths for sexual acts.
Schumer, D-N.Y., stopped in Binghamton on Monday on a statewide campaign to promote the bills — the KIDS Act and SAFE Act, that combined via an enhanced Internet tracking system will thwart registered sex offenders and others from using the Web for transmitting child pornography and soliciting children.
The KIDS Act, or Keeping the Internet Devoid of Sexual-Predators Act, would require all levels of convicted sex offenders to provide their e-mail addresses, instant message screen-names and other Internet information to law enforcement for the National Sex Offender Registry. Violators will face significant jail time, Schumer said.
There are more than 900 registered sex offenders living in the Southern Tier, according to the New York State Department of Criminal Justice Services.
“That's a lot,” Schumer said. “But that's just the registered ones. There are some who don't register and other (offenders) who come from out of state. The Internet is the method of choice with which they find their victims.”
Therefore, a second bill coined Securing Adolescents From Exploitation-Online Act (SAFE Act), would require Internet Service Providers to report any user who is engaging in online sexual activity aimed at locating children and youths to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, Schumer said.
The legislation will give law enforcement another avenue to fight the problem, Broome County District Attorney Gerald Mollen said.
Even if an Internet user or convicted sex offender changed their e-mail address and name with an ISP, or switched ISPs, they can still be caught because the legislation would require ISPs to report all illegal sexual activity aimed at children, according to Schumer's office.
However, James Little, of Endicott, suggested the federal government mandate computer manufacturers install products that prevent children from accessing inappropriate Web sites and require parents to setup a password.
“There's just a huge exposure to kids on the Internet and it's going to be difficult to control that,” Little said. “It's the parents that are going to have to prevent the trouble that their kids are getting into.”
But the government can't fully rely parental responsibility, especially given the social atmosphere in which parents can't be at home all the time to monitor their child's Internet activity, Schumer said.
“The Internet companies who don't cooperate get the book slammed on them too,” Schumer added.
ISPs who don't report such activity would be fined $50,000 per incident per person for the first violation, and the fines increase per violation, Schumer said. ISPs will be absolved from any potential lawsuits, he said.
There would be federal funding issued to local law enforcement agencies to implement the law, he said.
Schumer said he expects Congress to approve both bills in the summer and be implemented by the fall.
mlewis@pressconnects.com
http://www.theithacajournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070410/NEWS01/704100338
###
10 April, 2007
Dear Senator Schumer,
Again, we find politicians attempting to recover from falling approval ratings (Associated Press-Ipsos poll on public attitudes about Congress, conducted April 2-4; showed that 57% DISAPPROVE of the way Congress is handling its job) by playing the “tough on sex offender” card. Your proposed KIDS and SAFE Acts are nothing more than smoke and mirrors.
We believe you not only know this, you should apologize to your constituents. Like previous laws, this one is rooted in myths, and misconceptions in place of facts and truths. Americans, especially our children deserve better.
Chris Hansen of Dateline quotes “1 in 5 online teenagers are approached about sex.” However, he never tells you the truth. The survey, a DOJ study, he uses shows that in over 70% of the time, other teenagers, not adults trolling the internet for sex, are approaching each other.
Recently, an FBI report charged that reporters were distorting the facts with fear-driven stories about monsters preying on children. The FBI, in fact, insists that child abductions by strangers actually have declined. In the 1980s, the number of such child abductions averaged annually about 200 to 300, according to the FBI. In 2000, the number of cases dropped to 93 compared with 134 in 1999 and 115 in 1998, when the FBI first began tracking these statistics.
A report to the Unites States Senate Judiciary Committee by SOhopeful International stated, “It is because of these misunderstandings about the real nature of sex crimes, victims of sex crimes and sex offenders that Federal and some State governments are spending large sums for ineffective policies that do not increase public safety.” If registration is the answer, why do we see an eight percent increase in the registry each year? If safety zones (banishment) are the answer, why are children still being abused? These measures are only feel good legislation, which have proven ineffective, and are continued punishment, not regulation.
The public needs to be more concerned about high-risk sex offenders and absconders, not the low risk offenders who are working hard to comply with their probation and therapy guidelines or the former offenders who have finished their sentence and have remained offence free since. Additionally, hysteria created by media misinformation and political hyperbole has a devastating and demoralizing effect on the families of low-risk offenders, including the unintended practice of revealing the identity of victims of intra-familial abuse, traumatizing children a second time.
The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, 2007 Report of the Sex Offender Policy Task Force states, “The recent wave of sex offender legislation is based upon emotion and myths about sex offenders which are not supported by valid research or evidence. Legislation in this area should be based upon facts and valid evidence. The NACDL encourages criminal defense lawyers, prosecutors, and legislators to oppose legislation based upon myth and public emotion. In doing so we can ensure both public safety and due process.”
Why are we all in deep denial about this problem? As long as citizens rely on uninformed politicians, the misinformed media and myths about sex offenders, all children remain at risk. We need to come to terms with our denial and seek real solutions, and we need to do it today. How many more Christopher’s, Jessica’s, Dylan’s, Megan’s, Polly’s, and Jacob’s have to die before we WAKE UP?
If you really want to make children safer, then take the lead and call for a National Sex Offender Policy Forum. Forums should include mental health professionals, jurists, law enforcement and corrections personnel, victims and their families, offenders and their families. Then Federal, state and local governments can better formulate workable, cost effective laws that protect the rights of all citizens.
What’s right is right and what’s wrong is wrong, in lieu of fostering a fearful witch-hunt mentality for votes, our elected officials should step up to this societal challenge. They should strive to dispel the myths and create the environment for policy and subsequent legislation to succeed, creating a safe society for all.
At the end of the day, we are all responsible; we are all involved in the safety of our families and have an investment in the outcome of this discussion. Educate yourself, protect your children, please have a staffer visit http://www.sosnet.pbwiki.com and report to you with their findings.
Sincerely yours,
The Sex Offender Solutions Network
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
Won’t You Be My Neighbor
The following is my reply to Jay Andrews at AccessNorthGA dot com. It is in response to a Op-Ed written by Stan Hall, who is Director of the Victim Witness Program, in the Gwinnett County DA's Office. Mr. Halls Op-Ed follows my reply.
###
This is the Op-Ed by Mr. Hall:
Well good readers, is it not time we have a united call for a National Sex Offender Policy Forum?
Dear Mr. Andrews,
In reply to your Op-Ed by Stan Hall I submit the following with the hope you will print the facts.HB1059, like all the other legislation across the country have NOT SAVED ONE CHILD. You, nor Mr. Hall nor I can name one, period end of story. These feel good laws only serve to promote the careers of politicians and provide copy for the media. For them, it is a win-win that overlooks FACTS and common sense. Here are the facts concerning HB1059, I have been sending this to all the media outlets in Georgia and around the country, in an effort to wake people up.
Christopher Barrios did not have to die, but he did, why? If we look at the events of the 2006 Georgia legislative session, we can find answers.
1. Had the Georgia Representatives (led by Jerry Keen) and Senators (led by Eric Johnson) listened to Dr. Gene Able or Dr. James E Stark, and the other experts who spoke at the hearings last year, Christopher Barrios might still be alive today.
2. Had they listened to the RSO’s (Registered Sex Offenders) who spoke at the hearings last year, Christopher Barrios might still be alive today.
3. Had they implemented and funded RISK ASSESSMENT and a risk level system for ALL the current RSO’s and not just the new registrants after July 1, 2006, as was recommended to them, Christopher Barrios might still be alive today.
4. Had they listened to the experts in Law Enforcement, and not forced Law Enforcement to spend all their resources on chasing LOW RISK offenders away from churches and employment, Christopher Barrios might still be alive today.
5. ALL the Laws and Restrictions in the WORLD will NOT STOP someone who wants to offend, the Sex Offender Registry does not make children safer, and neither do SAFETY ZONES; however, THERAPY DOES. Offenders in therapy have the lowest recidivism rate. Had the legislators used common sense in place of political posturing, Christopher Barrios might still be alive today.
6. Because they FAILED to LISTEN to the experts, because they FAILED to LISTEN to Law Enforcement, because they were looking for election year sound bites, they are JUST AS RESPONSIBLE for the death of Christopher Barrios as the perpetrator is.
Again, I ask the people of Georgia to LISTEN to the experts, and force their elected representatives to do the same. Within the past year, these experts have voiced their concern about the new laws, well-intentioned lawmakers are enacting. Here is what they are saying.
“What you’re doing is pushing people more underground, pushing them away from treatment and pushing them away from monitoring, you’re really not improving the safety, but you are giving people a false sense of safety.” -- John Gruber, Executive Director of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers
“It may be time to do away with sex offender registration laws altogether. At the very least, the federal government should commission research to study the laws’ effectiveness. In the meantime, several changes should be made. States should differentiate between serious and non-serious offenders and only require registration of the most serious offenders. Next, public access to online sites should be dismantled, and registries should be kept at the local police stations. This would provide at least a minimal screening process to those seeking inquiries… Lastly, we should experiment with restorative justice models such as what has happened in Canada where sex offenders moving into a community meet with members of the community in a public forum facilitated by a trained mediator. This type of forum gives the community an opportunity to meet the offender face to face and express their concerns and for the offender to show the community that he is earnestly seeking to change his life.” -- Rachel King, Professor of Law, Howard University School of Law, Washington, D.C.
“Though laudable in their intent, there is little evidence that recently enacted housing policies achieve their stated goals of reducing recidivistic sexual violence. In fact, there is little research at all evaluating the effectiveness of these policies. Furthermore, these policies are not evidence-based in their development or implementation, as they tend to capture the widely heterogeneous group of sex offenders rather than utilize risk assessment technology to identify those who pose a high danger to public safety.” -- Jill S. Levenson, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Human Services, Lynn University
“I would rather have someone who has committed a sex offense be going to work every day, come home tired, have a sense of well-being that comes from having a regular paycheck and a safe home, as opposed to having a sex offender who has a lot of free time on his hands.” -- Richard Hamill, President, New York State Alliance of Sex Offender Service Providers
“We're not aware of any evidence that residency restrictions have prevented a child from being victimized.” -- Carolyn Atwell-Davis, Director of Legislative Affairs, National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
“Therapy works for these people. Let them be punished for their crimes, let them out and let them get on with their lives. Let them work. Let them have stable homes and families and let them live in peace. Harassing them, making them move and continually punishing them does far more harm than good. A sex offender in therapy with a job and a place to live is less of a threat than one that is constantly harassed.” -- Robert Shilling, Detective, Crimes Against Children Division, Seattle, WA
There is not a shred of evidence tough laws and residency restrictions have saved one child. There is however, corroboration from the experts, that Sex Offender Registries and “safety zones” are doing nothing more than giving the public a false sense of security.
Again, I call for a National Sex Offender Policy Forum. Georgia can pave the way by holding a Georgia Sex Offender Policy Forum. These forums would be comprised of treatment providers, law enforcement, jurists, victims, offenders, and their families. With the recommendations from this forum, legislators will know what laws need to be written, or amended to insure the safety of our children.
Why are we all in deep denial about this problem? As long as citizens rely on uninformed politicians, the misinformed media and myths about sex offenders, all children remain at risk. We need to come to terms with our denial and seek real solutions, and we need to do it today. How many more Christopher’s, Jessica’s, Dylan’s, Megan’s, Polly’s, and Jacob’s have to die before we WAKE UP?
At the end of the day, we are all responsible; we are all involved in the safety of our families and have an investment in the outcome of this discussion.
###
I encourage you both to do just an hour or two of research, and educate yourselves. If you both really want to make children safer, then help me educate parents with the FACTS, not the MYTHS. If you both really want to make children safer, then join me in calling for a National Sex Offender Policy Forum.
Finally, by way of copy to Mr. Hall; while I do admire your zeal, I wonder if you realize that by demonizing an entire group of people, based on the actions of a few, you are in fact laying the ground work for your children, and grandchildren, to live in a society without the same constitutional protections you and I enjoy? Is fear-mongering really worth the price of liberty? What would Jesus do in this situation?
Kind Regards,
###
This is the Op-Ed by Mr. Hall:
I thought about Mr. Rogers and the song when I was thinking about the on going argument about where sexual offenders can and cannot live. Frankly, I thought that we had settled this issue last year, but apparently not. The current law has some very strict language about where convicted sexual offenders may live. When the law was written, everyone thought that this law was a good idea. It would keep offenders away from the areas where children commonly gather. The law prohibits convicted offenders from working, living, or loitering within 1000 feet of child care facilities, schools, churches, bus stops or other areas where minors might congregate.
So what’s the problem? Well, U.S. District Court Judge Clarence Cooper has already blocked the enforcement of the school bus stop portion of the law, based on a lawsuit filed by our old friends at the ACLU. Don’t you just love them? They are always standing by waiting to protect the rights of the downtrodden. In this case, apparently the downtrodden are sex offenders. I guess that we should be glad that the ACLU is around for this purpose because most of us just do not have the time to worry about sexual offenders. We are a little predisposed trying to worry about our children and trying to protect them from sexual offenders. I suppose balance is important. While the enforcement of the bus stop provision has been blocked while the constitutionality of the law is being debated, some offenders who live near churches have been forced to relocate. I am a firm believer that the church is exactly where most of these people should be. But, I cannot feel sorry for those who have been relocated so that children can attend church without fear. If we truly reap what we sew, we should also know what to expect when the crop is harvested. We cannot act surprised or blame the system because of poor life choices we make. And we most certainly cannot expect the rights of the convicted to overshadow the rights of the innocent, even when it comes to church.
I really had to test my gag factor when I read a statement by the other party named in the lawsuit, attempting to have the sex offender law overturned. According to a report in the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Lisa Kung, who is the Director of the Southern Center for Human Rights, said that the law should be overturned based on three main flaws. According to the report, Kung stated that the law clumps everyone together, it is harmful to the public because it creates instability and that is destroys families. Wow, Ms. Kung, is there a chance that the law might do a few other things as well?
How about these? It protects innocent children from some fairly disgusting individuals. It clumps everyone together. If these clumps, as you call them, are a clump of sexual predators, at least we will know which clump to keep our kids’ away from. And using your last argument, how about the chance that it creates stability and it protects families. You want to talk about destroying families, take a peek at the wide swath of family destruction that occurs after a sexual predator comes through the house. But as always, according to some, the concerns of the victims and their families should always come just below the concerns of the offender and their families.
If there are flaws in the law, based on practical enforcement issues, or hardships on law enforcement agencies that may be caused by the current language, then we should fix it. But, changing laws that are in place to protect innocent people from sexual offenders because the law causes the convicted offenders hardship is appalling. Mr. Rogers welcomed everyone to his neighborhood and hoped that everyone might be his neighbor. But, I have to think that even Mr. Rogers would have second thoughts about his invitation to new neighbors if he knew they were hurting the very thing that he loved more than life itself; the children. Maybe he would, but most of us are not nearly as forgiving.
Fix the law... Don’t overturn it! Because if we do, we will all be singing a new song that has a lot more to do with locked doors and vacant playgrounds than our brand new neighbor.
Well good readers, is it not time we have a united call for a National Sex Offender Policy Forum?
Sex Offender Law Takes Beating in Court
The following was posted in Creating Loafing Atlanta by Scott Henry.
Last week, opponents of Georgia’s harsh new sex offender law got a boost in the form of a federal judge’s ruling that will allow a court challenge of the law to go forward. But it’s the unusually strong wording of the opinion by U.S. District Court Judge Clarence Cooper that makes lawyers with the Southern Center for Human Rights most optimistic.
In pointing out that ex post facto laws are unconstitutional, Cooper writes: “Ex post facto laws impose retroactive punishment; in other words, they increase the punishment for criminal acts after they have been committed. Defendants [the state of Georgia] argue that the act [the sex offender law] is regulatory rather than punitive, precluding a finding that the act is an unconstitutional ex post facto law. This Court disagrees.”
Later on, the judge considers whether the law would have the effect of forcing sex offenders to leave Georgia – a process called banishment, and also illegal. “The act may be found to sufficiently resemble banishment so as to support a finding that it is punitive in effect,” he says.
Finally, Cooper acknowledges the criticism that the law may do more harm than good because sex offenders who are forced to move from their homes and families often slide into recidivism. “The Court finds that the act’s failure to … identify those sex offenders who are most likely to reoffend, when coupled with the fact that the instability created by the act may be harmful to the public, could support a finding that the act is excessive,” he writes.
During initial hearings on the law last summer, Cooper was particularly interested in hearing the state defend a provision that bans registered sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school bus stop. Given the tone of his opinion last week, it’s probably safe to assume that the death of the bus-stop provision will be the starting point when the legal challenge of the law begins in earnest.
I posted my reply and encourage others to do the same. Until our politicians start to call for a Sex Offender Policy Forum, I will continue to call for reform and changes, after all, it is for the children, right?
Last week, opponents of Georgia’s harsh new sex offender law got a boost in the form of a federal judge’s ruling that will allow a court challenge of the law to go forward. But it’s the unusually strong wording of the opinion by U.S. District Court Judge Clarence Cooper that makes lawyers with the Southern Center for Human Rights most optimistic.
In pointing out that ex post facto laws are unconstitutional, Cooper writes: “Ex post facto laws impose retroactive punishment; in other words, they increase the punishment for criminal acts after they have been committed. Defendants [the state of Georgia] argue that the act [the sex offender law] is regulatory rather than punitive, precluding a finding that the act is an unconstitutional ex post facto law. This Court disagrees.”
Later on, the judge considers whether the law would have the effect of forcing sex offenders to leave Georgia – a process called banishment, and also illegal. “The act may be found to sufficiently resemble banishment so as to support a finding that it is punitive in effect,” he says.
Finally, Cooper acknowledges the criticism that the law may do more harm than good because sex offenders who are forced to move from their homes and families often slide into recidivism. “The Court finds that the act’s failure to … identify those sex offenders who are most likely to reoffend, when coupled with the fact that the instability created by the act may be harmful to the public, could support a finding that the act is excessive,” he writes.
During initial hearings on the law last summer, Cooper was particularly interested in hearing the state defend a provision that bans registered sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school bus stop. Given the tone of his opinion last week, it’s probably safe to assume that the death of the bus-stop provision will be the starting point when the legal challenge of the law begins in earnest.
I posted my reply and encourage others to do the same. Until our politicians start to call for a Sex Offender Policy Forum, I will continue to call for reform and changes, after all, it is for the children, right?
Friday, March 23, 2007
Where are the "Child Saviors"
We have to ask. Where is the outcry, where are the "child saviors,” why are politicians and the media not telling you about all the child neglect and fatality statistics?
What is truly amazing is that NO ONE and I mean NO ONE is screaming about the 2,600 some odd children that are killed each year as a result of firearm accidents. The fact that the
The Child Welfare Information Gateway web site gives this summary of child abuse in 2004. “According to the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System's most current report, Child Maltreatment 2004, of the approximately 872,000 child abuse and neglect victims in 2004, the largest percentage of perpetrators (78.5 percent) were parents. Other relatives accounted for an additional 6.5 percent, residential facility staff for 0.2 percent, and childcare providers for 0.7 percent. Unmarried partners of parents accounted for 4.1 percent of perpetrators, while legal guardians accounted for 0.2 percent and foster parents accounted for 0.4 percent.
In 2004, 57.8 percent of child abuse and neglect perpetrators were females and 42.2 percent were males. For the most part, female perpetrators were younger than male perpetrators; of the women who were perpetrators, 44.4 percent of females were younger than 30 years of age, compared to 34.1 percent of males.
More than one-half (57.9%) of all perpetrators were found to have neglected one or more children in 2004. Slightly more than 10 percent (10.3%) of perpetrators physically abused children, and 6.9 percent sexually abused children. Fifteen percent (15.5%) of all perpetrators were associated with more than one type of maltreatment.
There were variations in these overall patterns when the relationship of perpetrator to the child victim was considered. Of the parents who maltreated children in 2004, 2.6 percent committed sexual abuse, while 62.9 percent committed neglect. Of the perpetrators who were friends or neighbors, nearly three-quarters committed sexual abuse while 9.9 percent committed neglect.”(4)
Again, empirical evidence that in at least 90% of the cases, the child knew his or her perpetrator, be it a family member, friend, neighbor, or someone trusted by the child.
While these and other statistics are truly shocking, we should not be surprised that there is absolutely no coverage in the mainstream media. Our media has found it is easier to target sex offenders. Are we in denial about the real problem of child abuse in
At the end of the day, we are either the most ignorant people on the planet, or the most self-centered, or the least compassionate or all of the above.
Christopher Barrios Did Not Have to Die
Christopher Barrios did not have to die, but he did, why? If we look at the events of the 2006
- Had the Georgia Representatives (led by Jerry Keen) and Senators (led by Eric Johnson) listened to Dr. Gene Able or Dr. James E Stark, and the other experts who spoke at the hearings last year, Christopher Barrios might still be alive today.
- Had they listened to the RSO’s who spoke at the hearings last year, Christopher Barrios might still be alive today.
- Had they implemented and funded RISK ASSESSMENT and a risk level system for ALL the current RSO’s and not just the new ones after July 1, 2006, as was recommended to them, Christopher Barrios might still be alive today.
- Had they listened to the experts in Law Enforcement, and not forced Law Enforcement to spend all their resources on chasing LOW RISK offenders away from churches and employment, Christopher Barrios might still be alive today.
- ALL the Laws and Restrictions in the WORLD will NOT STOP someone who wants to offend, the Sex Offender Registry does not make children safer, and neither do SAFETY ZONES; however, THERAPY DOES. Offenders in therapy have the lowest recidivism rate. Had the legislators used common sense in place of political posturing, Christopher Barrios might still be alive today.
- Because they FAILED to LISTEN to the experts, because they FAILED to LISTEN to Law Enforcement, because they were looking for election year sound bites, they are JUST AS RESPONSIBLE for the death of Christopher Barrios as the perpetrator is.
Again, I ask the people of Georgia to LISTEN to the experts, and force their elected representatives to do the same. Within the past year, these experts have voiced their concern about the new laws, well-intentioned lawmakers are enacting. Here is what they are saying.
“What you’re doing is pushing people more underground, pushing them away from treatment and pushing them away from monitoring, you’re really not improving the safety, but you are giving people a false sense of safety.” -- John Gruber, Executive Director of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers
“It may be time to do away with sex offender registration laws altogether. At the very least, the federal government should commission research to study the laws’ effectiveness. In the meantime, several changes should be made. States should differentiate between serious and non-serious offenders and only require registration of the most serious offenders. Next, public access to online sites should be dismantled, and registries should be kept at the local police stations. This would provide at least a minimal screening process to those seeking inquiries… Lastly, we should experiment with restorative justice models such as what has happened in Canada where sex offenders moving into a community meet with members of the community in a public forum facilitated by a trained mediator. This type of forum gives the community an opportunity to meet the offender face to face and express their concerns and for the offender to show the community that he is earnestly seeking to change his life.” -- Rachel King, Professor of Law, Howard University School of Law, Washington, D.C.
“Though laudable in their intent, there is little evidence that recently enacted housing policies achieve their stated goals of reducing recidivistic sexual violence. In fact, there is little research at all evaluating the effectiveness of these policies. Furthermore, these policies are not evidence-based in their development or implementation, as they tend to capture the widely heterogeneous group of sex offenders rather than utilize risk assessment technology to identify those who pose a high danger to public safety.” -- Jill S. Levenson, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Human Services, Lynn University
“I would rather have someone who has committed a sex offense be going to work every day, come home tired, have a sense of well-being that comes from having a regular paycheck and a safe home, as opposed to having a sex offender who has a lot of free time on his hands.” -- Richard Hamill, President, New York State Alliance of Sex Offender Service Providers
“We're not aware of any evidence that residency restrictions have prevented a child from being victimized.” -- Carolyn Atwell-Davis, Director of Legislative Affairs, National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
“Therapy works for these people. Let them be punished for their crimes, let them out and let them get on with their lives. Let them work. Let them have stable homes and families and let them live in peace. Harassing them, making them move and continually punishing them does far more harm than good. A sex offender in therapy with a job and a place to live is less of a threat than one that is constantly harassed.” -- Robert Shilling, Detective, Crimes Against Children Division, Seattle, WA
There is not a shred of evidence tough laws and residency restrictions have saved one child. There is however, corroboration from the experts, that Sex Offender Registries and “safety zones” are doing nothing more than giving the public a false sense of security.
Again, I call for a National Sex Offender Policy Forum. Georgia can pave the way by holding a Georgia Sex Offender Policy Forum. These forums would be comprised of treatment providers, law enforcement, jurists, victims, offenders, and their families. With the recommendations from this forum, legislators will know what laws need to be written, or amended to insure the safety of our children.
Why are we all in deep denial about this problem? As long as citizens rely on uninformed politicians, the misinformed media and myths about sex offenders, all children remain at risk. We need to come to terms with our denial and seek real solutions, and we need to do it today. How many more Christopher’s, Jessica’s, Dylan’s, Megan’s, Polly’s, and Jacob’s have to die before we WAKE UP?
At the end of the day, we are all responsible; we are all involved in the safety of our families and have an investment in the outcome of this discussion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
