If Not In Your Backyard, Then Where?

To all imature, people who think the rest of the world should not inconvienience you-- shut the hell up.

You know who you are. You are the people who are whining about registered sex offenders living anywhere within a 3,000-square mile radius of your house. Sit down.

How dare you.

This is just NIMBY at it's worst. Listen, nobody wants to live never door to a registered sex-offender (I certainly don't), but just who do you think you are to dictate where these people can live? You don't get a say in anybody's life, but your own (and maybe your children's).

I simply have to ask you one question. If they can't live on your street... where can they live? They can't live on the next block, because there resides another selfish prick, who doesn't want them there either. That leaves the only option to set them out in the desert somewhere, away from any other person.

Isn't that little over the top? I mean, we don't live in 'the Scarlet Letter', nor is this 'Les Miserables'. We should not have the option to physically label these people for what they have done.

Let me put this another way-- In my many years as a college student, I have taken several Black Studies courses. One day, my professor brings in the covenence from the neighbourhood where he and his family resides. Less than 40 years ago, he would not have been permitted to own the house he currently lives in, simply because he is black. Now we are saying that because someone made a mistake in their life, we fear they might inconvienience your life-- you have been taken out of your comfort zone. Boo hoo. What do you think you are doing to these people?

You are the same people who demand more prisons... but not anywhere near your house. Guess what-- you can't have your cake and eat it, too. Pick one side of the argument.

But some of you have the right idea. We need to keep our streets safe-- and changes need to be made. I certainly don't have a problem with 'Class 1' offenders being released back into society. 'Class 2' might get a bit iffier. But, 'Class 3'-- those most likely to re-offend-- now we have a problem. If they are likely to re-offend, then they are not fit to return to society. It means they have not be rehabilitated, doesn't it? Isn't rehabilitation one of the primary objectives of our prison system? Then don't put us in harm's way, like that. If you're 'Class 3', then you've be pre-approved for an extended stay in our luxurious prison system. And if the prisons start to get overcrowded-- we can build more prisons, or reopen ones that have been closed. It is a good use of our tax dollars.

And to those of us on the streets, there are other things we can do to not be bothered with the fear emitted by having a sex-offender in our area. First, don't let your kids play in the front yard. It's bad enough you yell at me for driving 26 in the 25 MPH zone. It's even worse when you drive 15 on that same street. But you have a backyard for your kids to play in-- and you can have them protected by a fence. Secondly, treat the residences of registered sex-offenders the same way you would a HUD home. Seriously, none of us know which homes on our streets are HUD homes. (At least, we're not supposed to know). So don't tell us where the sex-offenders are living. It is our knowledge of the subject, our protusion into someone else's life, that gets us into trouble. We don't need to know. (This would sound a lot better in conjunction with my idea of keeping 'Class 3" offenders in jail).

I really don't understand why anybody can they are so much better than anyone else, that they can't live on the same street as them. If you think you are so much better-- leave. Start your own community elsewhere. Someplace you can make your own rules. If you need an example-- do some research on Germany from 1920-1939 and East Germany from 1960-1990.