Oct 11 2007
“No candy” signs for Baltimore sex offenders is a start…
I clicked on a Drudge Report headline “Police plan ‘no-candy’ signs at homes of sex offenders for Halloween…” because it looked like a police department was being proactive in protecting children from these beasts. The Baltimore police are indeed taking steps to minimize the chance contact that known sex offenders might have with trick-or-treating children. Unfortunately the signs that read “No Candy At This Residence” aren’t mandatory for the sex offenders.
The idea of the signs is a start, but a great deal more could be done to protect the children of Baltimore:
-The signs could be mandatory.
-There could be a sign that clearly states that the resident is a sex offender.
-There could be reasonable laws and sentences that actually protect the potential victims by not unleashing these monsters back on society.
I would also hope that the parents are doing their part to keep their children protected. Two simple steps can be taken by the parents:
-Parents can review the sex offender registry for their area.
-Parents should be accompanying their children while trick or treating.
-Common sense dictates that parents take their children only to houses of people they know!
Common sense dictates that parents take their children only to houses of people they know!
Victims usually know their abuser.
Fair enough, how about common sense dictates that parents only take their children (it is important that the parents are present) to the homes of those they know and trust?
I wish more parents had common sense. I know I’m a party pooper, but we never took our child trick or treating or allowed her to go. Period.
It just seems to be looking for trouble in my book. Plus, we’ve always attended fantastic churches that have had parties that far out do trick or treating.
No knocking on doors asking for candy for my kid.
As a disclaimer, I think she turned out just fine and doesn’t appear to be scarred for life by missing out on trick or treating?