Sacramento — The state board that oversees California’s sex offender registration laws wants to thin out and overhaul the registry because they say it has grown too big and does not help law enforcement or the public differentiate between offenders who pose significant risks and those not likely to reoffend. Full Article
Related posts
-
Action Alert: Registrants and supporters please take this survey on the effects of the registry and your unmet support needs
Source: restorativeactionalliance.org We at the Restorative Action Alliance (RAA) request that registrants and eligible loved ones... -
Guilty by Association: How Our Convictions Affect Our Families
Source: prisonjournalismproject.org 4/15/25 When a person is convicted, it is easy to forget they are more... -
Europe: ETIAS 2026? Start of European Travel Authorization System Delayed Again
Source: natlawreview.com 4/10/25 Implementation of the European Travel Information and Authorization System (ETIAS) has been delayed...
Some common sense coming out of Sacramento. Finally.
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Board-wants-to-remove-low-risk-sex-offenders-from-5503219.php
I don’t think sanity will prevail. I also think the majority of those that could make a difference are afraid of their careers being damaged, and then there are those, that even though the proof that the majority of registrants pose zero risk of any kind is right in front of them, still refuse to acknowledge the evidence. This is not about public safety and never was. I believe it’s always been about career stability and advancement at the expense of our constitution and bill of rights. If it was about public safety there would have been all sorts of registries for murderers, gang bangers, drug dealers, etc, a long time ago. I for one am not holding my breath and I’m for sure not getting exited about this. As time goes on I’ve become more and more pragmatic about things; especially when it comes to courage, honesty and integrity in public officials.
“I think all sex offenders are dangerous, period,” said state Sen. Jim Nielsen, R-Gerber (Tehama County). “I’m willing to work in a responsible way on legislation that builds in the highest level of protections for the public. This proposal concerns me enormously. … I think the risks are too great to try to intellectualize this stuff.”
Sounds like someone who still sleeps with his light on.
It’s about time they got their heads out of their A—. Now lets hope the right thing is done!
That’s really funny, the legislators feel they can’t be soft on crime, but they can be soft headed on crime. I wonder if they ask their constituents if they want to continue holding onto falsehoods, spending their money on this failed system or spend it somewhere else? I’ve got a few suggestions: Spend it creating a safe and healthy education for kids. Spend it on catching the many murderers running free due to unsolved cases. Spend it on a program that tries to prevent the 95% of the sex crimes not committed by someone on the registry. Just a few ideas.
I think they need to consider this as the registry has grown to a size that has become unmanageable. Even those in favor of the registry need to realize that having to monitor that large of a group is counterproductive and can’t possibly protect anyone. All SOs are dangerous? That is such an uneducated and silly comment. Nothing is ever black and white and stereotyping or generalization is a sign of ignorance. More people should take statistics classes and learn what the numbers mean. Granted, statistics is a tough class to take (I did), and it is much easier to follow the stories on “Jerry Springer” or read the “National Enquirer”, but please…do we really want to look dumb to the rest of the world only because we are too lazy to educate ourselves? Focusing on only the dangerous people (SOs or any other criminal for that matter) will benefit the public and our children so much more than confusing the entire country with putting everybody and their brother on that List. Wasn’t there a “List” somewhere in the past?? Can’t think of it right now, but it will come to me (do we want to repeat history).
‘Bout Time somethin’ Gives,Hope it flies Right..Should,, It’s the politicians & Media Period.They can’t stop, It’s constant on TV, Violence, sex, every add every everywhere & THAT is What is fueling it then the Politicians play off the results of the subliminal,, YEA,, GET’S DEEP QUICK..Then the Media Plays It Over & over for a years,, then some idiot falls on or off his meds and then there is the abuse factor and OMG no one sees this? It’s All Messed Up And Tim was right We gotta Protect the kids through educating their parents Because Allot of them “OBVIOUSLY HAVE NO CLUE” That’s what sells Just look @ 1 of the Most watched shows Sex & Violence, Oh Um ,,I Mean,Um, uh,, Law & Order…lol
Shows not even based on truth Just “PROGRAMS”& What is Our Brain? 1 Of the most & only Biological Computers in existence,,,I Might Need some new parts But I dont like their software!It’s Glitchy & Buggy,and causes system wide failures…lol
But NOW they are implementing world wide SO laws..?Sheeez!
Just read this & You will get the Idea “sensationalism, Definition Of”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensationalism
Guys I welcome the option to be removed from the registry but hope those that are removed are still welcome to attend meetings and continue being involved actively within RSOL.
I hope this is passed this time and we can get relief . I don’t even mind waitin 20 years at least I have an out date.
For what it’s worth, here is one of my comments over there.
“The fact that there aren’t multiple daily cold case hits seems to scientifically prove registered offenders did not [re]offend at alarming rates. If they did, the CODIS DNA searches would be giving them up for arrest. Since every sex offender and most violent offenders, and now even someone arrested for a felony but not convicted yet, has to give a DNA sample, it should be much easier to make arrests. Indeed, since the registered sex offender list has been active since the ’40s, it follows that if so dangerous the authorities should be getting countless cold case hits via a DNA search after requiring all registered offenders to submit their DNA a few years ago.”
ummm.. We are talking about the same political and safety people that was suppose to have the Stat code/level on every sex offender on the state site… yeah we see how that is happening….
It’s hard to not get a little excited over this article, but I also refuse to get super-excited about it. I recall this same conversation being announced by CASOMB about a year ago and it went nowhere. CASOMB can make all the recommendations they want but their “recommendations” will always prove meaningless if they cannot secure the majority vote. As Ammiano pointed out in the article, many of his colleagues have approached him outside chambers and expressed the sentiment that this proposed restructuring of the registry sounds like a good idea on paper, but they can’t rationalize its efficacy to their constituents — meaning, they are not going to put their necks out for a class of citizen that is repeatedly demonized by their voters. Sex offender legislation is not a Republican or Democrat kind of issue; rather, it is often used as a platform for every candidate, in just about every level of office, to secure and defend their political position or aspiration.
I have read a majority of the comments posted by the public at the end of the article and have to say that not much has changed in public opinion. Many people argue the requirement of having to register sends a clear message to the registrant that they are “being watched.” Whatever that means. As long as the public maintains its irrational fear of sex offenders, no matter the level of offense, I wouldn’t put too much stock into Sacramento extending any form of a lifeline anytime soon. Besides, Ammiano appears to have run out-of-steam on his tiered registry proposal. His last term ends this year and I wonder who will take up his fight once he’s done. From what I gather not too many.
I’ve been wrong plenty of times before. Let’s all hope I’m wrong.
In science it often happens that scientists say, ‘You know that’s a really good argument; my position is mistaken,’ and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn’t happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion. (1987) — Carl Sagan
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it, misdiagnosing it, and then misapplying the wrong remedies.” — Groucho Marx
This is wonderful news! When the California Board. ( a government institution ) is recommending that California change their laws, it’s serious. I myself was /plead no a misdemeanor Sexual Battery almost 18 years ago and received summary probation? Yet , we have individuals with multiple sex offenses who are treated no differently then me? It’s wrong and the laws have to change. Career criminals have more rights ! The fact of the matter is most states allow for those convicted of misdemeanors to fall off the registry after 10 years and more serious felonies after 15/20. I’m hoping that California is beginning to wake up ! Focus on the high risk and allow the others to move on with their lives
Unless the urgency to change the registry is stronger than the fear maintaining it the change will be hard in coming. Multiple points of pressure is required. Social, religious and economical. The real power is in bringing out the questions that applies such pressure. TRUTH
I believe there is a difference between registrants and treating everyone the same is patently unfair. A man could be convicted for relatively minor offences and have to live the remainder of his life registering. It is like a brand on the forehead or cutting off the hand of a thief. Categorizing every offender as dangerous is wrong. Remove the wrongly convicted or non violent registrants and give law enforcement more time and money to pursue the dangerous.
Great job on KFI this a.m. Janice. Thank you!
Today I was interviewed by Bill Carroll on KFI radio on this subject. Surprisingly, he and I found some common ground with regard to the Board’s recommendation of a tiered registry. That is, Bill Carroll stated his support for a system in which at least some current “members” of the registry would be removed from that registry. This is a BIG step for him and I believe it is an important data point that we are nearing the Tipping Point where the public understands that the registry is broken.
GREAT NEWS I HOPE , last year we had ASSSEMBLLY mrmb AMMIANIO TRYING TO GET THIS DONE IN SAC ,hope this think gets change soon TIER levels are the way , t
i get a 404 error
Janice, I heard you on kfi today, I was shocked that after the host said he thought child molesters should be on reg for life, You said in your opinon you thought so to. wow I thought you were the for all of us. My crime happened 25 years ago, yea it was oral cop under 14. He was 13 my bad. Now I know how is hurt these kids that i did not know then. I am married now, nice home, good Job, things are diffrant now. Do you think I should not get the chance for a life with out reg? I come to your meetings give money and Now I do not know what to think