VIDEO: Volusia County Council Considering Banishment Ordinances for People on the Sex Offender Registry
The Volusia County Council members were considering drafting an ordinance that would expand the state’s residency restriction requirement from 1000 feet to 1500 feet for all people on the sex offender registry. Additionally, they wanted an ordinance that would make it illegal for any adult who was unaccompanied by a minor to enter a county playground area.
Fortunately, there were members of the council who preferred to listen to sound judgment rather than unmerited hysteria on parts of the proposed ordinances. Some council members expressed concern for unintended consequences and questioning if there was a need for such ordinances.
Unfortunately, though, the council did vote to proceed in the drafting of an ordinance that would expand the residency restrictions for those labeled as a predator to 1500 feet in the unincorporated parts of the county.
Watch the video below or on YouTube.
I’m so glad I moved out of Florida. Now I’m free.
I am astounded at the rational discussion and fact based procedure. It can happen and it can be fruitful.
I will be 71, birthday upcoming.
I have lived away from Florida since my release with my sister and her family since my release, (7) seven years ago: I re-register every 3 months.
I agreed to leave Florida because my sister expressed several reasons; 1) Florida is a restrictive state, becoming more so each day, 2) the state I (she has) lived in has a way (method) to make you free. 3) F**k my husband, his ways.
Maryland has failed, Florida has not. My sentence was enhanced almost six years for a crime I pled guilty to & turned myself in-for over 10 years prior to the DUI charge current.Why am I not surprised?
Well what I saw was one there was a board member who had experience and knowledge of these situations and the fortitude to speak up and a chairman who allowed the conversation to be discussed to the extent possible. Even though one member was completely drunk on the cool aid he’d been served. If it hadn’t been for the one who had been a Judge there would have been a completely different outcome. But even in spite of that they agreed to move forward with regulations they saw as useless because any sexual predator that was a danger and was known of was in prison. So as mentioned it’s just feel good legislation with no examples of a need for it.
Florida is the battle ground State where they ( the State) and us ( the banished) fight it out. They want us to never be ” free” from persecution and punishment and if they can’t keep us in Prison, then they will force us out ( not in my neighborhood) by any means. And they will try to drive them all out until we can’t and don’t have a chance or a choice. Those who feel ” safe ” in other States or counties remember one thing that was talked about..” it’s working in other states”.
Not sure making people move retroactively would hold up in the supreme court. That would 10,000% be punishment and any judge who disagrees should be disbarred and undergo a mental health evaluation. I am not kidding, just because you do not like us, you still have to do your job. If you are a judge and cannot uphold the law regardless of your feelings, you need to find another profession like working at Starbucks.
Retroactively kicking people out of their home for something that was done in the past, and for some decades ago should cause every council member to be removed. Most of us are not even on paper anymore.
5 years ago, interesting read,,,,,,,,,,,,,
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/making-sex-offenders-pay-and-pay-and-pay-and-pay/
When rational arguments, take a backseat to irrational law’s.
I watched it live, for a long long time. But I think even though they decided to look at it again it’s not necessarily a loss yet. They said the area eligible for registrants to live would be cut by a third. If they tried to make people move because the new address restrictions that is a huge law suit. So it’s not great to think of it in terms like that, because people have to suffer until the courts get it right. But I really think this is important because at least one of them is concerned but losing that much area.
This nation is based on LIBERTY (that means freedom). It should be an extremely rigorous task to restrict any liberty, whatsoever! It should be an extremely difficult, uphill battle to restrict the freedom (Liberty) of any citizen (such as taking away the right of ordinary persons, of any age, to swing on a county-owned swingset). I was glad to hear such a lively debate, but not one of these men pointed to the US flag behind the dais nor mentioned the words “liberty” or “freedom”. They simply discussed the effect of a new ordinance instead of the PRINCIPLES that must guide any sort of discussion of this sort – namely, the Liberty and Freedom that this nation was founded on! —Furthermore, removing the available dwelling units in the county ( by 1/3rd) of returning citizens who have completely and entirely paid their debts to society, when evidence of the efficacy of this is lacking would have been extremely unjust. I am glad that these fine people demanded evidence first!
Liberty is a nebulous concept. Just look how that hate group “Mon’s for Liberty” has co-opted and hijacked “liberty” and radicalized conspiracy theories for their own personal message of entitlement.
They don’t want “liberty for all,” because that would take away their hate messaging and make them irrelevant. They can’t exist without marginalizing and witch hunting out groups.
They’re just coat-tailing the “child safety” propaganda train to make their message appear relevant.
Article related to the story https://www.observerlocalnews.com/news/2023/jun/27/county-council-to-explore-increased-residence-distance-requirements-for-sexual-offenders-predators/
Ask for something extreme so that the thing you really want will seem more acceptable….
Cause this plan has proven to be effective????
Per the U.S constitution (Make what you want of it, that is what lawyers and judges do)
Amendment XIV
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.