Des Moines makes city off-limits to sex offenders

Looks like the ball is rollin...

I think these laws will spread like wildfire and will be a hot topic in the coming months if not years. Any local candidates had better shore up their arguments for/against and be prepared for the questions!

----------------------
Des Moines makes city off-limits to sex offenders
Published: 10/11/2005 12:17 PM

By: Associated Press - Associated Press

http://www.gazetteonline.com/2005/10/11/Home/sexoffenders.htm

DES MOINES, IA - Iowa's largest city has joined a growing list of cities in taking action to keep child molesters out.

The City Council on Monday approved an ordinance that adds parks, swimming pools, libraries and recreational trails to a state law that bans convicted pedophiles from living within 2,000 feet of schools and licensed child-care centers. It essentially eliminates places for people to live in Des Moines if they have been convicted of a sex offense with a minor.

The vote could prompt about 300 sex offenders to the suburbs, such as West Des Moines, Ankeny, Clive and unincorporated Polk County, which are not covered by the city's ordinance.

...

Tom Bredeweg, executive director of the Iowa League of Cities, said his group has been contacted by about a dozen cities that plan to enact similar ordinances.
----------------------------------------

When I was living in Ankeny, there were threats of 'use taxes' being tossed around, as leverage against metro Des Moines. Wonder if that'll come up again.

or at least not within 2000 ft. of a school or registered daycare. Thats all right by me. Who wants those slimy pieces of crap around anyway? The guy who used to live next door to me is currently in the Iowa State penal system and will be for a long time for molesting at least one of his foster children. Good riddance to him. The only problem with these larger citieas having these bans is that they may go to smaller towns where there are no such rules in place. Thats not good either.

It is actually a state law that prohibits sex offenders from living within 2000 ft of a school or registered daycare..with the exception (I think) of anyone that has lived there prior to 2002 or lived there prior to the school or daycare opening.

What Ely, Des Moines, and I think one other city?, have done is pass a city ordinance that in affect tightens the restrictions set forth in the State Law, adding parks, pools, trails, libraries, etc. to the list of things the Sex Offenders can not live within 2000 ft of. (Basically making the city sex-offender free zones).

Like you said, passing laws like these will just send them all to one area, which will then pass the law, and so on and so on...until the towns/cities that do not pass such legislation see a higher concentration of them than they had in the past.

This will snowball until someone challenges the law and the legislation is forced to clarify things.

Nobody wants those worthless bastards around and so I propose either life without parole or create some type of exile for them. Just get rid of them. They are the lowest of the low and do not have any place in a decent society.

but what about the people in that DM Register article. The guy who was 19 and flashed a bunch of people at a party (one of whom happened to be 13) so he's now a registered sex offender. Or the 18 year-old who gets caught having sex with his 15 year-old girlfriend? They're all being lumped together with the child molesters and rapists.

Do you agree with life in pris ion without parole for a party prank gone bad?

There should be a difference between mooning someone and a pos baby raper. But I will not change my mind about child molesters. They are the lowest pieces of crap this planet has to offer and should not be in a free and decent society. Ever. But yes, the law should probably be changed to reflect the differences.

that molest children or rape women and men. I despise them and their sick acts. I agree that they should not be allowed to walk around freely in society ever again.

in the Des Moines Public Library. Keeping them from living 2000 feet from a school or child care center is just location. What's to stop them from walking up and taking a kid walking home from school or playing on the playground? Kids are still at public parks, churches, movie theaters, malls, grocery stores, etc.

Don't ask me what to do, because I'm utterly clueless! I just don't think this restrictive legislation is doing anything but creating a false sense of security in some areas making children more susceptible because they and their care-givers feel safe and let their guard down.

I can't say that I have any grand ideas on how to keep all of our kids safe either, but I am beginning to think (after reflecting on it for the last week or so!) that legislation that limits where sex offenders can live is not going to truly fix anything.

Like you said, the parks are still there, the trails are still there, the schools, the daycares, the libraries...they aren't going anywhere. By limiting where a sex offender can live we might be removing them from some temptation, but if the will is there to hurt or prey on children than they can still find them.

I don't know though..it might not FIX anything, but it may help limit it a little? Have there been any studies on this?

Why aren't we focusing on the fact that these people are out free in the first place? If these people are deemed a threat to our children's safety, than they should be locked up an isolated from them! I think a closer look at far more strict penalties for sex crimes is what is needed.

With that in mind I think it is important that there is a mechanism to differentiate between the varying sex crimes and the way they are handled. Yes, I think if someone flashes a group that includes a 13 year old then they need to be punished...its about personal responsibility and consequences for actions. But once that punishment is served, I don't think this is the type of person that deserves to be catologued and ostracized.

Limiting where a person can live doesn't solve the problem. They can still drive by, ride a bike by, walk by schools, child care centers, etc. I'm afraid that it just makes the potential victims and their families feel safer because 'no sex offender lives in my neighborhood or by my kids school'. Whoopie.

The guy who got caught six or seven years ago flashing his penis to kids at my son's elementary school lived about five miles away over by College Square Mall. Weird thing is that there was an elementary school about three blocks from where he lived, why did he go so far away to flash a bunch of little kids when he could've walked a couple of blocks?

I think this is legislation by emotional response and not a real answer to our problem which is designation of the crime so that stupid pranks aren't considered life-time offenses - potential of repeat offenses - containment of those who are deemed potential repeat offenders. (All while keeping everyone's civil rights intact) :eyes: Good luck to the legislature on that!

I just think that the 'you can't live here' laws that are being passed are a hassle on local law enforcement, are providing a false sense of security to those whose communities have the laws and harassment for the people who aren't child molesters or rapists but make stupid mistakes in their lives.

and people are saying it about gay people now. If a person committs a crime then they should be convicted and serve time. The question then comes down to what the time they are serving is for: punishment or rehabilitation. This law is close to discrimination. It sounds good, but it is taken a step too far. It is ridiculous to say that sex offenders have to live in rural areas or move to Missouri.

Back when I lived in Il. "Linc, there is a perv/pedo/rapist on your road."

"Can't be" I said. "Only four houses on my road."

"Oh huh!, I saw it on the internets."

"Sorry you are wrong, I know all my neighbors."

After a year of being informed daily by every one and their brother I got pissed and just told them to stuff it. "I know my neighbors, DAMMIT."

One night while having the young couple from across the street for a campfire I brought up the nasty rumors. The look on the guys face told me I had stuffed my size 11 in my mouth once again. Turns out this couple who had been together since 5th grade got in trouble when he was 16 and she was two weeks away from 16. Her infuriated (FUNDIE) parents sent the law after him. He was booked and charged that afternoon. (Sexual assault with girl under 16: That is all it says on the internets to this day!) Now hear is where some folks need to really pay attention:
Her folks tried to drop the charges THAT night. Guess what friends? Like the ridiculous drug laws with mandatory min, and the plethora of other REACTIONARY LAWS out there, the D.A. informed them all of this simple fact. STATE LAW required that he be prosecuted. Period, end of story, guilty, MARKED FOR LIFE.

This young man and his family will be stained forever due to the actions of an angry father. My friend is a full blown sex offender, who suffers the indignity of registration, who cannot even attend a school function for his children, drop them at daycare, school etc.

As a father of three I can think of nothing as inhuman as a true pedophile. But, I do know one thing that ranks right up there and that is the Tuna Net approach to any social ill. We continually twist and warp the constitution to qualm are fears and for what?

We said nothing about the drug war undermining our rights
>How is that 35 yr trillion dollar boondoggle going?<

We say nothing about sex offender laws undermining our rights
>Many have lost their rights, yet how many lives have been saved?<

If they are B A R D guilty, LEAVE them in jail! Leave my rights intact please!

BTW I know at least 1/2 dozen other men in similar situations.

I don't know all the answers, but I do know my father and both my parents fathers would be criminals in this "Legislate all the Evil Away" society we live in.

This is exactly the sort of thing that bugs me about this whole issue. We have to be able to differentiate between those that are truly a threat and those that made a bad decision.

These laws are feel-good laws that don't really fix anything. Sure, it makes people feel safer, but are those safer feelings warranted?

We need to address the legislation that allows sex offenders, those that are truly a threat, to be let free.

Maybe the local communities are using these laws as a way of telling the state legislature that they want stricter penalties? Perhaps this is a temporary fix...but I don't see it as doing any good in the long term.

If they are not a threat then they should released back into society, having served their, rehabilitated and able to participate as citizens.

Since that isn't currently how it works (people ARE released that are deemed at risk to re-offend), isn't it within the city's rights to propose ordinances they feel will make their city a little safer, regardless as to whether they do indeed make a difference?

I am not agreeing with these laws, I think they are a "feel good" law born from emotion for the most part. I don't think they will truly help a lot in the long term...but won't these laws open up the eyes of the legislators and make them see that the people do not feel safe? Won't it act as a catalyst for reform?

Our legislature (along with our Courts) need to go back and re-evaluate the knee-jerk laws that have been created.

I believe in the safety of our children (hell, of all of us) but these new "you can' live here" laws will cost money to enforce and keep law-abiding citizens who have gotten caught in the system from living their lives. I still firmly believe that the "you can't live here" laws will not keep true child molesters and rapists away from children. They will only create a false sense of security in these 'safety zones' and (God forbid) allow something terrible to happen.

I just heard on the morning news that a registered sex offender went on a school field trip with his girlfriend and her children. I don't know what his crime was so I can't comment on whether he's a monster or not. The school notified all the parents of the children that they was a sex offender among them and are now deciding whether or not to continue allowing parents to volunteer with the school. WTF? No more chaperons at dances? no more home room mothers? No more library or reading helpers? Just brilliant!! :eyes:

There have been stories on KCRG TV9 News last night and this morning that include an interview with the Marion Chief of Police. He is advocating that Marion follow suit of Ely, Garrison, and Des Moines in limiting where sex offenders can and can not live.

He plans to ask the Marion City Council to consider the ordinance.

I can't find any links to the story yet...good ol Iowa news.


***Can I say "I told you so"? This crap is going to grow exponentially as these laws are passed.

Not only following State law, but adding bike trails, public parks and public pools. They are being kind enough to designate where registered sex offenders ARE allowed to live w/in the city. (I guess that way we can better target and harass them :eyes:) "Oh, he lives at the corner of child molester court and rapist ravine, what did he do? Mooned a group of his college buddies at a football tailgate party and one of the guys 12 year-old sister was there and told her folks so they had him arrested, keep him faaaar away from society".

Marion's proposed ordinance is no worse than Des Moines's or Ely's.. Both cities have passed laws that add trails, pools, libraries, etc. to the state's law of schools and daycares.

Next they will add fire hydrants...then sidewalks.

I can understand the emotion these laws come from, but I think this is the start of something bad! I think it would take a hell of a politician to speak against these laws in our current emotionally-charged environment.

I am tryin to get a response from candidates running for City Council here in CR, to see if they would support a similar ordinance for CR...but I am getting nowhere.

NOBODY has an opinion right now.

I haven't even heard back from those that I have supported a ton and volunteered for!

Oooh how I love politics.

If people think these offenders should be kept away from the public, why aren't they given sentences that reflect that? I'm not typically a "law and order" type. I think the purpose of the criminal justice system should be first public safety, and secondly punishment. So, if the public doesn't feel safe with sex offenders out of prison, why are they? The practical thing to do is give them very long sentences. Are legislators reluctant to do that, or what is the problem? If recommended sentences were lengthened, local communities wouldn't have to do this bit by bit.

Really...just don't get it.

I think a lot of this ludicrous legislating is the fact that the Republicans have effectively eliminated the public's trust in the judiciary. On tort reform, mandatory minimum sentences, etc. the republicans have made it tough for the judiciary to be a co-equal third branch. Heck, just look at Delay's comments and those of Kay B. Hutchison.

I for one think Delay's attorney should be disciplined for suggesting the judge should recuse himself over alleged political contributions.