Ohio bans child sex offenders from working with kids
In Senate Bill 16, one of the two major criminal justice reform bills, lawmakers included a provision to prevent violent sex offenders from working or volunteering in a position with extensive contact with children. This originated from House Bill 459, which was introduced by Cutrona and state Rep. Jeff LaRe (R-Violet Twp.)
“Previously, Ohio did not have any laws on the books that would prevent a child sex offender from volunteering in a role with children,” the lawmaker said. “This will protect our children and keep them safe.”
The language around the bill could be a legal mess, according to Case Western Reserve University Law Professor Mike Benza.
“The statute is very particular. It’s not that you are employed by a company or agency that has contact with juveniles or with minors, but that the individual position is a position in which you would have extensive and unaccompanied conduct or supervision of a child or a minor,” said Benza.
Benza points to vague language in the bill that leads to more questions about how it could work, for example, in a haunted house setting.
I guess that includes us wrongfully convicted people too. Entrapment cases. My case was all about corruption in Wisconsin’s court system.
https://urbanmilwaukee.com/2022/03/31/your-right-to-know-shadowy-business-courts-corrupt-justice-system/
Ah yes. The vague wording that leaves open a wide range of interpretations and enforcement. AKA Florida law. Figure out what exactly what job positions satisfy unaccompanied and extensive contact with children. And then list them. Shouldn’t be too hard to do if you put any effort into it.
In theory sounds like a good idea. But Ohio tier classifications appears to be much different than most other states . Some of the offenses that are listed in the tier 1 for Ohio could put one on a tier 3 in Missouri. So if someone moved from another state would they reclassify them or would they remain a tier 3. They compared Ohio to Arkansas but there are 48 other states all with a different view as to what a sex offender is and how to classify them. Until they get together on the same page it’s all just more smoke into a smoke filled room full of smoke.
So, this law would retro- actively affect a person’s right to work at a job or volunteer with their own children even after they’ve completed their sentence? How can you take away their rights without them having committed a new crime. I feel that the government’s Achilles heel is the fact that they keep unconstitutionally applying laws. If they were to say that anyone who committed this crime from here forward is subject to this law, they would have a fairly ironclad law.
I also can’t help but notice that the complaints in the article aren’t about a new crime but instead about people’s extreme fear that a new crime may be committed. Why else would the woman keep checking on the registrant at the haunted house? If it was by his actions, then that would mean anyone that was suspicious could benefit from a little extra observation… no matter their status. But no, her fears are based on society constantly trying to instill fear of registrants onto every one of us REGARDLESS of the facts. Because people are taught to fear registrants (although some are motivated by hate, not fear), people feel they must continually find new ways to protect children.
If the government would see the truth and not be motivated by scandals or big headlines, then maybe a proper education to the public on who to actually fear and how best to protect your children could be implemented. This would save the government money fighting unjust laws, protect MORE children (better serve their safety), and prevent people who are just trying to exercise their inalienable constitutional right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness after they have paid their debt to society from being trampled on because of unfounded fear.
None of this will ever end until the Supreme Court does their job.
House Bill 459, which was introduced by Cutrona and state Rep. Jeff LaRe (R-Violet Twp.) was introduced I believe about 6 months before the halloween incident occurred. To me, this smells fishy. I would not doubt if the halloween incident was a setup just to get this Bill passed because the haunted house thing was all over ohio news.
“This will protect our children and keep them safe.”
Maybe in the twilight zone, but not here on earth.
They aren’t protecting anyone considering most crimes are perpetrated by individuals not on the registry. They’re just doing this for clout, brownie points.
I’ve said it many times before, but I’ll say it again. Laws can never keep anyone safe, because laws do not prevent crime. Laws only punish crime. If laws could realistically prevent crime, then there would only need to be one law on the books that states it is unlawful to do anything bad, then everyone could go on their merry way never having to be worried about being a victim of a crime. Yeah, sounds dumb, but not as dumb as the thought that laws prevent crime.
I also cringe every time I see the phrase violent sex offender. It makes it sound like people who are labeled thus are waiting for an opportunity to kidnap, rape, and beat the living crap out of their victim, or that they already have. In my opinion, if someone is truly a violent sex offender, he or she shouldn’t even be walking free on the streets.
This!^