Comments on: Sex offender homelessness: a growing problem http://apublicdefender.com/2007/11/21/sex-offender-homelessness-a-growing-problem/ Fri, 05 Dec 2008 12:35:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Ilah http://apublicdefender.com/2007/11/21/sex-offender-homelessness-a-growing-problem/#comment-8790 Ilah Fri, 23 Nov 2007 07:17:48 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/2007/11/21/sex-offender-homelessness-a-growing-problem/#comment-8790 <i>"...and in fact, may well end up being counterproductive."</i> Any policy that deliberately undermines a factor known to decrease the likelihood of recidivism--in this case, stable residence--is indeed counterproductive. Residency restrictions are a tacit admission that no-holds-barred community notification is a failed experiment. “…and in fact, may well end up being counterproductive.”

Any policy that deliberately undermines a factor known to decrease the likelihood of recidivism–in this case, stable residence–is indeed counterproductive.

Residency restrictions are a tacit admission that no-holds-barred community notification is a failed experiment.

]]> By: Mark from Jersey http://apublicdefender.com/2007/11/21/sex-offender-homelessness-a-growing-problem/#comment-8739 Mark from Jersey Thu, 22 Nov 2007 04:09:40 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/2007/11/21/sex-offender-homelessness-a-growing-problem/#comment-8739 I hope the decision of Georgia's Supreme Court, in finding that 1000-ft. residency restrictions are unconstitutional, will set a precedent, in where the justices found the following: "sex offenders face the possibility of being repeatedly uprooted and forced to abandon homes in order to comply with the restrictions" and the residency restriction: "is unconstitutional because it permits the regulatory taking of appellant's property without just and adequate compensation." S07A1043 MANN v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT of CORRECTIONS et. al. <a href="http://www.gasupreme.us/pdf/s07a1043.pdf" title=".PDF "> I hope the decision of Georgia’s Supreme Court, in finding that 1000-ft. residency restrictions are unconstitutional, will set a precedent, in where the justices found the following:

“sex offenders face the possibility of being repeatedly uprooted and forced to abandon homes in order to comply with the restrictions” and the residency restriction:

“is unconstitutional because it permits the regulatory taking of appellant’s property without just and adequate compensation.”

S07A1043 MANN v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT of CORRECTIONS et. al.

]]>