My goal in the coming year is to better understand why some things, in this brief and transitory life, are as they seem to be. Not to accept it, necessarily, but just to be able to make sense of it.
For instance, I am unable to figure out why D.C. taxpayers are being called upon to provide shelter for a man who, according to Mark Segraves of WRC-TV (Channel 4), was charged with several sex offenses and assaults in Prince George’s County nine years ago, pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a year and a half in prison. Full Article
Mr. King of the Washington Post,
I just read your recent piece, Colbert King: Why did D.C. house a sex offender near women and children? http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/colbert-king-why-did-dc-house-a-sex-offender-with-women-and-children/2014/12/26/ee14df22-8ba2-11e4-a085-34e9b9f09a58_story.html
I have been following the news on Eulis Knox living in the D.C. shelter as a Registered Sex Offender (RSO) along with his girlfriend and her daughter. There have been no claims of abuse by Mr. Knox at the shelter. I have noticed how many reporters and columnists have included the story of Relisha Rudd who was taken by a shelter employee who was NOT an RSO attempting to connect the two issues as one simply because of the location.
Once Mr. Knox’s status as an RSO was discovered he was moved to another shelter, but that’s not acceptable to you!
You know when people start a sentence with “I’m not a racist, but…….” And in the end it turns out they are a big old racist, well that’s pretty much exactly what your column does. “The milk of human kindness flows freely throughout my body. I believe in lifting up the lowly, scattering the proud and making sure the hungry have something to eat. I long for a world of no pain, tears or mourning. I try to open the door to my heart to others. But….”
You go on to then say, “The obligation to place convicted sex offenders in ¬taxpayer-supported housing is a city priority beyond my grasp”.
That’s not human kindness.
That’s not lifting up the lowly.
That’s not opening your hear to others, that’s slamming it tight and screaming I don’t deem you worthy.
That’s denying them a second chance.
That’s refusing them shelter, food and support.
You’re trying to promote mandatory reporting in your column but you are in fact outraged with the “obligation” to place RSO’s in a taxpayer-supported shelter.
That Mr. King, is cruel and unusual punishment.
• Do the D.C. shelters ask about drug dealer convictions? No.
• Do the D.C shelters ask about drug user convictions? No.
• Do the D.C. shelters ask about murder convictions? No.
• Do the D.C. shelters ask about robbery convictions? No.
• Do the D.C shelters ask about burglary or larceny convictions? No.
But they do ask about sexual convictions, the second lowest recidivism (re-offense) rate nationwide.
Because of the myth, fear, hate and prejudice against those who are listed on America’s public Sex Offender Registries.
Don’t try to cloak your true intent under the guise of “human kindness flows freely through my body”. Just like the Grinch, your “heart is an empty hole”. Emotion, anger and vengeance is the driving force to “weed out” the RSO’s just like your column claims not to be about those Sex Offender Registries or denying those in need with assistance but in the end that’s exactly what your column is about, hate and anger towards Registered Sex Offenders. At least own it, if you’re going to use your column to preach it.
A volunteer advocate for data-driven reform of Virginia’s Sex Offender Registry and Laws since October 2008
King’s column was pretty ugly, but the responses were quite good. More are needed.