Criminal vs Victim Rights
Bill to keep sex offenders away from child victims clears committee
By Doug Thompson
The Morning News
LITTLE ROCK — Nita Colclasure of Lonoke hears the hammers pounding every day, building a new home for the man convicted of sexually abusing her daughter.
“She can’t stay at our house any more. The night terrors have started again,” Cloclasure told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday.
The committee endorsed House Bill 1564, which prohibits sexual abusers of children from moving within 2,000 feet of their victims’ homes unless the offender had bought the property before the attack.
The idea that a sex offender can or could live near a victim is absolutely absurd. We talk of freedom and repsonsibilities, but mostly freedom. Too often I hear people complain that measures to distance offenders from victims denies the offender their rights. or freedom. Usually that lame argument is followed by “they paid their debt to society.” I don’t think the problem is with a debt to society but to the person you transformed into a victim. They have rights too. If it comes between the rights of a victim and the rights of a criminal, I say the victims rights trump the offenders at least in terms of this particular discussion. If criminals are aware there will be those willing to defend their “rights” that is one less deterrent for crime. It should be understood that if you choose to committ a crime and are convicted that your rights and freedom when ocmpared to those of your victim are diminished.
C. Harris
MoreWhat.com