FL: FAC Sues Seminole County, Florida over Sex Offender Exclusion Zones Ordinance

Admin

The Florida Action Committee (FAC) has sued Seminole County and its Sheriff over the County’s proximity ordinance, which prohibits certain registered sexual offenders and predators from traveling through or being present within “exclusion zones” that encompass most of the County. The problem is that the zones are so broad and so vague that law abiding registered citizens cannot comply with the ordinance. Full Article

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify or abbreviate their name. 
  24. Please check for typos, spelling, punctuation, and grammar errors before submitting.  Comments that have many errors will not be approved. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

1 Comment
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Florida is following suit with California.

Also, from the same site, they have an article on the Iowa 20 year anniversary of the registry. Conclusion: effectiveness not seen. It was posted on their site on Sept 13th, 2015. Here’s the link:

http://floridaactioncommittee.org/on-20-year-anniversary-of-ia-registry-effectiveness-not-seen/

That’s got to be a huge revelation! I’d like to see the actual report on that. Compile that information with California’s CDCR of 99% of registered parolees do not re-offend for another sex crime. All these facts all point to the same conclusion: Registration does not do what it proposes it does.

Not to mention the unconstitutionality – it is a punishment as Alaska, Oklahoma, and Ca have used the Ex Post Facto to determine the current registration is “extra punishment” to help win its case to no longer register. If the current registration is considered “extra punishment”, then it is, in fact, punishment.

20 years is a long track record. Lots a good info here. = )

0
Reply