Let's start with this. I don't like sex offenders. I think sex crimes, especially against children, are worse than despicable. I would have no problem if the law, in violent cases and cases involving children, were changed to make first offenses a life sentence. That's not the law we have. Even lepers had colonies. Forcing sex offenders to live under bridges and in open squalor may seem like just rewards to some. Consider this, however. When the last pillar of hope is removed from humanity, even the lowest depths of humanity, there is nothing to lose by returning to the perversions that got them in trouble in the first place. "Good", some say. "Now they'll go back where they belong." Yes, and now there is one more victim who might not have had to suffer. Even lepers had colonies.

There is a reason why landlords don't want them to move in to their homes. The law states that a landlord can be liable if they were aware of a sex-offender status and a crime was committed.
Why is it that someone else is responsible for anothers actions?
As a landlord we have no other choice than to deny them a place to live. Yet we aren't supposed to discriminate. Go figure.
Yes, it is true that lepers had colonies. But unless the law changes they won't be on my property.
I have a relative who is bi-polar and is fine when taking his meds, but when he's not he is crazy and a danger to others but until he actually commits a crime I can't do anything about it. Even if I know he's crazy and a possible danger, if I were to report him there is nothing that can be done. I can't lock him up and I can't force him to take his meds. But since I know that he's crazy, does that make me liable for his actions? If he was a sex offender in my home I am guessing the answer would be yes.

The DOC runs like it is a private, for profit company. The DOC routinely denies stable addresses (relatives, etc.) for a variety of bogus reasons so the sex offenders have no where else to go but a bridge. The DOC helps get laws passed like the ones that make a landlord responsible for a sex offenders actions (landlords aren't responsible for other types of criminal's actions). The DOC doesn't want sex offenders to have a place to live so they can delay their release due to no stable address. No stable address also means they will be back in prison soon, if not for a sex crime, than another crime. More money for the DOC. I believe the DOC now gets more state dollars than Education.

So since everyone seems to be in agreement that landlord's can be held resposible if an S.O. re-offends, why don't we all get together to pettition the gov. to change that law. By the way does anyone actually know the RCW that states that the resposibility for a sex offender's crime falls to the landlord? I have never seen it. S.O.'s need stability and a place to live. DOC, in the interest of public safety and the rehab of the offender, denies some home placements for several reasons.(family homes included) Schools, parks, churches and the number of minor children in a neighborhood are just a few of these reasons. DOC used to have a way to provide temporary housing for a month or two to help an ex-felon get established. This money is no longer available. Which means even if they had a place to stay, without a way to pay for it until they find a job, they are still homeless and living in the streets. Let's not even get into the number of employers that won't hire a sex offender.