ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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


Monthly Meetings | Recordings (3/20 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

California

Sex-offender laws: Heed the evidence

Should California have laws covering sex offenders that actually increase the chance of new sex crimes? Of course not. That’s why we welcome the recent decision by the state Supreme Court to reduce some of the travel restrictions imposed on sex offenders and last week’s follow-up announcement by the state that it will exclude less-threatening sex criminals from the ban on living within 2,000 feet of a school or park. Editorial – UT San Diego

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • 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.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • 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.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues 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.  
 
11 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

As evidenced by this editorial, reason may yet prevail.

Good editorial! I hope we see more like this one that advocate for sensible, evidence-based laws – not pitchforks & torches.
(Though I snickered at the term, “sex criminals”…. Gay men (and lesbians) have been “sex criminals” throughout history and remain so in many countries around the world. It was only the recent striking down of sodomy laws in the U.S. that eliminated that “sex criminal” status for homosexuals.)

I hate it when a facebook account is requires to participate in the comments.

Just setup a email account anywhere and setup a bogus facebook acct with fictitious info and post away.

Hmm… This works?

Since Facebook aspires to be the premier means by which the citizens of the world communicate with each other, and they are a publicly traded company, how are they able to deny people their first amendment right to press, based on a past conviction, a conviction which for many didn’t involve targeting minors for illegal goals by internet in the first place? Might as well put a blanket rule denying registrants the use of a phone or email. I don’t deny them the right to limit speech that attacks the rights of others, but to deny service to registrants is… Read more »

“Unfortunately, former state Sen. George Runner, R-Antelope Valley, and his wife and successor, Sen. Sharon Runner — the lead advocates of the 2006 ballot campaign that gave us Megan’s Law — say they may sponsor strict new legislation and warn that changes made by the state are dangerous to children.” These revelations about the actual effectiveness of these laws are dangerous to bottom feeding, fear mongering politicos who are now exposed for the shameless and selfish actions designed at perpetuating their feeding off public coffers. Any public official pushing laws based on fear rather than fact should be further exposed… Read more »

Good editorial. Especially liked the reference to George and Sharon Runner!

I would love to hear some feedback from Janice or chance or any legal expert on the following motion I am preparing. Thanks. I the plaintiff Michael …………… do hereby bring forth this motion for declaratory and injunction relief in the county of sacramento superior court for the state of California. This motion is being brought forth as a as applied challenge to the constitutionality of the sex offender registration requirement under the state and federal levels in my personal situation. I’m asking the court to grant me permanent injunction relief from the requirement to register as a sex offender… Read more »

It’s about time. When I was in therapy from 2001 through 2005, the therapists recognized that having stable family relationships and a steady job were part of a re-offense prevention plan. I followed this wisdom, dispite the fact that the public, fed by misinformatuon, came up with all manner of laws to sabotage those goals. What they knew then has made its way back into the public dialogue. It is encouraging that facts are working their way back into the the mainstream media, slowly, but I hope surely. It’s in large part due to the advocates of justice like this… Read more »

Timmr, I certainly agree with you regarding FaceBook. It may have been founded as a private enterprise, but as its reach continues to expand and as some forms of communication (i.e. newspapers’ comments sections) become inaccessible without a FaceBook account, it does become an issue of free speech. So as the FCC begins to regulate Internet providers as “public utilities”, it would seem the analogy becomes: RCs can have telephone lines (Internet service); and RCs can have telephones (computers); but RCs cannot have voice receivers in the telephones (that is, you can hear the conversations, but cannot participate in them… Read more »

11
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.