| Jessica's Law has some serious flaws. Few are actually willing to discuss them because they fear being labelled as Soft On CrimeTM. The Modesto Bee points out some of the problems:
Sex offenders who prey on children are every parent's nightmare, and understandably so. But fear and other emotions must be set aside in weighing whether Proposition 83 really will make children substantially safer.
The proposition would increase prison sentences for sex offenders; require lifelong monitoring for some offenders and further restrict where registered sex offenders could live. Those sound appealing, as does the initiative's title — the Sex Offenders, Sexually Violent Predators, Punishment, Residence Restrictions and Monitoring Initiative Statute. ... We have three serious concerns: (ModBee 9/27/06)
The 3 negatives they cite:
- This law does nothing for non-stranger molestation
- It's expensive without much in the way of proven results.
- All of the sex offenders end up getting pushed to rural and suburban areas. In my opinion this is the big one. You are shipping these people off to the Central Valley, the Deserts, and Far Northern California. They are miles from the services they need and are required under law.
There are a ton of reasons to be against this law. We have other laws (including one this year by Sen. Jackie Speier, SB 1178, signed by the governor) and this is mostly duplicative of other laws. What policies it adds are actually bad policy. There is only one reason to support this law, the politicial calculus of not supporting it. It's a shame, but it even swept up Phil into supporting this bad law.
Fear breeds bad law. Kudos to the Modesto Bee, which typically isn't one of my favorite papers/editorial pages, for speaking truth to power on Jessica's Law. |
