By Steve Pomper
State planned to put nearly a dozen convicted sex offenders in the rural community of Tenino, WA. (Pop. 1,870 est.) without notification.
Just how far are the anti-law-and-order radicals willing to go to subvert public safety? We’ve seen nationwide how far activist mayors, city councils, judges, and Soros-styled prosecutors have gone to show contempt for law-abiding people, even victims of violent crime.
According to The Center Square, “Earlier this year, a decision to house convicted sex offenders in cities such as Enumclaw [WA] without notifying the community drew outrage from local residents.” Cops risk their lives to protect their communities, only to have state officials put those vermin back among the people—without warning them.
Think I’m being hyperbolic? Live 5 News recently reported, “Two U.S. Marshals were wounded Friday morning in the Columbia [SC] area while attempting to arrest a fugitive from Georgia wanted on charges that included child rape.
“Both deputy marshals were being treated for non-life-threatening injuries.
“[The suspect] was pronounced dead at the scene from an alleged self-inflicted gunshot wound.” At least he won’t be moving next door to another potential victim.
The suspect was wanted for “child rape, aggravated child molestation, aggravated sexual battery and two counts of child molestation.” I wonder. In Washington, would he have eventually been allowed to live next door to unsuspecting families?
But the radicals are going even further. Now, they want to make it “illegalto notify communities when a sex offender moves into the area on the grounds that such policies undermine public safety.”
Who’s worse, convicted sex predators or the government officials and community activists who make preying on kids easier for them?
For these radicals, everything is backward or inverted. In what universe does notifying people about sex predators living among them weaken public safety? This position is morally and ethically indefensible.
I remember something in a similar vein, though more administrative in nature, which happened sometime after the Seattle’s 1999 WTO riots. It wasn’t enough that my department had a name tag policy for officers, which is normal. No, in 2000, because of the mostly peaceful “not-rioters’” complaints, the city council made cops wearing name tags a law. They even included the font size: 24-point typeface minimum.
The law also prohibited officers “obscuring” their badge numbers with a black shroud (band) worn to mourn a fellow officer’s death. If city officials didn’t have such scorn for cops, they could have just exempted officers during the mourning period.
NYPD officer wearing badge shroud at cop funeral
Now, outlawing the notification of people about sex offenders in their neighborhoods is obviously a more important issue than name tags. However, I use it to show the way radical leftist officials are weaponizing the law against the good to help the bad. This ridiculous name tag law shows the same general contempt for police officers as outlawing sex offender notification shows for a community.
Back in 2008, every convict’s good buddy, Gov. Jay Inslee, conjured a 13-member Sex Offender Policy Board to conduct sex offender policy and case reviews.
In 2021, the pro-sex-offender radicals passed legislation “calling for ‘equitable [Ding! Ding! Ding!] distribution’… of sex offenders,” including in rural communities with limited public safety resources. Isn’t that so lefty. They only want people to share—sex offenders.
Also, Despot Inslee and his criminal coddling cabal cannot possibly tolerate any backwoods, back-talking riffraff. So, what are authoritarians to do? Outlaw telling voters a convicted sex offender is moving in next door, of course.
Pro-Criminal, Anti-Cop AG Bob Ferguson and Gov. Jay Inslee
One state plan was to relocate 11 sex offenders from a state prison on McNeil Island to the rural community of Tenino. And it’s not just the public they won’t notify. Local government officials told Fox13 that state officials did not inform them of the plan.
According to radio talk show host Ari Hoffman, Inslee’s review board is considering “revisions to sex offender sentencing ranges” and is reviewing “post-conviction policies.” How many people believe they will increase those sentencing ranges? Okay, you can stop rolling on the floor laughing your asses off. And how many folks think the post-conviction policies will favor the law-abiding public over the convicted sex offenders? Never mind, just stay on the floor.
Co-signed by a Washington gubernatorial candidate, the reptilian Attorney General Bob Ferguson and 34 blue state AG co-conspirators published a letter reiterating that “placing restrictions on sex offenders ‘actually undermine public safety, the exact opposite of what lawmakers and the public so confidently assume they accomplish.”
Oh, right. We can trust them because their radical anti-rule-of-law legislation and policies have worked so well to keep the American public safe, right? Now, I’m on the floor laughing my ass off.
The proposed law reads, “sex offense registries should be reserved exclusively for the use of law enforcement, and community notifications should be prohibited.” Not simply not required but “prohibited.” They also advocate for removing from the registry all convicted juvenile sex offenders.
Even that’s not all. They’re also “against GPS monitoring, residency restrictions and limits placed on a convicted sex offender’s internet access.”
Adding to the extreme malice involved in these malevolent decisions, remember, these sex offender coddling officials want you to believe they’re doing it because being more lenient with these heinous criminals will somehow make the public safer.
According to a sex-offender recidivism study completed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics and released in 2019, “State prisoners released after serving time for rape or sexual assault were more than three times as likely as other released prisoners to be arrested for rape or sexual assault during the 9 years following their release.”
