Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just introduce yourself and let the scum bag know you know his deal and well be watching him.

Talk like this sounds tough, but seriously, you assume the SO will be afraid of you. I would caution you that if you do or say something threatening, I guaranty the SO will then also be watching you and your children.

You could also mention to the so you own a firearm

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here, yes, someone mentioned my rationale. Personally I'm ok with the proximity to the SO because they're registered, and so they're being watched.

I value my children's safety, PP. I would never put a price on that. What an abhorrent thing to suggest!

My question was aimed at determining resale value. It sounds like most people on this board are not swayed by SO proximity, unless the SO is next door or directly across the street.

Therefore, my conclusion is that not much of a price reduction can be obtained for this SO reason.

Thanks!

Okay, OP, I'll try to give you the benefit of the doubt and just say that your communication skills are weak. In the bolded statement you say you would never put a price on their safety. And yet, in the underlined quote, you say that you were trying to determine if there was a price reduction associated with a dangerous situation.

Again, I repeat from earlier, either you consider a SO to be dangerous to your children and you do NOT bit on the house at all, or you consider it to be an acceptable risk and that you will be vigilant and careful with your children and you do bid on the house. But to discuss and consider whether such a situation (especially one that is variable and can change at any time) would be worth a price reduction says that you consider this an acceptable risk but that you would subject them to the risk "for the right price" and hence you are suggesting that you do put a price on that.

Stop talking about such a situation as worth a price reduction and people will stop questioning your motives. You are clearly trying to place the "value" of SO proximity which is just plain sleazy.

Anonymous wrote:There was actually a case a couple years ago in a town where the sex offenders sued, and won, against the restrictions that they can't live X distance from a school, park, etc. It turns out the schools and parks were so evenly spread around the town that there was basically nowhere in the town they could live without being in violation.

I think this was a town in Texas, but I don't remember exactly. My point is that adding parks/schools just to flush out sex offenders may backfire. After serving their time, they have a right to reside just as much as anyone else.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just introduce yourself and let the scum bag know you know his deal and well be watching him.

Talk like this sounds tough, but seriously, you assume the SO will be afraid of you. I would caution you that if you do or say something threatening, I guaranty the SO will then also be watching you and your children.

There's no need to invite trouble. Just be aware of who the SOs are and keep an eye out. I don't think it's a good idea to go introduce yourself and say something that could be construed as threatening.

The idea of the SO registry is to give people information; not to spur on vigilante behavior. And my guess would be that the truly dangerous among them aren't going to be afraid of your veiled threats. And in fact, it could backfire and make you a target.

Be informed. Make sure you properly teach your kids about the dangers out in the world. But don't stir up trouble.

Anonymous wrote:Just introduce yourself and let the scum bag know you know his deal and well be watching him.

Anonymous wrote:They are everywhere the ones to be concerned about are the ones that haven't been caught. There needs to be stricter laws including life in prison and the death penalty nut our system full of lawyers would be against that.

Anonymous wrote:OP here, yes, someone mentioned my rationale. Personally I'm ok with the proximity to the SO because they're registered, and so they're being watched.

I value my children's safety, PP. I would never put a price on that. What an abhorrent thing to suggest!

My question was aimed at determining resale value. It sounds like most people on this board are not swayed by SO proximity, unless the SO is next door or directly across the street.

Therefore, my conclusion is that not much of a price reduction can be obtained for this SO reason.

Thanks!