Sex offenders congregate to reform laws they consider too harsh

American Bar Association  Journal – More than 700,000 people are now registered sex offenders, and some among that group are fighting to change or overturn laws that they consider too harsh.

More than 100 people attended a conference held in Los Angeles a few weeks ago to advocate for reform, the New York Times reports. Those attending the meeting—and other conferences like it—claim the sex offender laws are unconstitutional and ineffective.

In California, for example, sex offenders can’t live within 2,000 feet of a school, park or playground. In the state’s Orange County and several of its cities, sex offenders are banned from visiting public parks or beaches. Full Article

Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Thank you, American Bar Association, for reporting on our conference! It is articles like this that help to attract attorneys who can join our worthy cause and overturn the laws which continue to deny civil rights to anyone labeled a “sex offender”. I say this even though there are some factual errors in the report and even though some who comment upon need a quick education. Our voice is being heard and that is a good thing.

Why do we, or anyone, have to fight for the rights & freedoms we’re “supposed to be” entitled to? There should be a test in place by now (considering all of the civil cases brought to win our U.S. inherent rights) to gauge a petition or bill before it can be put on the ballot for a vote; it’s common sense!

Indeed, the sex offender issue advocacy should be a main point for all legal professionals to follow, if at the very least the “canary in the mine” when it comes to civil rights as a whole to all of humanity.

All you who comment here ought to leave a comment on this ABA site. There is a lot of misinformation expressed there.

I am an individual who’s life has been destroyed because of the “amended law” to change one’s tier level on the Department of Public Safety’s sex offender website, based only on one’s past. I disagree with their decision to change me from tier 1, which is where I’ve been for the last 25 years, and move me to tier 2; disclosing all personal information, place of residence and photos. I did have a family before this happened, but after having my life (fiance’ and child) threatened by people I don’t know in the community, I chose to leave my home of 13 years and 10 year old daughter, whom I had full custody of, so she could pursue her singing and acting career, without my past affecting her future. “I am not the person the state assumes I am and never will be!”
When laws are changed to deliberately continue ruining someone’s life, or the assumption is made that I have become a threat to society, based only on my past, with the assistance of amended laws, it is not only constitutionally offensive, but also highly prejudicial and defamation of my character, ruining the little bit of good reputation I did have left.
The Fifth Amendment to the U.S.C. states that “no person shall be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.”
The Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits state and federal governments from prosecuting individuals for the same crime on more than one occasion, or imposing more than one punishment for a single offense.
It is clearly stated in the second sentence of our Declaration of Independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Unalienable rights are fixed rights given to us by our Creator rather than by government. Unalienable rights are absolute rights – showing that they are absolute because they came from him who is absolute, and they were, are, and always will be, because the Giver of those rights – “Creator” – was, is, and always will be.
Because we are “endowed” with them, the rights are inseparable from us: they are part of our humanity. In other words, the government did not give them and therefore cannot take them away, but the government still strains at ways to suppress them.
To protect fundamental, individual rights, James Madison helped include the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. The intent was to remove them from government’s reach.
Unalienable rights, explicitly protected by the Bill of Rights, include “the right to be secure in one’s own property and protection from cruel and unusual punishment.”
Furthermore, law is a respecter of persons if it treats persons differently because of their immutable status or belief. The law is not a respecter of persons if it treats persons differently on the basis of their acts or conduct. The law looks to what a person does, not who they are. Those who deny the rule of equality or its origins in the law of God, or who argue that equality is subject to changing cultural or social conditions, or who twist the meaning of equality to require government mandated quotas, do so in contravention of the principle of equality.
Title 18, Section 242 of the U.S.C. makes it a crime [a felony] for “whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, to willfully subject any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution of the United States.”
Referring to the Declaration of Independence, President Abraham Lincoln affirmed that the United States was “conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that ‘all men are created equal’.” Lincoln realized that the rule of equality applied to all men and nations, without regard to the age in which they lived, their location on the globe, or the circumstances of history which surrounded them. Therefore, infringement of my Individual rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness are precluded.
I have paid my debt to society and for the state to enforce this sudden life changing affliction upon me, ruining all chances of ever being employed again or finding suitable residency, it has impaired me completely disabled.