[D.P.Roberts]

An excellent idea! But I don't want thieves and murderers living near me either. Can we ban them as well? Please?

[PeteB570]

The Law works for me. I got no problem with placing huge areas of cities Off Limits to the molester types.

[thoughtomator]

It should be illegal for these guys to live anywhere in the US except San Francisco and maybe Baltimore (since half of them seem to live in Baltimore already). If these criminal pervs don't like it, too bad. They should be thankful that these crimes aren't punished with rope.

[Emmett McCarthy]

I'd prefer to see the classification of "sex offenders" considerably narrowed so that it includes all of the dangerous people, but ONLY the dangerous people. I heard of a case recently where a teenage boy got caught taking a leak in public and is now required to register as a "sex offender" for the rest of his life. That kind of bull$##t makes the whole thing meaningless, for one thing, and criminalizes behavior which may be stupid and indiscreet, but which is essentially innocent.

[Gorzaloon]

"The new restrictions have had — or will have — the effect of making entire small towns off limits, and several sex offenders have already been forced to move work harder to find children. "

It would be different if they "Got Better".

Some bank robbers, for example, can be persuaded not to rob banks any more.

[newgeezer]

The Iowa laws are full of good intent, but they're ridiculous for any number of reasons.

Basically, these laws give people (politicians and voters) the feeling that they've done something to protect children. Have they? I doubt it. For one thing, these laws merely limit where the perverts (and others) can reside, but say nothing about where they can go.

At any rate, these laws won't survive a proper SCOTUS review. Banishment has been struck down before.

[joshhiggins]

If they can't live in town they will be forced to live in the farm country, where I've heard them referred to as "cheap targets".