ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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


Monthly Meetings | Recordings (4/17 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings
ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18, 2021

ACSOLAction ItemsCalifornia

Senate Appropriations Committee Approves SB 448

In a vote of 7 to 0, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved Senate Bill 448 (SB 448) on August 27 by releasing it from the committee’s suspense file. The next step for the bill is a vote on the floor of the Senate next week (Monday, August 31) where it is expected to pass. After passage in the Senate, the bill will be referred to two committees in the Assembly — Public Safety and Appropriations.

“Senate Bill 448 must be stopped,” stated CA RSOL president Janice Bellucci. “Although the bill has been amended, it is too broad because it includes anyone, including minors, who uses the internet in the commission of their offense.”

There are no dates yet for the committee hearings, however, both hearings and a floor vote in the Assembly must occur no later than September 11, which is the last day a bill can voted on.

Letters of opposition should be sent as soon as possible to the Assembly’s Public Safety Committee, 1020 N Street, Room 111, Sacramento, CA 95814 and the Assembly’s Appropriations Committee, State Capitol, Room 2114, Sacramento, CA 94814. If possible, letters should also be sent via FAX to (916) 319-3745 for Public Safety and to (916) 319-2181 for Appropriations.

Letters can also be sent to individual members of the Committees. That information can be found online at www.assembly.ca.gov.

Related

SB 448 scheduled for hearing August 24

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.  
 
32 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Very strange process… there is only ONE business day between Thursday (approval by Appr. Committee) and the Senate Floor hearing on Monday. Since I am not eligible to contact the members of neither the Public Safety Committee nor the Appropriations Committee via e-mail UNLESS I reside in their district that leaves me next to no time to contact MY representative in the California Senate. But maybe all of this is much ado about nothing. After this (if it does) passes the Senate on Monday August 31 it must go to 2 Committees (PS and Appr.) in the Assembly and then… Read more »

Loni Hancock and Mark Leno agreed to vote and pass SB448, pre-amendment language by Hueso, right?

As Timmr noted Aug 16, this process also violates the Brown Act: “This is a violation of California’s open meeting act, which fulfills the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution — the Brown Act.”

Question one, is the Public Safety Committee’s vote valid? Is it legal to vote for something that says “fill in the blanks” with this and this, and the author turns around and chooses to fill it in with something else? Question two, what’s the emergency? I haven’t seen any evidence that the sky is going to fall if this isn’t passed in three weeks. If that is how they spend our money, thoughtlessly, without deliberation, they need to all be recalled. If this is the way our government works, there is a way to describe it — inept. This is… Read more »

I’ve been wondering how the Democrats on the committee could support this oppressive legislation. My answer, now, is that it’s political: they want to help DUI Hueso get re-elected. I recall a similar event about ten years ago, in which a “get tough on sex offenders” bill was handed to a junior Democratic legislator to sponsor in order to help her win re-election in her red district in the San Joaquin Valley. Seems I read about this, including this political analysis, in the LA Times. I suppose these pols know what they’re doing, even Mark Leno.

Yeah, we are the universal n#$%ers, bated and hated and exploited by both sides. Anyway, faxed my letters off tonight. Mail them off tomorrow once I get my printer re-inked. Thank you, Janice for sending email about this.
Everyone go to a meeting in your area, if only to take the minute to put your email down on the list for notifications. They need thousands of contacts, because a call to action at best only gets about 10% response.

WOW, Im surprise

This shouldn’t surprise anybody. And it will pass overwhelmingly as it moves forward. Picture the TV ads against any person who votes against it come election time. There is simply no way any elected official will ever do the right thing when it comes to this class of people. The only way it will every be resolved in our favor is through the high courts. And even that isn’t a certainty, as we all know. The Supreme Court is supposed to rule on constitutional items. RSO’s are clearly the most oppressed and abused citizens in the country, but so far,… Read more »

The stupidity of our lawmakers knows no bounds. To argue that this bill is constitutional because it is “narrowly tailored”, and serves a “legitimate government interest” is asinine. To underestimate the importance the internet plays in today’s arena of free speech is tantamount to saying that a simple sit in at a diner was insignificant in 1960. To use a current example, the hashtag #blacklivesmatter has triggered an entire civil rights movement. This simple expression of free speech has unified tens of thousands of people! It has also lead to several marches and protests, some of which have experienced specific… Read more »

The difference is that when a registrant is murdered, no one makes much of a protest about it, social media, on the streets, anywhere.

Janice,
Please advise us as to how we can all file suits to tie this up in the courts so it can’t be implemented.

California has some real problems in their legislative process. I think the state elitist culture that makes them think that they are above other states leeches into the legislative process as well. Instead of going to states where II laws have been upheld, they decide to reinvent the square wheel and put the following statement as the trigger for who must report their IIs: use of the Internet was essential to the commission of the crime And in the definitions section, there is no definition of what “essential” means. This will be a trip wire for an offender who may… Read more »

So here is a guy where the internet was essential to the commission of the crime (18 yo HS Senior and 15 yo Freshman, statutory, absent force). Seriously, has this guy not heard of the fax machine or a telegram?

Labrie was convicted of a felony charge and four misdemeanors: the most serious count being the use of an online service or the Internet to seduce, solicit or entice a child under age 16 in order to a commit sexual assault.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/08/28/us/new-hampshire-prep-rape-trial/

And when will Facebook etc be held liable for facilitating Child Sexual Abuse? What would Chris Kelly say?

I would never dare to inconvenience our esteemed State Senators (and Assemblypersons). However, there’s a difference between a Senator, and a politician. A difference between a Senator, and a lawmaker who breaks the law (The Brown Act’s open meetings, US Constitution, and Bill of Rights) to secretly advance a bill into law that is not based in fact or evidence, and does nothing for public safety (SB448). And finally, a difference between a statesperson and leader, and a political hack riding on the back of law-abiding citizens toward the next election. Hueso, Hancock, Leno, Anderson, et al fall in the… Read more »

Good point, MarkW-SF. This is legal, re the Brown Act, which says that citizens are not to be required to give their names or fill out any kind of form as a condition of commenting on any meeting. In other words they should take your comments even if you leave the entire form blank. Now, one can always say you can call them and express your views that way, but what if you are mute or have a speech impediment or simply are not as skilled at expressing your views verbally as in writing? And the staff answering the call… Read more »

I’d also start pressuring each committee member to start listing every single RC/290-related bill in their Contact Form’s Subject line drop-down menu. This goes for the CA legislature site as a whole. When you go on that site to search SB448, incorrect link comes up: http://www.legislature.ca.gov/cgi-bin/port-postquery

Miranda writes

“Then join a bunch of incest forums and drive them crazy trying to figure out what you are doing, lol.”

And kiss away any chance of getting a CoR.

CoR for sex offenders is a loophole that will soon be closed.

Miranda, stop fear-mongering just to make yourself feel better. Unless you are a licensed attorney, which we know is impossible, stop making dramatic claims without evidence. It’s getting obnoxious and your credibility is going down the drain.

BG – Stop telling me what to do, I am not your victim.

LOL victim?? Give me a break.
You gotta stop using that victim-nonsense as your knee-jerk response to being challenged. Just because someone puts you in your place doesn’t mean you have to pull some idiotic card about “victim” to try to deny it. Stop trying to duck responsibility for the b.s. you continue to spout.

You might have a problem with needing to find victims and to try to fear-monger them through baseless statements, but no one is going to be YOUR victim. You’re simply not capable of pulling this transparent game off.

Miranda, it’s obvious that you accuse others of having to need “victims” because you believe the accusation is something that would bother them. You believe this because it’s something that would bother you – it’s pretty clear you’re the only here who needs victims.
It’s called “mens rea” in law which means “the guilty mind.”
I suggest you take therapy instead of trying to sow your skewed mentality here because you’re only coming across as a clown.

Credibility going down the drain??? This person has no credibility to lose; never had any to begin with.

It’s pretty safe to say that no one will give credence to what this person says. The fact that he has referenced incest more than once is telling of what this person’s frame of mind is. Sick sick sick. Just don’t listen or respond to what Miranda has to say.

Well Miranda is clearly projecting his/her own state of mind onto others with this whole overly-defensive “victim” reaction.
Also it’s funny how Miranda makes it a point to blindly label anyone who challenges him – trying to lump everyone together down to his own level.
Sigh, it’s sad.

I believe that this shows an urgency to stop all forms of human trafficking, especially sex trafficking, and that is the driving goal of this bill. They think we’re most likely to be the people causing humans to be bought and sold, who else? Maybe we could help brainstorm a way to stop human trafficking that doesn’t ruin our lives. They obviously couldn’t come up with anything better.

It’s unlikely you could come up with something effective to curb human trafficking especially since it is largely non-existent outside of the fevered imaginations of the fantasists.

Miranda wrote “Then join a bunch of incest forums and drive them crazy trying to figure out what you are doing, lol.”

I wrote “And kiss away any chance of getting a CoR.”

Miranda writes “CoR for sex offenders is a loophole that will soon be closed.”

Well, until it is closed, I don’t think anyone should be following that irresponsible and bad advice.

I’m not sure if anyone has noticed this yet, but the law does NOT require us to disclose what websites each user name is associated with; only that user names be disclosed. “Internet identifier” means an electronic mail address, user name, screen name, or similar identifier actually used to participate in online communications, including, but not limited to, Internet forum discussions, Internet chat room discussions, emailing, instant messaging, social networking, or similar methods of communicating online. For the purpose of this chapter, an “Internet identifier” does not include Internet passwords, or any electronic mail address, user name, screen name, or… Read more »

That’s a good point, it says nothing about divulging what sites the “identifiers” are for. Just for fun, we should copy usernames we see other people using. In other words, pick someone else’s username from site A and make it our own for site B!

Also, I wonder what the implications are if we make a point of using your personal email address for business purposes. There is a clause in there that “identifiers” used for business purposes do not have to be given to them.

Introduced by Senator Pavley
February 26, 2015

An act to amend Section 6603 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, relating to sexually violent predators.

SB 507, as amended, Pavley. Sexually violent predators.

I just found this on the Senate Appropriations list. I hadn’t heard of this one before, did we miss it? Is it important?

This is one of the stupidest laws I’ve ever heard of. What or how are they supposed to use any info to prevent anything. It’s a COMPLETELY arbitrary law. Does nothing but burden rso.

Being on the registry is like being in “The Village”, that fictional island on the 1960’s TV show staring Patrick McGoohan. We never know why #6 has been kidnapped and detained or why his captors keep asking him for information, information, or of what use it is to them, aside from being to exercise their own authority over others. If anyone fails to provide information and attempts to leave the island — a large bubble like thing tracks him down and smothers him. Even if you manage to ditch the guards and think you have left, you find yourself back… Read more »

Miranda said ” California has some real problems in their legislative process. I think the state elitist culture that makes them think that they are above other states leeches into the legislative process as well. Instead of going to states where II laws have been upheld, they decide to reinvent the square wheel and put the following statement as the trigger for who must report their IIs: use of the Internet was essential to the commission of the crime” So you’re on a forum thats pro-registrant and instead of saying the California legislature is elitist for all its tough on… Read more »

32
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.