ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (7/10 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Click here to sign up now for ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18
Download a PDF of the schedule

CaliforniaGeneral News

Sex offenders should not be allowed in parks or beaches

In 2012 a law was passed that prohibited registered sex offenders from entering areas where children would likely be present. This in includes parks, playgrounds and beaches. However, according to ABC News the law was overturned in an appeals court in January 2014 because it was said to violate California’s state law.

It is clear the state of California and its cities are not doing all they can to protect the families and children of California by leaving them vulnerable to dangerous criminals.

In May 2012, District Attorney Tony Rackauckas released a statement explaining the conditions of the law that would be put into effect within 30 days. Under this law, if a sex offender entered one of these restricted areas, they would have been charged with a misdemeanor, facing six months of jail time and/or a $500 fine for each separate facility entered. Santa Ana was one of the first cities to pass their new ordinance laws and since then dozens of cities have followed.

However, now with the overturn of this law, registered sex offenders will be allowed in areas with a high population of children. Sex offenders have committed heinous acts and they should not be allowed into parks or beaches. Full Op Ed Piece

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
    4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
    5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
    6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
    7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
    8. 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.
    9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
    10. Please do not post in all Caps.
    11. 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.
    12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
    13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
    14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
    15. Please do not solicit funds
    16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
    17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
    18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
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.  
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Hmmm…my post was deleted from the Op-ed site. I had provided links to studies, court cases, and the usual litany of sources that renounce what the opinion writer said, then challenged her to be a journalist and perform due diligence. When I tried to post a less-tinged followup, I found that my account has been banned from posting on The Titan site. I am not one to critique people’s opinions, but in this case the writer is majoring in journalism (communications), and scheduled to graduate this year, so there should be a higher standard to her presentation of opinion.

You may always do what i do in this case: Contact their professor(s) about the issue at hand, as well as their employers. This always seems to work for me.

This article is not even worth commenting on. On so many levels it is plain bad and lacks any merit.

The writer of the ignorant piece adds….”at all costs “. Brubaker is
here to tell you its gonna cost millions a dollars..millions a dollars for the
blatant reckless civil rights violations for everyone in this california registry….
the selfish greed to punishment discrimination goes against the foundation of law…that
fullerton writer needs to take some courses in history and fundamental rights….do it before your
seventh year there ends…)))))))….unbelievable .

Also note the writer of article should be asking for your education refund …lack of understanding history to no vision for today or tomorrow …get your education refund…
the writer “at all costs”…would mean doing away with the Constitution ….is that what you want.?? the writer of article : if the accused can have evidence taken from record to his innocence …would that be good protection “at all costs”….how bout placing false evidence to deceive inflame jury: wouldn’t that help protect “at all costs”………There is a pattern here in orange county they want for the whole state….you just got scruled…I mean schooled.

I never got the verification email; just as well, because I’m sure mine would have been deleted like the opinion of Eric Knight was. It’s pretty obvious that KAYLI CRAIG gets her research material from non credible sources like the newspapers and whatever she has heard and not from empirical sources. The article is poorly written trash.

My comment also was not posted. Makes me wonder.

I hope this article wasn’t written by a journalism grad student as it was poorly written, lacked any supporting facts, and contained more grammatical errors than a 1st grade book report!

Since the “Comments” appear to not be working, feel free to share your thoughts by contacting them directly:

Hi Paul;
I did! One to the editor in chief and one to the managing editor. Here it is.

To whom it may concern; Editor in chief

I am writing this email to complain about the way the comments are handled on your site. I am speaking of a specific article titled “Sex offenders should not be allowed in parks or beaches” written by Kayli Craig, in your opinion section.

It appears I, and at least seven others I know of have been denied/blocked the ability to respond to this article. I feel that if your site is going to be on the open web that the people that read it should not be blocked if their opinions differ from the authors opinion. If this is your policy perhaps you should consider switching to a VPN instead of the open web.

I wanted to post a response citing empirical research because the author of this piece sounds as though he/she is trying to write an intelligent article but her/his lack of research is evident, which triggered my desire to cite peer reviewed studies that are counter to her opinion.

Your attention to this situation is much appreciated – Q

Here is the response from the editor in chief;


I’m sorry your comment wasn’t able to go through. We encourage rebuttals to our articles and we do not block comments by default. I looked into your issue of not being able to post. As of now we require everyone to make a Disqus account to post on our website. Comments will go through an approval process if a confirmation email is not completed on a Disqus account. Another way your comment might find its way into the approval queue is if it has a website link included in it. Comments are not usually deleted unless they are spam or are just hatful without contributing to the conversation. Other than that everyone should be able to post comments on articles until 90 days after they are published.

I just went through and approved all of the comments that were waiting to be approved. Today has been a busy day and this has been the only time for me to go in and check the comments. Take a look and see if yours was posted yet.

We chose to tighten down on our comment system because of the massive amount of spam and hate speech that was posted on the website. Making it a little more involved for posting comments so far has cut down a vast majority of problems we have had with comments.

Let me know if your comment will still not go through. Maybe we need to change up how we have comments.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention,

Ethan Hawkes
Editor in Chief
Daily Titan
Cal State Fullerton
Cell: 1.714.418.6574
Desk: 1.657.278.5815

College Park Building, CSU Fullerton
2600 E. Nutwood Ave. Suite 670
Fullerton, CA 92831-3110

You said it Ethan, “all the hate speech that was posted on the website”, your website and this is exactly what the subject story is really about, “HATE”. He/she out doing ones’ best to spread “HATE” regardless of whether one writes well or not and even if no real research was done, all it needs are those few words and the “HATE” spreads.


Thank you for your follow through. I’m sure they didn’t expect the barrage that this post generated. Her article was cross-posted on the Sex Offender Issues blog as well, so I would wager that one article she wrote probably got more hits than any other opinion piece they wrote this year.

Hi Eric Knight;
I’m sure they didn’t. Over in general comments there is a link to a O.C. Register article that is about denying a man his right to live in the house he grew up in. It’s in Fullerton, and it was his parents house. They have passed on and he inherited it and wants to live there, I believe with his son.

Well needless to say the neighbors are up in arms and the O.C. Register is ever so subtly fanning the flames of hate. I sent the journalist that wrote the piece a letter politely conveying my thoughts and I also put a link to scholarly study about residency restrictions. You should check it out and voice your opinion also; there is strength in numbers!

Now, if I know O.C., and I think I do; (I was born and raised there) I really do not expect much of anything because, well, O.C. is just so sick with rectal cranial inversion that I think they are incapable of recognizing the truth. Geez; if their heads ever do come back out into the light I sure hope the pop doesn’t scare them!!!

I used to live in the same neighborhood in another life before the registry. Cant even get a job now!!

Have you checked out some of titles of the headlines they use? They are definitely fanning the flames and have proven to be a biased organization by the way they package the news. You’d think that journalism would have some level of fairness and neutrality but headlines sell papers and so on…

RCI is definitively a real pathology in that neck of the woods.

HI j; I have not, but it wouldn’t surprise me at all. It’s pretty much the normal socially acceptable behavior these dark days; to hate RSO’s.

Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil.

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations,
the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” Dresden James.

What turnip truck did this hate mongering miscreant disguised as an author fall off of?

If this weren’t so sick it would be laughable but this is coming from an institution of higher learning. I guess that since CSUF is in Crow-ange County, it may be more understandable but I hope that some checks and balances exist somewhere in that institution. Let’s thank freedom of speech for the chance to respond and I hope we don’t confuse matters even more by introducing facts.

If any latitude can be given here is that she sounds like a victim that needs to channel her anger. Otherwise, the only real statement being made here is that this person wholeheartedly represents the metaphor “Ignorance is Bliss”.

It seems like this author was mimicking the style of Jessica Valenti, in her article on Woody Allen, in The Nation, which similarly lacked any statistics, evidence or anything but innuendo and an agenda to support her claims. Why would a reporter for a school paper think she needed to do better than a professional? In the same manner, the commentators at the end of both articles had to fill in the facts the journalists ignored. I was suspicious of registering with Discus, but we need to comment in places other than this site, if we are to make any impact.

To call the author of that article/op-ed piece an uneducated, uninformed, biased idiot would be a compliment. So much less than that…

Reminds me of that Saturday night Live skit with acting face-off on issues journalists Jane Curtain and Dan Ackroid …”Jane you ignorant shut.”

It almost sounds as if Ms.Craig was molested as a child herself.
But yes, her research is VERY lacking. if she had done any, she would have found that the various banning laws were solution looking for a problem.
In every city that had the police testify before the city councils on these various ordinances, they reported no particular problem with RSOs committing addition sex crimes in the various parks under their jurisdiction.

I am still trying to wrap my head around this. So, can SOs enter State Parks, like Chino Hills? Also, what is Elfin Forest in Escondido considered? It is not a park as far as I can see. So, would we be able to go for a hike there? Maybe someone in those areas can clarify this since “we” are still on probation with an ankle bracelet and don’t want to stir up anything that might cause a violation of probation.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x