Sexual offenses; prohibits convicted adult from residing in proximity to children, penalty. (HB1823)

Introduced By

Del. Glenn Oder (R-Newport News)


Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law


Sex offenses prohibiting residing in proximity to children; penalty. Prohibits an adult convicted of certain sex offenses from living within 500 feet of a playground, recreation center, athletic field or facility, or public pool. A violation is a Class 6 felony and there is an exception if the playground, recreation center, athletic field or facility, or public pool was established subsequent to the offender's conviction. Read the Bill »


Bill Has Failed


01/11/2011Impact statement from (HB1823)
01/11/2011Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/12/11 11100006D
01/11/2011Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
01/11/2011Impact statement from VCSC (HB1823)
02/08/2011Left in Courts of Justice


Susan Caperton writes:

While I am glad this is not retroactive, I do not agree with this bill. If someone has served a prison term and needs to live with family when they are released, this could prohibit that capability. Also, if someone does not have a place to live, they could end up with civil commitment. I have read articles where people are put in civil commitment if they do not have a place to go. Also, I thought there was already a law like this.

Editor’s Pick
Susan Caperton writes:

Ok, I just read the impact statement for this bill. It says there have been NO violations of the current law. So if there is no fire, why the firetruck!

Rickey Moore writes:

Again, a Good Parent that assumes the position of Power and Authority over those in their care, also acknowledges the Responsibility that is equally attendant. The Bad Parent only assumes Power and Authority. So, in cases like this, the Good Parent would see to it that a good alternative place to live (not back in prison) would be provided by the State. Otherwise, we are left with the Bad Parent style of parenting.

I understand this because I was one myself. The difference is that I see it clearly now and repent of my actions in the past. But, I can spot and call it when I see it now. No good can come from keeping a person down by a label. That is how we committed our crimes objectification. Ric

stephen writes:

It's clear this delegate is just looking for votes, and knows nothing about the subject. All the facts show these kind of laws to be useless and a waste of taxes.

Dr Bob writes:

Dear Delegate Oder and the Courts of Justice Committee:

I thank you in advance for taking the time out of your busy schedules to read my opinion.
It’s hard to understand introducing a Bill prohibiting thousands of people required to register from living 500 feet of a playground, recreation center, athletic field or facility or public pool. This Bill proses residency restrictions when residency restrictions have “failed across multiple States” over the past five years. Trying to implement, enforce, and the costly court contests attempting to define and defend these restrictions that protect absolutely no one.

There is significant studies and literature spanning 20-30 years that (unbiased) demonstrates sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rates of any criminal group. The literature describes residency/bus stop/parks/ recreation centers/swimming pool restrictions having “zero impact on re-offending or safety of society”. Credible studies show when you make a segment of society a pariah to society and deny them the ability to obtain a home and the ability to work, the results are costly and devastating across the spectrum.

Yet, legislators have done nothing to evaluate, study, or even consider actual individual risk. No consideration of the plethora of sex offense literature and studies available. Instead costly and ineffective legislation continues to proliferate every year such as HB 1823. HB1823 legislation offers absolutely no value to protect society, it’s erroneous, and appears to be politically driven and fiscally expensive.

If legislators are truly interested in protecting society, then why include people who have already proven in Virginia courts they are “no risk to society” and subsequently removed until SORNA 2006. Virginia legislation returned these people back into the growing and costly registry. The thousands of Virginia registry registers are now all legislated as “violent offenses” which mask the very few that are truly risks to society. Is this a well thought out plan to protect society with a return on Virginia tax payer investment (ROI)?

This Bill will cost tax payers precious funds, for no other reason but to dam/devastate anyone required to register as a sex offender. This Bill will certainly impact the innocent children of people required to register and it protects absolutely no one from someone intending harm. What about the severe impact and abuse from the superfluity of sex offender legislation that impacts innocent family members and children? Is the harm caused from bad legislation towards the innocent children considered acceptable in favor of the majority?

This proposed legislation protects absolutely no one and is not feasible to enforce. Instead, it specifically targets to restrict large areas of Virginia from its “taxpayers” because they are legislated to register as a sex offender in Virginia.

Virginia legislation continues to create a sub-human class of people for which Virginia has a long history.

I am laboring as to exactly why this Bill was even introduced after reading the lengthy burden of registration requirements. I can’t grasp any good value in this Bill or the ROI cost to taxpayers.

Again, I appreciate the opportunity and your time to read my opinion.

Mary writes:

Died with no action, because it was based on emotion and hate not on facts or statistics.