this bill would need to include other places where children congregate...ie...loitering. And it would need to delete "knows or has reason to know" with "on property that is a school, day center, park, playground" etc. It would also need to include anyone convicted of lesser charges of sex offenses, non-forcible sex offenses and even public nuisances such as peeping, exhibitionism(flashing) etc.

What does "engage in any volunteer activity" mean? If a political party has someone passing out sample ballots who has been convicted of a sex crime, is that what this bill is intended to make a felony? Remember, school is not in session on Election Day, at least not in Charlottesville.

Concerning C. Cooper's comment, I understand that the spur for this legislation was a Santa Claus who was a sex offender. As drafted, it bears some relation to the specific harm that has brought it to public attention. As expanded, it would go far beyond that.

It is important to keep in mind that as a criminal statute, it has to be absolutely clear what the law prevents, so that someone who has been convicted of a sex offense can absolutely know two things -- whether the law applies to him or her, and EXACTLY what he or she is prohibited from doing.

Finally, since this is going to be retroactive, it should have some requirement that people who are governed by it be notified that there is something else that they cannot do, upon pain of being convicted of a felony. Perhaps notification by a probation officer? Or if the person is no longer on probation, what are you going to do?

I would agree with Lloyd about making the language here as clear and concise as possible. I imagine there are scenario's like the one he mentioned where a convicted offender may be on school property when children were not present.

However, very few sex offenders are ever arrested and convicted, and of the few that are, many plea down to lesser charges. Thats why I believe it should be expanded.