Copyright 2024 All Rights Reserved.

July 17, 2024

IL Representatives Want Child Sex Offenders Living Closer To Schools –

By John Kraft & Kirk Allen

On March 19, 2021

Springfield, IL. (ECWd) –

Two Illinois State Representatives, Camille Y. Lilly and Kelly M. Cassidy, sponsored House Bill 3913, which would permit child sex offenders to live as close as 250 feet from a school or playground – currently they must stay at least 500 feet away.

Language from the Synopsis:

“Synopsis As Introduced:
Amends the Unified Code of Corrections. Provides that it is unlawful for a child sex offender with the duty to register to knowingly reside within 250 feet (rather than 500 feet) of a school building, playground, the real property comprising any school that persons under the age of 18 attend, or other specified child care facilities. Provides further requirements concerning a child sex offender’s address of registration. Amends the Sex Offender Registration Act. Removes the weekly reporting requirement for persons who lack a fixed residence (currently, both weekly and quarterly or annual reporting are required). Provides that if a person lacks a fixed residence, he or she shall not have to provide documentation of registering address. Makes conforming changes.”

Please voice your opposition to this Bill.


Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print


  • Dave
    Posted at 19:42h, 19 March Reply

    The left is working to decriminalize pedophilia, they are nuts!

    • HT
      Posted at 21:06h, 19 March Reply

      Just pay attention to the left’s tactics. Just a little bit at a time, until every little bit adds up to and piled so high that we’ll all be overwhelmed.

      Easy to think of the left as a cancer. No one ever allows even a little cancer to grow within their body if they knew about it, right? A little of a cancer is still a cancer.

      • w
        Posted at 13:13h, 20 March Reply

        Chemical castration and periodic testing.

  • Greg
    Posted at 20:02h, 19 March Reply

    Maybe these two would be OK with having these convicts live in their basements or at least in their neighborhoods?

    Come and live in my neighborhood! I guarantee you won’t be there long!

    • HT
      Posted at 21:57h, 19 March Reply

      Oh, come on. Politicians are the elite. Why would they live among us plebes? Their mansions have walls and fences and armed guards. Their kids go to exclusive private schools. They have their favorite restaurants open for them while others had to close. We know the drill by now.

  • Dennis Finegan
    Posted at 01:13h, 20 March Reply

    I would like to know the reasoning behind this bill before I throw it in the trash. No, I do not support any sort of pedophilia., and I know of no one, Republican, Democrat, nor Elite that do support them. The left isn’t a bunch of crazies supporting amoral activities, and neither is the Right. We’re people. We live next to you, work with you, volunteer with you, and yes, even go to church with you, so give this pedophile line of BS a rest, OK? It doesn’t further the discussion and only serves to lower a reader’s impression of your intelligence.

    • John Kraft
      Posted at 07:54h, 20 March Reply

      This article repeated the actual language of the Bill’s synopsis (a cut and paste) from the General Assembly website – with a link to it. At some point, you have to believe what these State Representatives put in writing.

      • Dennis Finegan
        Posted at 16:46h, 20 March Reply

        First, I don’t agree with the bill. The sponsors have to live with what they wrote., I agree. What I don’t agree with is all the left lumping together and bashing. I think for myself – Democrats certainly aren’t perfect, but neither are Republicans. I think we need a blending of policies to make real progress in almost any field.

    • PK
      Posted at 11:21h, 20 March Reply

      The distance halving part of the bill steels a repugnant synopsis. I set my reactionary bias aside and read the full text. I’ll not condemn the bill just yet, either.

  • Gus Maroscher
    Posted at 01:42h, 20 March Reply

    I sent the following text via email:


    HB 3913, would allow child sex offender with the duty to register to knowingly reside within 250 feet.

    Are you two ladies nuts? 

  • Mags
    Posted at 08:53h, 20 March Reply

    Child Sex trafficking and pedophilia has been and continues to be rampant. Do you remember we had Child pedophile Denny Hastert as Speaker of the House? I remember that no one – not one Republican or Democrat chastised him. Not one. It troubled me then and still does.

    These people who want to further endanger our children and society are sick individuals.

    If these radical Democrats running their radical agenda continue this in Illinois, the State will see a massive exodus – there will be no one left to pay the taxes to support them.

  • Derek W. Logue of
    Posted at 08:59h, 20 March Reply

    Residency restrictions do not actually work. What makes you think 500 feet housing restrictions are some kind of magical crime prevention barrier? Can Registered Persons only walk 499 feet or something?

    Most sex crimes occur in the home by someone known to the victim. Most sex crime arrests are of people with no prior sex offense record. People also wrongfully assume everyone on the registry is a danger to children, yet very few ever reoffend.

    The registry and residency restriction laws need to be abolished. Both political parties created this mess and both need to fix the mess they created.

    • HT
      Posted at 14:49h, 20 March Reply

      You seem to know how such vile crimes are committed and who are not likely to reoffend. It’s also interesting that you’d want such registry and restrictions abolished. Well, that’s an easy solution that a moral society has somehow missed. Just abolish any means of identifying criminals, abolish any legal standards and restrictions on criminals, and voila!, society has solved such crimes!

      Would you also be in favor of families of children victims having the right and free range to exercise justice on those they’ve identified as having committed those crimes? There has to be some sort of balance, right?

      • Larry Lynch
        Posted at 16:31h, 23 March Reply

        Oncefallen, who was actually only caught once, is a registered pedophile in Nebraska and Florida. He spends his life attempting to get himself off the registry most likely so he can once again troll playgrounds and middle schools for additional opportunities. This is why the registry should never be abolished.

        • PK
          Posted at 11:50h, 24 March Reply

          Go to absolute zero tolerance in hate of the thing in lieu of a vigil for abhorring the person. Then…just stay in that state.

  • GW ONE
    Posted at 09:47h, 20 March Reply

    These two women are the most liberal, far left legislators in the Illinois General Assembly, Once this pro crime Bill passes, they will move on to the elimination of the sexual predator registry. This is evil portrayed as good.

  • jannie
    Posted at 10:46h, 20 March Reply

    I don’t know the reasoning, nor have I seen any. I’m not sure the “magical” feet away from school works as those people have cars. I do find, though not justifing that more are now sex offenders when, in my day a man of 22 having relationship with the babysitter of 16 would not be “labeled”. I’m not saying the situation is right – just saying that label sticks for life.
    As some have said the registration when moving doesn’t work — And, perhaps law- enforcement complained, Personally, I feel the registration when moving is an important thing to keep in the law.

    • PK
      Posted at 19:07h, 20 March Reply

      The six years age difference may be more often occurring as you’ve described, JANNIE; but there are cases where the younger male is taken advantage of by an older female.
      In other words, a 22 year old woman taking advantage of an adolescent 16 year old male. In either of those situations, such a person or persons being “labeled” into a life of persecution seems unjust. Evidently, if someone decided to open up a day care facility next door, they would have to move, else be in violation of the 500 ft. distance requirement.

  • Golden Country
    Posted at 13:07h, 20 March Reply

    The issue with sex crimes in Illinois is the broad brush that is used to lump them together. When most people think of a sex offender they think of an old man preying on young children. Which unfortunately does happen. But many young men and women who are high school age and have consensual sex (and I will save you the trouble of posting I am not referring to rape) with someone who is younger than 17 is charged as a sex offender. Such aa a Junior having sex relations with a freshman. This does happen. Think teen pregnancy’s.

    In regards to the registry even a misdemeanor sex conviction of a 15 old is treated the same as a predatory 60 year old who preys on your children.
    Both crimes requires the individuals to register for the rest of their lives and be subjected to very high scrutiny. This is unfair and unjust to those young individuals that are exposed daily to the sexual nature and it needs to change.
    A lot of times after serving their sentence these young individuals have no place to parole too and are stuck in prison.
    And don’t think for a minute that prosecutors wont go after high school kids for these issues because it happens. Anybody remember the sex texting issue that came up a few years ago. So a 17 year old that is texting naked pictures that his 16 year old girlfriend sent him is charged with child phonography and if convicted sends the rest of his life stigmatized as a sex offender.
    This is wrong and immoral and in my opinion should be unconstitutional

    • PK
      Posted at 12:13h, 21 March Reply

      As requested, I thought teen pregnancy then remember a State of the Union address whereby the POTUS touted the rate of teen pregnancy being at an all time low. Since that was a decade or so ago, it stands to reason that this bill is attempting to make an adjustment from what could be viewed, in a lagging sense, an overcharging policy/prosecutorial stage.

  • Aaron
    Posted at 09:40h, 21 March Reply

    This is how you identify politicians who are being bought off/extorted by the deep state and Democraps. Wake up Illinois.

    • PK
      Posted at 12:00h, 21 March Reply

      Huh? What role did the original sponsor of house bill 3913 have in your REM (Rapid Eye Movement) sleep last night? Otherwise, your comment make no sense whatsoever.

  • GW One
    Posted at 11:47h, 22 March Reply

    Most Democrats in Springfield do support a hyper radical agenda. The sponsors of this wrongheaded Bill could easily be categorized as Illinois deep staters – look at the Bills they have sponsored, then voted for or against. Those that want to give them quarter, beware. The Democratic Party is patient to accomplish a long term strategy that few other states would condone today. These two Representatives are on board with this strategy, doing lots of heavy lifting for the, “get out Illinois,” ultimatum. Doubters, get the facts. Your opinions might change.

    • PK
      Posted at 15:09h, 22 March Reply

      The headline on this article elicits outrage then requests the reader voice their opposition. Why?

      On these two sponsors, where’s the ANOVA (analysis of variance) that shows the purported deep-staters’ strategy. Also, the recent headline about a senate bill received the same partisan headline. Why?

      The only other bill covered with these two co-sponsors is Rep. Lilly’s Gas Station Attendant Act, a year or so ago.

  • Fac Speaks
    Posted at 06:01h, 23 March Reply

    Sangamon County Sheriff Jack Campbell has stated that the closer you bring a sex offender to these vulnerable targets, the more likely they are going to offend. Additionally, he has stated that the bill would make our communities less safe. But he offered no research to back up his statements.

    What research does show:

    SMART (Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking with the U. S. Department of Justice) found through its research that residency restrictions do not work: (page 4)

    Maryland has no residency restrictions. Why? (see question 15)

    Why Kansas does not have residency restrictions:

    • PK
      Posted at 00:38h, 24 March Reply

      Accordingly, residency restrictions vary considerably across state lines from 2000 feet to NONE, And in addition to Kansas and Maryland, 12 other states bravely co-occupy NONE. Of these states, MI seems the most unlikely tenet. In IL, does the Sheriff consult with the Sangamon County Public Health Director or what?

  • Derek W. Logue of
    Posted at 15:31h, 23 March Reply

    HT asks, “Would you also be in favor of families of children victims having the right and free range to exercise justice on those they’ve identified as having committed those crimes? There has to be some sort of balance, right?”

    No. Vigilante violence is not “justice.” As worfully deficient as our American adversarial system of justice can be, at least there is some semblance of a trial to ensure we are punishing a guilty person.

    Last year, a vigilante murdered a registered persons and tried to justify his attack by blaming the registrant, claiming he was “leering at children” while washing his car. The killer did not stop someone in the act of a crime. Instead, he killed a man because he says he saw a guy on the registry supposedly looking in the direction of children. We’ll never know if he’s even telling the truth. What’s not to say he just made up the “leering” story?

    Feminists like to claim ONLY 2% of rape claims are false; well, assuming this lowball estimate is true, then there are still thousands of falsely convicted people on that public pillory.

    Where the line is drawn is that punishment should be limited to the Criminal Justice syatem, which, despite being in bad need of reforms, is still better than devoolving into a feudalistic system. If you want to bring back vendettas and lynchings, then you may as well revive witch dunkings and trials by ordeals. After all, where should we draw the line?

    • HT
      Posted at 20:23h, 23 March Reply

      Ah, such eloquence and virtual signaling still can’t hide your conflict of interest. Like I said, it seems that you know a lot about how these offenders commit or not commit their crimes and who wouldn’t be repeat offenders.

      Let’s just keep the topic confined to just these crimes against kids for now, but the usual suspects that are of the left politicians are just that, usual and predictable. Criminals seem to have better treatment that law abiding citizens when left politicians have their say. When in doubt, look back at most of 2020 up until now, and we can see perfectly clear who the left adore and protect.

      At the end of the day, if Americans can’t count on their legislatures to do their job and enforce laws, and instead have their legislatures arbitrarily rule according to their whims, then what good is the judicial system?

      Before you can try to be virtuous and lecture on anything remotely relevant to justice, maybe disclose your conflict of interest in wanting any and all restrictions abolished.

      Also, good attempt at deflecting by mentioning lynching or other means of punishment, but the topic at hand is about restrictions on sex offenders, of which include convicted predators on children.

      A lesson that I’ve learned well since coming to America: Never believe a lefty when they preach about morality or justice.

  • Dwight Kay
    Posted at 08:45h, 24 March Reply

    The General Assembly is dominated by Chicago style career politicians. They do their job for Chicago, with no regard for the state at large. How many people would be attracted to live in Illinois with radical legislation passed by these far left legislators? No one. HT has it correct, never believe a lefty when they preach morality, or anything else.

    • Dennis Finegan
      Posted at 19:15h, 24 March Reply

      More “lefty” bashing, just because you can. No facts nor figures. Until this division heals, this country will never return to normal. If you vote for “the other side,” you get censured, no matter how good the new law might be. It will take years to undo the Trump era. Somehow he was able to get almost 1/2 of the voters to ignore his racism, misogyny, and thousands of lies. As he said, “There are good people on both sides.”

      • PK
        Posted at 15:19h, 25 March Reply

        Mr. Finegan, I wonder why you wouldn’t stop yourself at ‘….how good the new law might be.”

  • Vicki Henry
    Posted at 15:57h, 24 March Reply

    Women Against Registry advocates for the families who have loved ones required to register. There are over 917,000 men, women and children (as young as 8 and 10 in some states) required to register. The “crimes” range from urinating in public (indecent exposure), sexting, incest, mooning, exposure, false accusations by a soon-to-be ex-wife, angry girlfriend, or spiteful student, viewing abusive OR suggestive images of anyone 18 years old or younger, playing doctor, prostitution, solicitation, Romeo and Juliet consensual sexual dating relationships, rape, endangering the welfare of a child, the old bait-n-switch internet stings (taking sometimes 12 months before a person steps over the line) guys on the autism spectrum or with intellectual disabilities and many others.

    Multiply that number by 2 or 3 family members you can clearly see there are well over 3 million wives, children, moms, aunts, girlfriends, grandmothers and other family members who experience the collateral damage of being murdered, harassed, threatened, children beaten, have signs placed in their yards, homes set on fire, vehicles damaged, asked to leave their churches and other organizations, children passed over for educational opportunities, have flyers distributed around their neighborhood, wives lose their jobs when someone learns they are married to a registrant. Academics and researchers indicate 3 things are needed for successful reintegration; a job, a place to live and a “positive” support system. Banning a registered citizen from drug treatment centers is not positive support.

    The Supreme Court’s Crucial Mistake About Sexual Crime Statistics – ‘Frightening and High’ (Debunks the high recidivism rate cited by retired SCOTUS Justice Kennedy and current Chief Justice Roberts)

    It is very important that you read the abstract below and then the full 12-page essay by Ira Mark and Tara Ellman.

    ABSTRACT This brief essay reveals that the sources relied upon by the Supreme Court in Smith v. Doe, a heavily cited constitutional decision on sexual offense registries, in fact provide no support at all for the facts about re-offense rates that the Court treats as central to its constitutional conclusions. This misreading of the social science was abetted in part by the Solicitor General’s misrepresentations in the amicus brief it filed in this case. The false “facts” stated in the opinion have since been relied upon repeatedly by other courts in their own constitutional decisions, thus infecting an entire field of law as well as policy-making by legislative bodies. Recent decisions by the Pennsylvania and California supreme courts establish principles that would support major judicial reforms of sexual offense registries, if they were applied to the facts. This paper appeared in Constitutional Commentary Fall, 2015. (Google: Frightening and High)

    A study reviewing sex crimes as reported to police revealed that:
    a) 93% of child sexual abuse victims knew their abuser;
    b) 34.2% were family members;
    c) 58.7% were acquaintances;
    d) Only 7% of the perpetrators of child victims were strangers;
    e) 40% of sexual assaults take place in the victim’s own home;
    f) 20% take place in the home of a friend, neighbor or relative (Jill Levenson, PhD, Lynn University)

    There is a tremendous need to fund programs like “Stop It Now” that teaches parents how to begin and maintain a dialog with their children to intervene before harm occurs and about grooming behaviors as well as other things at age-appropriate levels in their Circles of Safety.

    Our question to the public is one of, when does redemption begin? Ever? When are human beings required to register given their lives back without the stigma and hate?

    We support the principles of Restorative/Transformative Justice; restore the victim, offender AND the community. Unfortunately, our justice systems, federal and some states, prefer to annihilate human beings using mandatory minimum sentences, leaving our families destitute for years or decades and call that justice. Institutionalization is counter-productive to what we pretend to be doing.

    Our country is evidently proud to be ‘the incarceration nation’ with 5% of the world’s population and 25% of the world’s incarcerated.

    Here is an example of how our families are harmed. A well-meaning teacher printed out profile pictures of local registrants and put them on the board around the classroom. She promoted her effort to protect her students by suggesting they look at and remember those people. One student pointed at one picture and said, “Katie isn’t that your dad?” It was….

    • PK
      Posted at 11:11h, 25 March Reply

      Salutations to the informed membership of Women Against Registry.

  • as
    Posted at 15:05h, 27 April Reply

    It is very scary to think that a predator is living close to schools or places where children live. However, I am a grad student and did my semester final on sex offender registries. After a TON of research, I learned that the majority of sex crimes, especially involving children are done at home or by someone the child knows. Additionally, it is not proves that housing restrictions do any good. There has even been some findings that housing restrictions cause the sex offender to lose their job or that their family suffers because they have to move. Recently, there are sex offenders who can’t get out of jail because the housing restrictions are such that they can’t find a place to live. When this happens, they end up doing their parole time and some treatment while in jail, which makes their entry into society more difficult, possibly leading to recidivism. I would like to see less housing restrictions and much more evidence based treatment and supervision for offenders to reduce recidivism rates.

Post A Comment