Finally, some clearer thinking on sex offenders

After years of panicked and excessively punitive lawmaking against sex offenders, cooler heads are beginning to prevail. The U.S. Supreme Court, for example, on Monday struck down a North Carolina law that effectively banned registered sex offenders from using any social media that is also accessible by children. Full Editorial

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. 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. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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.  
 

14 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

A decent, level-headed op-ed from the LA Times. Good to see. They had also urged President Obama to veto IML. Too bad he didn’t listen. 🙁

Hopefully more major media pick up on this and keep espousing the proper statistics and information, not the soundly debunked 80%.

–AJ

It looks as though things are heading back to where (slowly) they were before certain people ignited the frenzy of knee-jerk reaction feel good laws that have done nothing positive for anyone, much less lived up to their stated purpose. I’m talking about when the registry was non public. Since it has become public politicians have used the sex offender panic as a tactic to push many useless laws effecting hundreds of thousands of people every time a single crime was committed by an individual, and many times laws have been passed seemingly just because, even though there was no demonstrable need for the law. What has been happening is large numbers of people have been punished over and over again for the acts of a single person.

The results have been dead people after they have served their time because someone decided to troll the registry for a registered citizen to assault because they felt they had not been punished long enough or hard enough. Destroyed lives of wives, husbands, mothers, fathers and blameless children, as well as the astronomical and ever increasing cost to the taxpayers for something that does nothing aside from the above mentioned results. I challenge anyone to do a google search to see if one documented case exists where someone has been saved by the registry or any associated laws or if there is one documented case where the registry or any associated laws have prevented one single sex crime. I’ll tell you the search results ahead of time; you will come up with a big fat zero. This monster needs to go back to being non public.

I say keep up with the fight against those that distort information and hold them accountable for their malicious content against American citizens.

In my world in Florida 🙁 there a case that a 19yr had sex with a 15yr old consensual sex the prosecutor is offering probation but must register as a sex offender. I think this is total BS. I think this should go to trial and ask the jury to side this case. What do you guys think???

How and when will the SCOTUS ruling in North Carolina affect R.C.’s in other states, particularly in California? Am I correct to assume that they’re currently banned from all social media in CA?

My question is how would this affect people who have lifetime registry due to 290? It doesn’t make sense to keep said people at lifetime registration if it has been 20 years and they have stayed crime free. In my personal situation, I’m under 290 which means life in California, but have been out for 10 years without probation or parole, eventually married which I have been raising my own children and a couple of step children for the past 8 years, obtained a Bachelors degree and generally work in a professional field (IT), yet I still carry the SVP label due to the alleged victims age? If so, something doesn’t seem right……………