General Comments February 2015

I’m going to level with you guys; I’m scared. With all of this talk of new legislation and litigation, it’s got me spooked. I know I need to focus on my classes for tomorrow, but there’s a point where being a registrant affects the way I think, as I’m sure it does you. I am constantly looking over my shoulder after this brush with jail and probation. It simultaneously made me very afraid and came to grips fairly quickly about what it means to be a pariah in a modern world. We are hated, universally. No one professes their love for a rapist, pedophile, or the flavor-of-the-day criminal thrown onto this list, but their hatred crosses race, sexuality, creed, and politics. I’ve only been on this list for a relatively short time, in comparison to the more lively members, but it’s so jarring going from building up one’s self through childhood and young adulthood, all to have it crash down in a matter of minutes; say the wrong thing, do the wrong thing, act on the wrong impulse, and your house of cards is blown down.

I’ve been a lurker on this site for a while. I’ve always wanted to come to the meetings, but always found an excuse not to. I check this site regularly and given donations via PayPal, but I don’t post articles or get involved in the online community. I’m fairly certain that a majority of you reading haven’t done the same either, but I consider each and everyone of you my brother or sister. I feel your pain when you post about that something that hurts you and I feel a little victory when someone in the world thinks that society unfairly treats us. Every time I am out on the streets, in the halls of my university’s library, or driving by, if I see a homeless individual, I always wonder if they are a transient fellow. When I go to registration, I think about striking a conversation with someone who I know is a registrant, but I can’t help but feel wrong. The camaraderie I feel between each and everyone of you is fascinating and a tad horrifying; I don’t know you, but I always can empathize with what you are going through.

I’ve almost been homeless twice, and if this residency case goes wrong, I might actually be homeless. I was almost violated during probation because of a clerical error, but I’ve been off probation for a little over a year now. The payments I’ve made towards probation, classes and the money my Dad threw down for a lawyer and money towards canteen feel so unjustified. Regardless of all that, I’m here. I’ve held down jobs, going to university, and I have been in a relationship with a loving woman for 4 years now. I’ve seen your stories, especially those about heartache and not knowing when things are going to get better. I’ve seen the writing on the wall that we do not matter as citizens, much less people. I’ve seen the infighting between us because one person won’t be off the list sooner than this person will.

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is breaking my heart.

We are arguing over theories that have not been made law, putting our wants and needs over what the big picture is. And that is, abolishment, of this so-called sex offender registry. Under this current scheme, I won’t be off for twenty years. I will have been on this list for half my life under the current plan. But I sure as hell, won’t forget about you when I’m 41. Hell, I want to push it so I’m off at 30. Will it happen? Probably not, but I need to look at the larger picture. And when I’m off, I’ll remember you, and that you are my comrade under this twisted scheme. We aren’t done until everyone is off this list, regardless of the time they put in.

I’m scared because I don’t want this to fall apart. You guys are honestly the reason why I nod my head to the buses full of prisoners that roll by and why I do what I do now. If I’m homeless, I guess I’ll deal with that when it comes, but I would much rather go kicking and screaming, but that’s not what scares me. I’m truly scared that one day that I will turn on my laptop and this organization will be defunct due to us forgetting what our goal is. Until that time, I will keep supporting you guys, keep donating, and maybe, one day, actually show up to a meeting. However, I will always support you guys and gals out there fighting the fight that you never chose. We are stronger than this, and no politician, or judge, or squirming John Public will stop this machine.

With love and regards,
AllMyFriends

This is NOT a protect the children issue, but it is being used to appear as such. There has not been any history of a registrant (after going through probation, therapy and time served) attacking a child in a park. The real motive I believe is a political one. Registered citizens have become the perfect new political whipping boy for votes. Face it under the guise of punishing those deemed as evil and from the angle used to protect the children who wouldn’t be okay with these kind of measures? To NOT be for them you would somehow be seen as NOT being there for child safety.

What fuels their reasoning is the societal climate. People are afraid and out of control. It is from that Black-hole of darkness that comes our challenge. It’s not these people we must fight it’s their fears. Parents lack of control of their kids, the feelings of insecurity about the future and the feeding of that fear by the media. Society has a cancer it’s the THEM verses US mentality and the illusion that we are somehow separate from THEM. We are them. We registrants come from the same backyards and playgrounds as them. Defining that is our challenge.

Registrants are the best targets to release against from that place of darkness. How do we fight such a Goliath? We do it with truth. This truth and the history that has always looked for a scape goat to victimize. The truth from the past of those once viewed in this way (slaves, Jews, Japanese Americans and the Native Americans) are our allies. We will gain more allies to fight this evil as the truth reveals itself to others and to society over time…some in the clergy and some in societal groups, but most important WE needed to hold fast and stand firm with each other.

This fight is a light against darkness fight people. The sad thing is that this darkness is thought by these (otherwise nice) people as a thing of light. The Sex Offender Registry is a LIVING DEATH it is Evil and it is Wrong. Proverbs 16:25. There is a way to a man that seems right but the end thereof is the ways of DEATH. Be of good cheer people we are on the right side of this issue. TRUTH

Sorry for the length of this post. I will not make this common practice.

Anonymous Nobody said “Schiff, whose background is as a prosecutor, rode the sex offender scare into office, and during his entire time in the Legislature, was always in the forefront of adding yet more draconian crap onto former sex offenders. And he was always speaking about it — hyping it to the hilt – when speaking in his district. Whatever his attitude about crime overall, he is a major figure against sex offenders. (I don’t know who it is in Congress who is behind the crap that has been coming up on the federal side,but I’m sure Schiff is very supportive of it as he always has been — and I find it surprising that the federal push got going around the time he was elected to Congress.)And sorry, but Schiff has zero chance in a Senate campaign — he is not a well known figure! Schiff is not at all on the level that Villaraigosa is. Schiff does not have a political machine, like Villaraigosa does. Yes, Schiff might run for state AG – but even that is no clinch for him, as he is not known around the state, not even very well know around his own county. Schiff has his district pretty locked up, but zero beyond that. If he does run for AG, you can expect…”

Maybe I was a bit naive about how much damage Adam Schiff has done with his sex offender add-ons. He seems ok with collective punishment based on single rarely occurring incidents. Not to be an apologist for him, but he did defeat another tough on crime guy Jim Rogan -R, to get elected in the first place. The reason Rogan got defeated was because he supported the Clinton Inpeachment and played a role in it. So Schiff took a longtime Republican district into Democrat hands, by basically opposing the treatment Clinton got for sex accusations against him. Then when he gets into office, he singles out sex offenders. Ok, Anonymous Nobody I am with you so far.

But I would have to disagree on Schiffs popularity. He is known outside of his district. Schiff is in the House of Representatives after all. He supported SOPA,PIPA, and supports TPP. He’s been tough on crime, tough on drugs, voted against the Paul Booker Act to allow states to set their own Medical Marijuana policies. Schiffs district used to be centered in Glendale, but now its centered in Hollywood Hills. So he is known in all these parts . Schiffs district covers the most influential parts of Los Angeles… Hancock Park, Los Feliz, Hollywood, West Hollywood, Burbank, Glendale, Tujunga ( Burbank Adjacent ), Montrose, Silverlake, etc. I would bet Schiff is even well known in places like Lancaster since a lot of people from San Fernando Valley came from the Antelope Valley, with Schiff’s district partially in the San Fernando Valley.

The L.A Democratic Party used to be dominated by Waxman and Berman. Now its dominated by Brad Sherman and Mike Gatto. Schiffs district overlaps with Gatto’s district and Schiffs district is next to Shermans district. But the question of how big Schiffs political machine is depends on how close Schiff is to Sherman and Gatto, how much they will help him, to know if Schiff has a machine behind him. In any case, Schiff surely is at a disadvantage against Kamala Harris in the Senate race, of which Schiff has indicated his intention to run. Villaraigosa is still mulling over the prospect of running. I prefer Villaraigosa to Schiff on tough on crime/sex offenders issues. I was not aware until you told me that Villaraigosa wanted to put sex offenders on a tv channel. You said he wanted that when he first started as Mayor of L.A. But absent that, Antonio Villaraigosa went his entire 8 years as Los Angeles Mayor without scapegoating sex offenders. 8 years without personally being responsible for any Nannystate or tough on crime crap. Anonymous Nobody, you would seriously prefer Adam Schiffs constant piling on to 8 years of no Nannystate crap, no tough on crime crap, no draconian ex post facto nonsense? Yes, I know Villaraigosa as Cali Assembly Speaker probably could have thrown some obstacles to all the tough on crime crap, but I don’t know if he could have stopped them altogether even if he possibly wanted to.

“As for Harris, the comments arose because of her action on the Ninth Circuit ruling. Her staff assured she will be pushing hard in the Legislature to override that legal argument with a new law, thus taking strong action to make sure there is no relief for former sex offenders. And this comes after how many years in office and doing nothing all that time to even so much as slow the ever expanding number of legal disabilities imposed on former sex offenders. All she has done her entire time as attorney general is send her lawyers out to fight hard to defend what she should be attacking as unconstitutional. She is supposed to be one of the checks and balances against legislative overreach, but instead she is defending it tooth and nail. And now she is not even wanting to wait for the courts, instead wants to fast-track that Ninth Circuit decision into oblivion – so that’s done during her campaigning for Senate, so she can exploit sex offenders. Very bad sign from her — again, no matter her attitude about…”

First of all, Harris is not part of the California legislature. She is Cali Atty General. She will most likely be part of the Federal Legislature, as in US Senate, but for now shes not part of the legislature. As Attorney General, she made a good decision to not pursue the challenge to prop 35 in the courts. Do you think Chris Kelly, if he was Cali Atty Gen would have done the same thing? The legislature does not want the draconian cyber-fascist crap Kelly and his Facebook pals have hatched thus far. Harris has not used tough on sex offenders as a scapegoating mantra to get elected thus far. And look who she ran against, Chris Kelly, who centered his campaign on that crap. And she didn’t get into a tough on crime/sex offenders propaganda contest. She won with integrity.

“Regarding your comments about the history, yes, that is so. But that earlier history also is why I did not expect sex offenders to be so singled out, because prior to the Wall coming down, the tough on crime thing was more about violent offenders generally, not at all about sex offenders specifically. It was an also-ran in the world of distractions. But when the wall came down, in a time when for decades Communism was the top distraction, a new top distraction was needed, and crime was a bit blunt. They hit on sex offenders, and being as sex sells, it became the top distraction of them all. That was already building quietly and in the background when the 1990s arrived, but it was Bill Clinton and his attorney general, Janet Reno, who made it the number one top issue and distraction of them all, bringing about the federal rules for registration and making the registry public.”

Tough on crime started out as a distinctly Republican thing with Nixon and Nelson Rockafeller. Rockafeller was much more into it than Goldwater, who was mentioned earlier. Goldwater talked a lot about tough on crime, but his main focus was economic stuff and foreign policy. Domestic law enforcement was not one of his big interests, unlike Nixon who had not much interest in economic issues, but was into crime issues. In California, home of the nations first sex registry ( as you have pointed out ), the california prison guards unions made all this tough on crime, which includes tough on sex offenders, a major priority. They even made their own lobby group crime victims united to push for harsh sex offender laws , more crimes with jail time, longer prison terms, etc. for violent crimes and sex offenses. It wasn’t until the late 70’s though in California that there was ever talk of using the Sex offender registry for anyone other than gays and lesbians. So like you said, the foundations were already quietly building ( some not so quiet ) in the backround for Clinton to come on the scene in 1996.

It’s not so much that the US needed a new bogeyman and sex sells than it is that sex sells and now the sellers are in the U.S. Rupert Murdoch always used sex to sell and make his media empire profit.The onloy difference is Murdoch would now bring this crap to the U.S. Murdoch did it for decades before he bought Fox News, which flourished in the 90’s after Murdoch bought it in 1988. Murdoch owned the Star, a sleazy gossip tabloid, since the 70’s. But it wasn’t until he bought the New York Post in the 70’s and radically changed its political orientation and it became a tough on crime newspaper that the ball was set rolling. This culminated in Murdoch and Ailes turning Fox news in the 90’s into a tough on crime, tough on sex offenders empire. Clinton in 1996 created the Federal Sex offender registry to prove he wasn’t subject to pressure from the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. Clinton also as President signed the 1996 Federal Telecommications Act, although it would have passed with a veto-proof majority even if he didn’t sign it. This paved the way for Clear Channel ( now calling themselves I Heart Media or I heart radio , who are responsible for putting registrants on billboards in Indiana, but thats a different topic ) to own and control most all of the talk radio programming. The Telecommunications Act removed the limits of ownership on radio stations. Prior to this act, the same company could own like 5 stations. With the act, the same company could own like 20 stations and Clear Channel/I Heart Media/I Heart Radio had every subsidary counted as a different company. Clear Channel and Fox News worked in unison as a single propagandas machine on tough on crime ( which includes tough on sex offenders ) with a special focus on selling sex, selling advertisement during programming with sexual content, whether its recounting details of sex crimes or promoting draconian legislation and describing the details of the rare occurring crime that led to the push for the harsh collective punishment legislation. You are correct. Sex sells. Not only Clear Channel and Fox built and rode this bandwagon. It was also other media companies like Viacom, which owns tv stations, has some connection to Paramount, and was originally I think spun off of CBS.

“I would like to see Janice of state Attorney General. :)”

That would make me happy beyond words as well and also make up for some of the fearmongers who have expressed interest at running in the past. For example, when Lou Corea got hids money ripped off by some woman who also ripped off money from some other prominant democrats, one of the funds that got ripped off was “Lou Corea for Attorney General’ Fund. I recall this guy being the same idiot who tried to preempt State law, but was at least samrt enough not to follow through on it. This guy Corea is an example of how Orange County democrats can be as screwed up or more than Orange Republicans ( if thats even possible ).

After replying to a post on a separate thread, I realized that quite a few California teachers have been arrested this year (2015) for sexual offenses against students.So, I decided to see if my conclusion was correct: after a quick Google search, I was easily able to identify 19 separate teachers who have been arrested for allegedly committing a sex offense against a student, just in California, and just this year alone (and it’s only February 21st). I’ll also point out that, while I did not verify this the same way I did for teachers, quite a few police officers were also arrested for inappropriate relations with a minor.

So then I did a search to see how many registered citizens were arrested for a new sex offense: 2!!

Makes you wonder who the REAL threats are!