[fabsroman]

Val,

I re-read the letter too, and while I think your heart is definitely in the right place, I have questions about it.

Are sex offenders generally poor? Is that why they can only afford lower income areas and/or rental properties? What is the ratio of lower income sex offenders compared to middle income and wealthy sex offenders? What is the ratio of lower income, middle class, and wealthly compared to the population as a whole?

Just wondering if the increased risk of sex offenders in poor neighborhoods is true when compared to the population at large?

Now, the proposal to allow cities to limit the number of sex offenders that live within that city is probably a little tough to enforce and will probably be even tougher to pass. Would this be a federal law? Probably would have to be? Would it be consitutional (i.e., would it be cruel and unusual punishment?) I am all for castration, but that would definitely be cruel and unusual punishment. Would the cities be allowed to establish their quota of sex offenders allowed, or would it be set by the federal government? If you allow the cities to set their own quota, why wouldn't they set it at zero?

With that said, I don't disagree with harsher sentences, but you have to remember the purpose for jail sentences. They are to rehabilitate and to pay back the burden to society. I would like to see the jail time reflect the crime and would hope that it does where a person is found guilty of a heinous crime. Also, lumping all sexual offenders in a single group is kind of tough. How can a guy that grabs a woman's rear in a bar be the same as a child molester that goes all the way (for lack of a better term that is family friendly)? How can you give each of them the same amount of time? How about death? Would they both deserve it? Probably the child molestor more so than the rear grabber.

Here in Maryland there are several degrees of sexual offenses, and each one has to be proven.