Sex Offenders in Florida now have Warning Signs outside of their Homes

[whitehall]

I'm all for truth, justice and the American way but it seems to me that felons who have paid their debt to society should be left in peace and their parole officers. Why not post a sign in the front of paroled junkies or bank robbers or murderers? I'm guessing that the County Mounties are campaigning for the next election.

Because junkies and bank robbers generally don't diddle kids. Sexual Predators do.

Keep them in prison if they are a deemed to be a danger to society but it's just a cheap political ploy to post a sign in front of their houses so the Sheriff can get a photo op. If they can drive they become anonymous predators anyway so why impact the real estate values for half a mile around the house just to feel good about the problem and get grand standing politicians re-elected?

 

[asterism]

I'm all for truth, justice and the American way but it seems to me that felons who have paid their debt to society should be left in peace and their parole officers. Why not post a sign in the front of paroled junkies or bank robbers or murderers? I'm guessing that the County Mounties are campaigning for the next election.

Because junkies and bank robbers generally don't diddle kids. Sexual Predators do.

Keep them in prison if they are a deemed to be a danger to society but it's just a cheap political ploy to post a sign in front of their houses so the Sheriff can get a photo op. If they can drive they become anonymous predators anyway so why impact the real estate values for half a mile around the house just to feel good about the problem and get grand standing politicians re-elected?

I don't see it that way. I see it as a proper way to label a very dangerous place for kids.

 

[dilloduck]

Because junkies and bank robbers generally don't diddle kids. Sexual Predators do.

Keep them in prison if they are a deemed to be a danger to society but it's just a cheap political ploy to post a sign in front of their houses so the Sheriff can get a photo op. If they can drive they become anonymous predators anyway so why impact the real estate values for half a mile around the house just to feel good about the problem and get grand standing politicians re-elected?

I don't see it that way. I see it as a proper way to label a very dangerous place for kids.

I understand that you see it that way and maybe other adults see it that way but that doesn't mean that it's effective.

 

[idb]

So, everyone's cool with cops taking it upon themselves to judge who's worthy of persecution and who isn't?

When did everyone become so trusting of the police?
Doesn't everyone carry a gun to protect themselves from the corrupt authorities?

 

[Montrovant]

Bumping this post because it explains those that get the signs.

I notice that a person convicted of Lewd or Lascivious Conduct twice constitutes a sexual predator. From my reading of the relevant law, this means that an 18 year old can engage in whatever Florida classifies as lewd or lascivious behavior with a 15 year old and be a sexual predator, get one of these signs, and be stuck with it for a minimum of 20 years. That includes a lot of things, including things with zero physical contact. In fact, at the end of the statute, they felt the need to clarify that breast-feeding cannot count as lewd or lascivious behavior.

I think that some of you may be under a false impression of just what can be considered sexual predation.

Here's the Lewd or Lascivious Conduct statute if you're interested.
800.04 - - 2011 Florida Statutes - The Florida Senate

This seems like a bs sop to the public. If the offenders are truly so dangerous, why aren't they still imprisoned? This is as much as admitting that the penal system is releasing dangerous criminals back into the public. Why?

That's not true. Predators are only those who had victims under 12.

800.04 is one of the excluded statutes from the definition unless the perp is the victim's parent:

1. The felony is:

a. A capital, life, or first-degree felony violation, or any attempt thereof, of s. 787.01 or s. 787.02, where the victim is a minor and the defendant is not the victim's parent, or of chapter 794, s. 800.04, or s. 847.0145, or a violation of a similar law of another jurisdiction; or

b. Any felony violation, or any attempt thereof, of s. 787.01, s. 787.02, or s. 787.025(2)(c), where the victim is a minor and the defendant is not the victim's parent; chapter 794, excluding ss. 794.011(10) and 794.0235; . 796.03; s. 796.035; s. 800.04; s. 825.1025(2)(b); s. 827.071; s. 847.0145; or 1s. 985.701(1); or a violation of a similar law of another jurisdiction, and the offender has previously been convicted of or found to have committed, or has pled nolo contendere or guilty to, regardless of adjudication, any violation of s. 787.01, s. 787.02, or s. 787.025(2)(c), where the victim is a minor and the defendant is not the victim's parent; s. 794.011(2), (3), (4), (5), or (8); s. 794.05; s. 796.03; s. 796.035; s. 800.04; s. 825.1025; s. 827.071; s. 847.0133; s. 847.0135; s. 847.0145; or 1s. 985.701(1); or a violation of a similar law of another jurisdiction;

Predator Definitions

Perhaps I'm off on my grasp of semi colon usage, but I think you are mistaking them for commas. The semi colons are separating all of the various things which do fall under the sexual predator label. So, the part about exclusion is only this, "chapter 794, excluding ss. 794.011(10) and 794.0235". In other words, it is only excluding certain subsections of chapter 794 from the sexual predator label.

I don't know if legal statutes follow normal semi colon rules, or if I'm even correct in my understand of them, but that's how I read it.

 

[dilloduck]

Gun free zones are designated as such by signs ( I refuse to use the word "signage" ).

We know how well that works.

 

[asterism]

I notice that a person convicted of Lewd or Lascivious Conduct twice constitutes a sexual predator. From my reading of the relevant law, this means that an 18 year old can engage in whatever Florida classifies as lewd or lascivious behavior with a 15 year old and be a sexual predator, get one of these signs, and be stuck with it for a minimum of 20 years. That includes a lot of things, including things with zero physical contact. In fact, at the end of the statute, they felt the need to clarify that breast-feeding cannot count as lewd or lascivious behavior.

I think that some of you may be under a false impression of just what can be considered sexual predation.

Here's the Lewd or Lascivious Conduct statute if you're interested.
800.04 - - 2011 Florida Statutes - The Florida Senate

This seems like a bs sop to the public. If the offenders are truly so dangerous, why aren't they still imprisoned? This is as much as admitting that the penal system is releasing dangerous criminals back into the public. Why?

That's not true. Predators are only those who had victims under 12.

800.04 is one of the excluded statutes from the definition unless the perp is the victim's parent:

1. The felony is:

a. A capital, life, or first-degree felony violation, or any attempt thereof, of s. 787.01 or s. 787.02, where the victim is a minor and the defendant is not the victim's parent, or of chapter 794, s. 800.04, or s. 847.0145, or a violation of a similar law of another jurisdiction; or

b. Any felony violation, or any attempt thereof, of s. 787.01, s. 787.02, or s. 787.025(2)(c), where the victim is a minor and the defendant is not the victim's parent; chapter 794, excluding ss. 794.011(10) and 794.0235; . 796.03; s. 796.035; s. 800.04; s. 825.1025(2)(b); s. 827.071; s. 847.0145; or 1s. 985.701(1); or a violation of a similar law of another jurisdiction, and the offender has previously been convicted of or found to have committed, or has pled nolo contendere or guilty to, regardless of adjudication, any violation of s. 787.01, s. 787.02, or s. 787.025(2)(c), where the victim is a minor and the defendant is not the victim's parent; s. 794.011(2), (3), (4), (5), or (8); s. 794.05; s. 796.03; s. 796.035; s. 800.04; s. 825.1025; s. 827.071; s. 847.0133; s. 847.0135; s. 847.0145; or 1s. 985.701(1); or a violation of a similar law of another jurisdiction;

Predator Definitions

Perhaps I'm off on my grasp of semi colon usage, but I think you are mistaking them for commas. The semi colons are separating all of the various things which do fall under the sexual predator label. So, the part about exclusion is only this, "chapter 794, excluding ss. 794.011(10) and 794.0235". In other words, it is only excluding certain subsections of chapter 794 from the sexual predator label.

I don't know if legal statutes follow normal semi colon rules, or if I'm even correct in my understand of them, but that's how I read it.

Go find a an example of someone identified as a "Sexual Predator" that didn't harm a child under 12 if you disagree.