Replies

I dont live in a small town but given your stated parameters, there are still lots of residential areas left. The problem is that "I" would not want to live within 2000 feet of a sex offender either. I dont believe that repeat sex offenders should be allowed in the general society anyway.

I'd agree about repeat sex offenders, if that term is tightly defined. They should be imprisoned or executed.

But the Iowa law does not do that. Instead it singles out a few neighborhoods for the concentration of sex offenders. Suppose a family with several young children lives in such an area. Not only are their property values likely to drop radically, but the danger to their kids is raised by the concentration of sex offenders in their neighborhood. Will Iowa reimburse such a family for the damage that it has caused them?

>>But the Iowa law does not do that. Instead it singles out a few neighborhoods for the concentration of sex offenders. Suppose a family with several young children lives in such an area. Not only are their property values likely to drop radically, but the danger to their kids is raised by the concentration of sex offenders in their neighborhood. <<<

ok, so maybe I misunderstood your original post, did it indicate that the towns of Iowa are so small that using the 2000 ft no sex offender zone surrounding a school forces the sex offenders to seek residence in a small area of town? which would be the 'few remaining' parts of the town? And, isn't that all that is left for anyone?.... the few remaining parts of town?