<p>I had to read this twice to make sure I wasn’t seeing things. Did this bill really just surface; was there not a law about this before? I wonder who the 4 were that voted against this bill!</p>
<p>[Bill</a> would bar sex offenders from driving buses in Georgia | ajc.com](<a href=“http://www.ajc.com/news/bill-would-bar-sex-1364777.html]Bill”>http://www.ajc.com/news/bill-would-bar-sex-1364777.html)</p>
<p>What other bills/laws have you seen that were a no brainer?</p>
<p>Of course there wasn’t a specific bill to bar sex offenders from driving buses. Why would you single out one particular class of criminal? I would hope they also forbid those with a DUI.</p>
<p>Note that the definition of “sexual offender” in Georgia includes some whose offenses were not sexual in nature.</p>
<p>[Sex</a> Offender Registry | georgia.gov](<a href=“http://gbi.georgia.gov/00/channel_faq/0,2627,67862954_86708497,00.html#86708518]Sex”>http://gbi.georgia.gov/00/channel_faq/0,2627,67862954_86708497,00.html#86708518)</p>
<p>Also, those who turn 18 and have younger girlfriends/boyfriends may get into trouble here.</p>
<p>And the reasoning behind this is…</p>
<p>(In my state, sex offenders not only have to “pay their debt to society”, but can be held virtually indefinitely until the state determines they are safe. So exactly what would be the point? And who is being protected?)</p>
<p>I wonder what Gerald Amirault woukd think of this bill.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You should know: politics. It is politically easy to be “tough on crime”. It is politically difficult to actually think about what may produce the best reduction in crime per dollar spent (on police, courts, prisons, etc.), without stopping ex-offenders who really want to reform from doing so, infringing on civil rights and liberties, or sweeping up large numbers of minor criminals into the definition of major crimes.</p>
<p>It’s interesting that nobody seems opposed to this bill because of its outrageous impact on religious freedom. It would prevent a church school from hiring a bus driver who had a sex offense, even if the church believed the person had repented and reformed.</p>
<p>I wish that states would adopt different terminology for “sex offenders” – in my mind, there is a chasm of difference between a convicted rapist/pedophile/sexual assault on a minor or incapacitated individual by a person in a position of trust and a 18 y.o. male who had six with a just underage girlfriend, or the creep that flashed his Johnson to passers-by on the bike path. (Or, in a neighboring town, the (Episcopal?) priest who liked to run near dawn – naked.) Or the teens that sext each other. Some folks should be under a lens for a long, long time – and restricted perhaps forever in terms of what jobs they’re allowed – but to impose the same degree of restriction on a tremendous range of offenders is, imo, unhelpful.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Innocent people get arrested and convicted too. It may not be possible to back them out of all of the criminal databases that their identities get pushed out to, even after a declaration of factual innocense.</p>
<p>So I am curious, just what jobs is it okay for sex offenders to have?</p>
<p>I get that pedophiles shouldn’t ever work with kids since most studies seem to currently show they really can’t be fixed. But I’m having trouble with the rest. </p>
<p>Once you’ve done your time it seems to me you should be considered rehabilitated.</p>
<p>Latest estimates I;ve seen suggest that there are 120 sex offenders for every one convicted. They hold every job under the sun - doctors, lawyers, professors, engineers, sanitation workers, schoolteachers, auto parts salespeople, ministers, and priests. In other countries, the idea of very high reoffense rates among those convicted turns out to be mythical. Here, the data seem to be equivocal. But the risk posed for those convicted who did time, and who are released is likely much less than that posed by those never even arrested.</p>
<p>Again, I don’t know what the law is in your state. In my state, sex offenders can be held indefinitely after their sentence is served until it is felt that the risk of reoffense is relatively minimal. Will there be some cases that outrage the public? You bet. But outliers make for bad law.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Apparently the only 4 rational people with any gumption in the legislature.</p>
<p>Yet more stupid grandstanding for political profit.</p>
<p>I completely agree with arabrab regarding the failure to distinguish between actually dangerous offenders and others. Several years ago, a mentally-ill young man from another state looked up the names and addresses of “offenders” in the public database of my state, traveled here, and shot and killed them. One of those murdered was a man in his 20s who had been convicted of having sex with his just-barely underage GF while himself 19, IIRC. In many cases, this could easily be a HS senior with a freshman GF. People like that do not belong on a list of registered sex offenders. It really got me when they started lobbying for people to be added to the database retroactively. Leaving aside the legal principle of ex post facto, it never seemed to occur to the enthusiasts that some innocent young men may have been persuaded to plead “guilty” to statutory rape in such circumstances who would NEVER have agreed if it meant they would be forced to register as an offender for a lifetime and appear on a public list!</p>
<p>The bill says that offenders can’t drive school buses. It also says that registered offenders can’t get a license to drive a vehicle that holds more than 15 passengers, because vehicles that size might be used to transport children. :rolleyes: </p>
<p>Sounds like it’ll still be OK for registered offenders to drive a SuperShuttle at the airport to pick up a bunch of out-of-town teenagers headed to a conference. But it won’t be OK for registered offenders to drive a pickup shuttle for a rental car company at the same airport, picking up a bunch of business travellers.</p>
<p>What they should do is limit the registry to what they describe as “A person who is determined by the Sexual Offender Registration Review Board to be at risk of perpetrating any future dangerous sexual offense.” (see the definition of “sexually dangerous predator”, as distinct from “sexual offender”). But the registry includes a lot of other categories.</p>
<p>[Sex</a> Offender Registry | georgia.gov](<a href=“http://gbi.georgia.gov/00/channel_faq/0,2627,67862954_86708497,00.html#86708518]Sex”>http://gbi.georgia.gov/00/channel_faq/0,2627,67862954_86708497,00.html#86708518)</p>
<p>Serving the same purpose as the Roman Coliseum.</p>
<p>Bread and Circuses, Toblin.</p>
<p>The legislature of the fine State of Georgia does not have a reputation for producing illuminating, cogent, thoughtful, practical or effective laws. This is the state were a teenage male was sentenced to a very long prison term for having consensual relations with a younger female. This is the state that has one of the longest serving inmates in the nation; a non-violent young fellow (yes, he was nonetheless guilty) who was sentenced at the age of 14 I believe, about 40 years ago.</p>