That is very insane .they having to relocate every three days. ..they need to take off the restrictions and allow people to have a home to live in ....that is crazy to have to relocate every three day . .what do u think should be done .independent ?

If they was such a risk .why haven't they reaffended and people didn't know they was there.why cause they Didn't cause problems or reaffend ...so if they are law abiding why restrict them with all this restriction stuff .if they are out .doing wrong .that's diff .but they wasn't. Hmm use tax payer money for education counseling .finding jobs employment .help them to integrate .taking people away of everything does nothing for rehabing.

This whole situation reminds me of a work situation a friend told me. He is in middle management. The company enacted a bad policy so he goes to his boss and tells the boss this is s bad policy. His boss tells him, this is the direction the company is going, make it work. A couple months go by and my friend gets called into his boss's office and his boss is there with the Vice President and they are asking him why things aren't going smoothly. And he is sitting there thinking because you guys have a terrible policy that is making matters worse!

That's where we are at. No one wants to tell the VP that the policy, though well intentioned is making it harder to manage sex offenders, and is making offenders less stable.

The solution would be to use evidence based policies agreed upon by the majority of criminologists. Instead we have politicians with no experience making policy decisions based on fear and wanting to look tough on crime. It's a big cycle:

1) Media reporting the worst of the worst stories lead people to believe crime is going up, when it's actually going down (still a lot of crime, we are statistically much safer than 30 years ago)

2) General public terrified of the boogie man lobby politicians to do something about it.

3) Politicians enact more draconian laws and continue to get re elected because they are tough on crime.


I'm not sure what the answer is other than not giving up. We need to continue to influence people at all levels of the truth.

Well, that was a nice, fear-mongering report. The reporter should have asked the neighbors whether any of the sex offenders had caused any problems, and asked the alderman to justify the city's residency restrictions.

The city counsel was warned repeatedly about this issue. What I don't understand is why it was allowed to pass when it contradicts a state statute that the DOC is required to follow.

The only locale that is pushing for state wide restrictions is Milwaukee. Now if they would just stop producing criminals from their communities they wouldn't need to be placed back in those communities when they are released from any confinement time.

The DOC and local law enforcement advocated against the residency restrictions when they were up for voting. The City council ignored them all, ignored the experts in the field, who were telling them that it wouldn't work. So now they get wandering and moving targets when it comes to housing sex offenders. This they would rather do than educate their children. Take responsibility for the people they groom to commit these crimes and then deal with them afterwards. They say the statute that states that offenders of any crime must be place on supervision in the county in which they offended, is to keep them from hiding from their crime. With the way residency restrictions are being implemented they are trying to hide the crimes from themselves. Complete denial.

I know it sounds harsh, but that is what they get when they implement an ordinance that does more harm than good. Now they just need a resident of Milwaukee to take this to a state court with the right argument to get the judge to repeal or suppress the ordinance there. I am not from there, I have not been damaged by the law, so I can't file it myself.

Right someone from the state to file lawsuit in court ...we not from there either.each state should take stuff to court .from one state to another .all 52 states.maybe w.a.r...if I had lived in Tallahassee or close .I sure would of been at that rally they had ....

Court proceedings cost money most offenders and their families don't have. It requires the 'right' kind of case to bring forward so that it will change the law for everyone. And you need the right attorney that will do the right things that the right times to win the case. These are far harder to find than one would think.

If this situation wasn't so sad and it would almost be funny.

It reminds my of the old Abbott and Costello comedy skit "Who's On First."

Watch this and see if it does not remind you of some the incompetence of the people who have no idea what they are doing with these laws. Nobody has any idea what anyone else is doing.

The read hilarity begins at about the one minute mark.

http://tinyurl.com/kncu8c7

rewdiazepam

BTW, this is one of the most clever comedy skits of all time.

Thanks for posting that, rew. That routine never gets old.

I could definitely see the humor about this situation if it wasn't so sad. They don't give a damn about who or what they destroy. Why? Because they only think about today and not tomorrow. Today tells them to make a 2000 foot residency restriction but I don't know if they thought of how it affects tomorrow.