CEOExpress Blogger Private Label
 CEOExpress Home

 Total visits to this poll: 17961

This icon appears on your homepage
when there are new posts.

      Search Messages:           
AllThis Forum

Should local governments have the authority to choose who lives in their midst?


Forum View Preference: Basic | AdvancedOpen Forums/Previous Polls | Suggest a Poll
Return to Today's Poll

Sort By Newest Sort By Newest 1-10 of 827 11-20 >>  Last >

1. Patricia Pomerleau CEOExpressSelect Member
     Forum Moderator
     (4/20/2019 7:54:43 PM)
     Message ID #330783

View All Related Messages

In a not unfamiliar case, a convicted killer serves his or her sentence and is released. Released with no parole, with only one string still attached.

After presumably years in prison, release generally is to a half-way house so the now free man or woman can re-learn society, practice living skills, and perhaps even become productive again.

But what happens when the crime — now 'paid for' — was so heinous that no one wants the criminal in their midst — no matter what? That's what's facing the residents and city government of Aurora, Illinois, a western suburb of Chicago. From the NYT, excerpts:

The most widely feared person in Aurora lives in a brick building on New York Street. He attends chapel eight times a week, passes his days sorting clothes in a thrift shop warehouse, and never leaves the property of the Christian ministry that houses him.

He is Thomas Kokoraleis: a convicted murderer, a member of the notorious 'Ripper Crew' and, as of last month, a free man.

But even after serving more than three decades in prison, Mr. Kokoraleis remains a pariah. The mayor of Aurora, the second-largest city in Illinois, noted his arrival with a statement calling for him to leave. Protesters have marched outside his new home in Aurora’s downtown. An online petition demanded that Mr. Kokoraleis move elsewhere.

The arrival of Mr. Kokoraleis has raised questions about what authority, if any, local governments have to choose who lives in their midst. It has shown the complications of releasing prisoners at a time when there is a bipartisan push to reduce the country’s inmate population. And it has prompted an uncomfortable question: If not Aurora, and if not prison, where exactly is Mr. Kokoraleis to live?

Legally, Mr. K. can live anywhere. Practically, should he be able to?
  • He served his sentence, and the only string still attached is he must register with 'local authorities.' Is that enough?

  • Do victim's rights extend forever in space and time? Should Mr. K. be able to reside near those affected by his crimes?

  • Many prisoners turn to religion while in prison. Should churches and synagogues and mosques be the logical next links in the redemption and forgiveness process?

  • How should such decisions be made? By statute or by a vote of a town's citizens?

  • If not Mr. K's choice — Aurora — where?

Editor's Note: We welcome comments, posts, and informed debate from a wide range of perspectives. Personal attacks, insulting/ vulgar posts, or repetitious/ false tirades have no place and can result in moderation or banning.
Civility — Clear-minded criticism is welcome, but play the ball and not the person. This includes speculation about motives or what ‘sort of person’ someone is. Civility, gentle humor, and staying on topic are superior debating tools.
Relevance — Please maintain focus on the topic at hand. Do not attempt to solve big problems in a single comment or to offer as fact what simply are opinions.
Ponder before you post — It’s bad form to dominate a discussion either by multiple posts in a row or too many posts in a given forum.

Message edited by user at 4/20/2019 7:57:42 PM

2. D Robb
     (6/11/2019 7:05:02 AM)
     Message ID #334086

View All Related Messages
Well, Patricia you have really done it this time. You have created a question that would stump King Solomon.
The NIMBY phenomena are something that manifests itself over multiple issues. Locally funded schools combined with real estate redlining are probably the most obvious – except for Gated Communities.
When you are part of a community you get privileges, but you also have responsibilities. NIMBYs try to avoid that part or the deal. We used to have national service, which many people they were too good to do – besides, it could get you killed or maimed.
I answered Yes. If you enjoy the privileges you have to put your man pants on and endure the responsibilities.

3. Gary Patishnock CEOExpressSelect Member
     (6/11/2019 8:30:57 AM)
     Message ID #334087

View All Related Messages
"It's a free country." If one is here legally, why not?"

4. D Robb
     (6/11/2019 9:27:44 AM)
     Message ID #334091

This message is in response to Gary Patishnock ( message id #334087 )  View All Related Messages

So you think Muslims should be able to build Mosques wherever?

5. Michael O'Neill
     (6/11/2019 9:40:20 AM)
     Message ID #334092

View All Related Messages
I should be able to rent a house to whomever I want. If the city doesn't like it, too bad.

6. Tams Bixby CEOExpressSelect Member
     (6/11/2019 10:09:11 AM)
     Message ID #334093

This message is in response to D Robb ( message id #334091 )  View All Related Messages

Get a grip DRobb ...

The question itself does NOT say a damn thing about "building ANY type of building in this place or that place".

It asks a question about where a PERSON may or may not be allowed to live and whether or not local governments should have any say over that.

7. Tams Bixby CEOExpressSelect Member
     (6/11/2019 10:18:38 AM)
     Message ID #334094

View All Related Messages
First off, I agree w/ Gary.

Secondly, IF as in this case the "person in question" is an ex-convict, provided they comply w/ all the provisions of their release as set forth by the releasing agency, YES!, they should be allowed to live wherever they want to w/o being unduly harassed by EITHER the local or state government OR the country's citizenry.

Reintegration back into society is difficult enough w/o undue harassment from other agencies, organizations or citizens.

Last time I looked this was still a free country (and I hope it stays that way) so if you can't live by the laws of this country then YOU (whomever you may be) need to go somewhere else.

8. D Robb
     (6/11/2019 10:21:05 AM)
     Message ID #334095

This message is in response to Tams Bixby ( message id #334093 )  View All Related Messages

Actually, it's about government involvement in the lives of individuals. If you have nothing you can add to the discussion you would be better not posting.

9. Tams Bixby CEOExpressSelect Member
     (6/11/2019 10:27:10 AM)
     Message ID #334096

View All Related Messages
"Former White House Chief of Staff Is Now a Navy Ensign"

Mother Machree!! Life outside of the Washington DC "drain circle, nay drain whirlpool" must be pretty rough for ex-WH aides that they need to join the USN (@ the ripe old age of 47) in order to make a living.

10. Tams Bixby CEOExpressSelect Member
     (6/11/2019 10:29:30 AM)
     Message ID #334097

This message is in response to D Robb ( message id #334095 )  View All Related Messages

You wish! But not to worry, I'll be here the next time I want to make a comment, regardless of what you think of it.
  1-10 of 827 11-20 >>  Last >