ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: Nov 21, Dec 19 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)


TX: Bill would ban sex offenders from college dorms

Sometimes as a state representative, I come across laws that have outlived their usefulness, and at other times, glaring oversights that should have been addressed years ago. On Wednesday, in the House Committee on Higher Education, where I serve as Vice-Chair, I presented HB 355 which corrects one such glaring oversight, the prevention of registered sex offenders living in on-campus college housing. Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. C

    What an absolute, thoughtless ass. Will paroled thieves, drunk drivers, child abusers, wife beaters, murderers and other violent felons be barred from dorms as well?
    Do politicians even bother to consider worthwhile legislation anymore or are they too worried it might offend someone, choosing instead the remaining safe targets: RSOs, Christians and white males?

    Meanwhile, Satan Clubs are popping up in schools and preschoolers are learning that sometimes boys have vaginas and girls have penises and, perhaps worst of all, my tax dollars will pay for refuge and legal defense of people in my country illegally. I repeat, OUR tax dollars will be used by the city to help criminals continue to violate the law and drain public coffers.
    Meanwhile, the jails are full, the roads look like a lunar landscape, sink holes are swallowing cars, water mains are bursting and my little ones come home with shopping lists from the teacher for classroom supplies and ask me questions like “Daddy what’s a lesbian? What’s LGBT…whatever?”

    The world, the country I served 4 years to protect in particular, is upside effing down.

  2. Nicholas Maietta

    Hah, that means they’d have to ban 95% of the campus students from attending. On a side note: How against is this not banishment? Additional question: How is this being justified again?


    • New Person

      It’s like this b/c of the conclusion of 2003 Smith decision. No one in TX is actually comparing what 2003 set as regulatory vs punishment. No one is caring to review the judicial work.

      Again, Dr. Ira and Tara Ellman have discovered that the SCOTUS utilized information that came from non-experts as well as unsubstantiated information by other experts.

      Justice is turning a blind eye to what’s transpired since. 80% recidivism rate vs, say, 3% recidivism rate represents a vast discrepancy. In California, CASOMB founded less than 1% recidivism rates for the past two consecutive years (after removing ‘not registering’ from the re-offend category).

      Lots of judges and decisions re-iterate the 2003 Smith decision, but they don’t realize the new laws are well above and beyond what was stamped at regulatory. This is why Michigan’s Snyder case is pinnacle as well as has the possibility of being transformative b/c it attacks the 2003 Smith decision in comparative thresholds as well as query the aspect of public safety due to the excessively high recidivism rate of 80%.

      Why isn’t there judicial review at the SCOTUS level about utilizing unsubstantiated information coming from non-experts to where the 2003 set it’s whole premise upon to trample upon all constitutional rights of its citizens?

  3. jo

    Yes, that is GLARING! Probably tons of sex offenders assaulting people they live with in college dorms.


  4. Joe123

    Look at all of these sex offenders on campus rapping and assaulting! Look at the headlines, they’re everywhere! Such great lawmakers we are paying for, they’re getting rid of such a menace to the United States instead of focusing on pharmaceutical drugs that kill hundreds of thousands, alcohol addiction, violence, home grown terrorism, etc. We should give these geniuses a raise!

    • Lake County

      I spend several hour a day watching Congress on C-Span and believe me they are focusing on pharmaceutical drugs. They talk about opiate drug use laws almost daily. Most doctors will no longer prescribe any pain medication out of fear from the DEA. I’m someone who has not had a pain free day in 6 years and it’s getting extremely hard to get pain medication these days. Heroin is easier to get and I often consider trying it for relief. Keeping doctors from prescribing pain meds just drives pain sufferers to illegal and dangerous street drugs. Pharmaceutical drugs (all opiates) aren’t killing hundreds of thousands. The last full statistics for 2014 was 18,893 overdoses for all opiate drugs. That includes low strength pain pills to the more dangerous Oxycontin that most overdoses come from. That’s far from 100’s of thousands. Lets not exaggerate statistics on this website like the politicians do to us on SO issues.

  5. TG

    I would bet that the number of RSOs who even want to live in a dorm is exactly 0.

    • Lake County

      I can’t imagine that any Registered Citizen would want to stay in a dorm. Can you imagine what would happen to that person after someone found out. Worse yet would be a compliance check. I’m sure law enforcement would show up for a compliance check “in force” just to make sure you want (or have) to leave. I wish we could find out how many RC live in a dorm in the entire U.S. Likely not more than 2 or 3?

      • WantsToHellp

        The problem is that a number of four-year colleges in Texas require that freshmen live in a dorm on campus for the first year. So. Essentially this “common sense” law has the unintended consequence of ensuring that anyone put on the registry as a teenager will be unable to attend an “affordable” college. Nice.

      • C

        When the public reads “sex offenders banned from dorms” they’ll think of the mythical, middle-aged, fat, bald (hmm, kinda describes Rep. John Raney) child molester with a van offering free candy and adamantly agree.

        When I, and probably you, too, think of “sex offenders banned from dorms” I think of a scared kid trying to put a mistake behind him and get his, or her, life back on track, worried to death everyday that someone will announce the dark secret and run him off campus.

        Indeed, the public will think of a fox in a henhouse. I think of a lamb in a den of wolves, a lamb better off as a commuter student living off campus.

        This is worthless legislation written by a worthless politician struggling to justify his existence.

  6. Chris F

    I wish I had known about this before public comment was closed on March 22nd. I might have been able to get down there. As it is, I see a representative of Texas Voices For Reason, Mary Molnar, was there and opposed, but did not speak for some reason. The only one to speak against it was a Gary Wardian while 4 others spoke for it. I’ve tried to get Mary Molnar to send me updates on this kind of stuff but I guess she is busy.

    This is ridiculous. The rep claims ” 23 percent of Texas sex offenders have committed a second sexual crime over the past 10 years.” but doesn’t site the source or how it relates to the average young college student who, if put on the registry as a juvenile, is the most likely NOT to re-offend regardless of any statistics that cover all sex offenders.

    As someone else said, this only prevents young people that made a mistake from getting an education and integrating with society since many Texas Colleges require first year students to be on campus housing.

    There were no issues that caused this law to need to be created. On the contrary, there is already a law that sex offenders notify the campus and this allows them to make the decision based on the individual circumstances and not some wide brush that sweeps away everyone.

    Horrible. At least it isn’t retro-active though, but still horrible.

    Looking at upcoming Texas bills I see:

    SB 1041 – Senate version of this Campus bill

    SB 811 – SEX OFFENDER CANNOT BE IN A MOTOR VEHICLE WITH UNRELATED CHILD (What the !?@#!?!) This means they can’t even ride a public bus or train!!!! (Not retroactive though)

    HB 2575 – Sex Offenders must report to front office anytime they go to a school during business hours (RETROACTIVE! Covers all sex offenders other than those attending the school)

    Now that I know where to find this stuff I’ll try to keep more aware. Here is where you can pull these up in a search for Bill Number as well as HB 355 from the article above:

    • WantsToHellp

      Texas Voices didn’t testify against it because they are busy trying to kill far worse bills. You can set alerts on bills that interest you and be notified when they’ve been scheduled for committee. If you show up for the worst of them you’ll certainly run into folks from Texas Voices. That might be the easiest way to make contact. The big one that is currently pending in committee right now is HB387

      Go to “Urban Affairs” and click the link. You’ll see this bill begin at around the 41:00 mark. If the others you listed go up for committee vote, they will likely be opposed as well.

      If you want to mass email your legislators to encourage them to vote no, you can go here. There’s a generic one sentence message in the box and you can delete that and create your own:

      HB387 is a critical bill for many reasons, but the biggest is for the way it codifies proximity restrictions into Texas statutes for the first time. If this bill passes it is only a matter of time before the escalation begins with each town trying to outdo the other in terms of who has bigger restrictions, and once a bill like this becomes law it’s much easier for amendments to get tacked on with ever increasing restrictions and restrictive language.

      You can also find out who the committee members are on that committee and if any of them are your own representatives, a personal call to their office, even a visit, will go way way further than a mass mailing (although that would be important too). The bill is currently pending. It could be voted out of committee at any time.

  7. New Person

    Curious… why stop at living conditions? Why not stop educational conditions, which is, by default, employment opportunities? The implication is that registrants must live a sub-standard life compared to everyone else. I mean everyone has the capacity to live a sub-standard life, but the government is implementing that all registrants cannot be more than that.

    I hope to God that Snyder burns all this down and we can sue the government for a plethora of abuses b/c we all are suffering from some kind of PTSD from all this AFTER BEING RELEASED FROM PUNISHMENT CUSTODY.

  8. USA

    I actually went back to school after my ordeal/lost a professional license. I eventually obtained an MBA, financial Aide, grants and had no issues. I’ve since expunged my offense, but the registration process creates hurdle after hurdle. I can understand the legislators view, but come on. Things need to change.

  9. mike r

    this countries general population is so far gone or at least politicians know how to use them to further their power that i dont know if sanity can be brought back from the brink of exctinction. look at that no statute of limitatikns on so many different crimes..that sounds great on the surface but in reality its insane..hey I remember that vice principal that suspended me way back in eighth grade 30 years ago for smoking on campus molested me in his office…go get em.or that teacher that gave me an f 30 years ago molested me while I was in detention with him…ect.ect.ect.ect.ect….this country is crazy stupid now..ever seen idiocrasy the movie…thats our future….

  10. kat

    This is a joke.
    The recent college sexual assaults have been perpetrated by rich college jocks, not ex-offenders. But, if we don’t mention that, no one ever knows, right?
    It’s lawmaker “puff and fluff” like this that continues the lies people believe about registrants. Time to put an end to it. Rise up registrants!

    • Um, Kat...

      ….is there something you know the rest don’t about the demographics of those who are allegedly committing such actions on college campuses, e.g. rich college jocks? That particular athletically & financially secure demographic seems to get a lot of media attention whereas the non-athletic or non-financially secure person who commits the same action does not. So…does the broad rich athletic college student brush stroke here really apply? Empirical evidence maybe to back up the assertion? Just asking for those who prefer not be painted in with others where the paint does not work.

  11. kat

    Just to clarify my comment-
    Recent media attention of college assaults has been focused on several cases of the alleged “priviledged or athletically gifted” who committed sexual assaults. I’m sure there are plenty of sexual assaults on campus by others, but those are the ones that the media latches on to.
    If lawmakers are so worried that former sex-offenders are going to commit a sexual assault while living on campus, then where’s the empirical evidence showing that ? Are they more likely to assault someone than some priviledged, athletically gifted or average college kid? No, I don’t think so.
    Didn’t mean to sound as if I was painting anyone with a broad brushstroke, the lawmakers do enough of that.

  12. Son of Liberty Child of Freedom

    I posit for those Innocent Family members who will be Victimized by those who lack knowledge or simply ignore it, for the sake of Beautiful Lies that reinforce and elevate the conceited Ego:

    House Committee on Higher Education (C290)

    Clerk: Grady Dahlberg Phone: (512) 463-0782 Room: EXT E2.106

    Member & Position:
    Rep. J. M. Lozano – – – – – – – – Chair
    Rep. John Raney – – – – -Vice Chair
    Rep. Roberto R. Alonzo
    Rep. Carol Alvarado
    Rep. Angie Chen Button
    Rep. Travis Clardy
    Rep. Donna Howard
    Rep. Geanie W. Morrison
    Rep. Chris Turner

    As Yehovah Lives, so should we

  13. Matt Duhamel

    Does anyone know if this law actually passed? I’m seeing this trend more and more and it’s very upsetting. In fact, I was personally denied education through a university that offers online correspondence specifically because of my sex offender status. What’s next? What will be taken from us next?

Leave a Reply

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.  

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *