Looking for Rental? Be sure and search sex offender databases!

[CarlitosBala]

Personally, I would deny somebody who is on the Sex Offender's list. This is more out of me being very paranoid, than the effectiveness of the list.

In a country where you can get a DUI for sleeping in the car, because you realize you are too drunk to drive (happened to a very close friend of mine), and you can get on the sex offender's list for taking an emergency leak behind a trashcan in some dark alley... the truth is that the Sex Offender's list is full of innocent people, who would never harm a human being, yet it makes it impossible to differentiate them from the monsters who prey on children.

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Originally Posted by CarlitosBala

Personally, I would deny somebody who is on the Sex Offender's list. This is more out of me being very paranoid, than the effectiveness of the list.

In a country where you can get a DUI for sleeping in the car, because you realize you are too drunk to drive (happened to a very close friend of mine), and you can get on the sex offender's list for taking an emergency leak behind a trashcan in some dark alley... the truth is that the Sex Offender's list is full of innocent people, who would never harm a human being, yet it makes it impossible to differentiate them from the monsters who prey on children.

True. Like denying applicants based on the fact that they had an unlawful detainer filed against them. Not fair to all either, but what are the choices? Safer to just deny them all.

[STT Resident]

Originally Posted by CarlitosBala

... the truth is that the Sex Offender's list is full of innocent people, who would never harm a human being, yet it makes it impossible to differentiate them from the monsters who prey on children.

I completely understand your point and have no argument. The only thing which irks me about this thread is that there is no question from many posts about exactly where the OP lives in a low-income retirement complex. These forums have thousands of readers yet the post was clearly written to be area-specific and even building-specific which, in light of Ultrarunner's cautionary story about the octagenarian in his locale, just feels very wrong to me. A simple general caution to landlords would have sufficed if the OP felt it necessary ...

[babygirl020173]

You also need to remember that not all sex offenders are of the statue that the TV portrays. So and actually quite a bit of them are actually on the list and their crime could be listed as Lewd and Lascivious acts with a child under 14 and in fact it could just be urinating in public where a child under the age of 14 could have happened to walk by and then report it as they saw the persons private parts. so just remember that when you all pull your junk out to take a **** next to a parked car or behind a bush when you have had too much to drink. I Agree with you STT Resident. people should never assume there are laws that protect sex offenders from people like you. remember what you say on the internet is burned into the web. you can never get rid of it. If you are not happy with the situation then move. All people have rights and you are violating them right now. This man has done his time and you were not that judge nor part of that jury and let it be know that with that attitude towards people you obviously never will be one of them either. Some of them are just falsely accused and wrongly convicted. With that being said I would becareful about what you air out out here. Just saying.

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Originally Posted by babygirl020173

You also need to remember that not all sex offenders are of the statue that the TV portrays. So and actually quite a bit of them are actually on the list and their crime could be listed as Lewd and Lascivious acts with a child under 14 and in fact it could just be urinating in public where a child under the age of 14 could have happened to walk by and then report it as they saw the persons private parts. so just remember that when you all pull your junk out to take a **** next to a parked car or behind a bush when you have had too much to drink. I Agree with you STT Resident. people should never assume there are laws that protect sex offenders from people like you. remember what you say on the internet is burned into the web. you can never get rid of it. If you are not happy with the situation then move. All people have rights and you are violating them right now. This man has done his time and you were not that judge nor part of that jury and let it be know that with that attitude towards people you obviously never will be one of them either. Some of them are just falsely accused and wrongly convicted. With that being said I would becareful about what you air out out here. Just saying.

Megan's Law is public information. This is a CA state government website.

Put in an address, and the information appears. Including photos.

It is actually law in CA that a rental contract must include the Megan's Law website address so that tenants can check for themselves whether or not there are sex offenders at their address.

As long as my intention is to protect the public, I could give you all of this pedophile's personal information right here.

This crime is not about accidentally peeing in front of someone. It is all about the intent to arouse either the adult or the child, with physical contact. This is not an accidental crime.

288. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (i), any person who willfully and lewdly commits any lewd or lascivious act, including any of the acts constituting other crimes provided for in Part 1, upon or with the body, or any part or member thereof, of a child who is under the age of 14 years, with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of that person or the child, is guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three, six, or eight years.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/di...file=281-289.6

Other types of sexual crimes can be expunged under CA law. This one is considered so heinous, that it may never be expunged.

[STT Resident]

Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe

1.I am concerned about the little ballerinas 2 doors down who think the guy in the wheelchair is safe. Who just happens to be able to walk just fine. I'm also concerned about the grandchildren that I see wondering the halls here on their own.

2. What kind of wacko are you?

1. It's a shame that the whole thrust of the criticism totally eludes you.

2. Maybe the kind of "wacko" who sees many shades of grey rather than stark black and white.