Proposed law could harm the state's smaller communities

WHEN WE HEAR the terms “convicted child molester” and “sexual predator,” it provokes deep seeded emotions that stir our interest. Certainly newspapers and television news take advantage of this inherent vulnerability of our psyche, but it seems that some of California’s politicians are using this psychology to pass the Sexual Predator Punishment and Control Act.

I am an avid proponent of stronger laws that protect our nation’s children, but “all that glitters is not gold.”

This is especially true with regards to this law.

Many of you may remember the Florida case where nine-year-old Jessica Lunsford was kidnapped, raped and murdered by a convicted pedophile. The outrage caused Florida lawmakers to draft Jessica’s Law.

California’s Sexual Predator Punishment and Control Act of 2006 has four main provisions, which mirror Jessica’s Law:

•To ensure anyone who molests a child under the age of 14 gets a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years or 25 years to life.

• To eliminate all “good-time” credits for sex offenders ensuring they serve their entire sentence and will not be released for good behavior.

• To electronically monitor, through GPS tracking, convicted sex offenders.

• To create a 2,000-foot “predator-free” zone around schools and parks to prevent sex offenders from living near where our children learn and play.

I have few reservations with the first three provisions of the law. In fact, I applaud lawmakers who are willing to implement these steps as a way to create a deterrent for those who have yet to commit an offense and as a way to keep those who have committed crimes against children behind bars.
Yet the fourth provision has some major drawbacks.

LET ME EXPLAIN by way of analogy if you catch a kid stealing gumballs from a candy store and ban him from the store, he can never steal from you again. But if the kid really wants a gumball, he’ll go to the next store and steal what he wants there.

People who practice deviant sexual behavior, whether it is against a child or an adult, will ultimately gratify their urges. The recidivism rates for sexual offenders, child molesters in particular, are among the highest of any crime in the nation.

Current law states that convicted offenders cannot live within 1,320 feet of a school or recreational park.

The new law would expand that by 680 feet This will have a significant impact on urban communities where population densities require schools and parks to be closely grouped. An estimated 10,000 or more offenders from areas such as San Francisco, L.A and San Diego will be displaced. Where will these people live?

They will have no choice but to move to more rural communities such as Kingsburg, Visalia or Sanger. Or they may simply move to another state and avoid the restriction altogether.

The problem here lies in the fact that these communities are far less equipped to handle the onslaught of this predatory invasion.

Is this law intended to protect all children, or just those who live in the larger cities? According to Megan’s law statistics, states are already unable to keep track of one quarter of the convicted child molesters.

If this law, although seemingly well intentioned, passes the way it is written, it will ultimately have a negative effect. Moreover, it will be the children who suffer the consequences of our actions with t

heir bodies, minds and innocence.
Don’t let lawmakers pray on your psyche, investigate the issue before you vote or sign a petition.

Comment on this story in the Opinion forum >>