PDA

View Full Version : Proposed law aimed at sex offenders' parole status


Chuck
June 10th, 2005, 05:11 PM
FRANKFORT - Most convicted sex offenders would face parole restrictions
for life under a bill proposed for the 2006 session of the General
Assembly.

The proposal, co-sponsored by Rep. Jon Draud, R-Edgewood, and Sen. Jack
Westwood, R-Crescent Springs, would specify certain conditions for the
lifelong parole status of those offenders.

"We need strong, comprehensive legislation to deal with sexual
offenders," Draud said. "We have to be proactive if we want to prevent
recidivism."

Under the bill, parolees would be subject to continuous electronic
monitoring via GPS units, which they would pay for. Parolees would also
pay the costs of registration with their local sheriff's office. The
money would be used to pay for community notification.

Offenders would also be banned from working within 1,000 feet of a
school or daycare center, working or volunteering for any organization
or program that works with minors, or visiting within 500 feet of a
playground or swimming pool. They could not own computers, VCRs, DVD
players, or any other device that would allow them access to
pornography.

The goal, the sponsors said, is both to protect children and to help
prevent convicted sex offenders from slipping into past behavior
patterns.

Under the bill, some sex offenses would be ineligible for pretrial
diversion or shock probation.

Violating parole could result in up to five years in prison for the
first violation, and up to 10 years for subsequent violations.

The proposed legislation was presented to a meeting of the Interim Joint
Committee on the Judiciary during a special meeting in Newport.

During the meeting, legislators also heard from Lt. Governor Steve
Pence, who heads the state's Justice and Public Safety Cabinet. Pence
and Corrections Commissioner John Rees, who spoke about proposed
legislation that would allow prison inmates to work for private
companies while incarcerated. Inmates currently produce goods and
provide services for Kentucky Correctional Industries, but they cannot
be marketed outside the commonwealth.

"This legislation would allow us to take part in the federal Prison
Industry Enhancement program," Rees said. "It will open up prison labor
to a whole new sector of industry and teach them valuable job skills."
The PIE program is currently used in 35 states, allowing inmates there
to make money while producing marketable goods for the entire country
and world.

Under the program, inmate labor is leased to private companies, who are
then required to pay the prevailing wage. Taxes and other normal
deductions are taken out of inmates' paychecks.

"This program has so many benefits," Pence said. "It keeps them occupied
during the day, which will cut down on safety concerns. They'll be able
to make a decent wage while in prison, which will allow them to pay
child support, victim's compensation, and the state for their own costs.
And in the end, they gain valuable job skills, which will help them to
productively re-enter society when they've served their time. That's
been shown to cut down on recidivism."

A similar bill was filed during the 2005 session by Rep. Brent Yonts,
D-Greenville, but did not make it out of committee.

mark
June 11th, 2005, 12:09 AM
......................should this proposed law apply in this case??

See link:

http://www.700wlw.com/cc-common/feeds/view.php?feed_id=102&feed=/news.html&instance=1&article_id=23242


I certainly hope not ! ..................see ya Mark

kcredden
June 11th, 2005, 01:23 AM
WEll I am for this, on the most part. I like the idea, that all they do, must be paid by them. I like the idea, they'll learn skills, and make wages. (Of course, we all know some 2 bit lawyer will throw a hissy fit, and strike that down.)

I'm not as happy with probation. HOwever, I can see the need for it. Locking someone away in a jail for life, is difficult to say the least. You have to house them for 20, 30, 40+ years. At the same time, keep them from being able to escape. Yes they do at times, but it's still difficult. But lets face it. Unless you get a congress who's got the guts to enact a law that says "you offend against a child, your going to be in jail for life, with no chance of parol" nothing will change. Also as before, they'll get a lawyer who says it's cruel and inhuman. I...better not start, I'll say something I might regreat on that, so I'll end that there.

But I feel that unless a fool-proof way of curing these "people" are found, they must be kept away from society. We do have a right to protect ourselves, and our children. If they can't find help, and to stop themselves, then they must pay.

"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime"

I remember one Dear Abby of a Grandfather, finding out that he had - feelings - for his granddaughter of about 9 or so (If I remember right) He did the responsable thing. He went out and *got help* That person I admire (to a point) WE need more like him, in the world.

Anyway, to Mark's question. No, this worthless piece of meat does NOT desirve parol. In fact, he desirves the ultimate punishment, and I don't just mean the death penelty. Midevil punishment sounds pretty good about now. Anyone for tar and feathering? (IN reality, tar and feathering mean some SERIOUS pain, and injuries) Drawn and quartering? Disembowling? or how about that one king that died without a scratch on him, his killers using red-hot pokers...

GirlColumbo
June 11th, 2005, 09:49 PM
only one answer CASTRATION!!!!!!!!!!

GirlColumbo
June 11th, 2005, 09:54 PM
or sex offenders could have to wear a huge badge that says SEX OFFENDER or CHILD MOLESTER,