Overhaul of sexual offender registry is on right track

Admin

Once in a while, politicians in Sacramento get things right. The overhaul of the state’s sex offender registry proposed by Sen. Scott Weiner, D-San Francisco, and Sen. Joel Anderson, R-San Diego, is one of those rare occurrences of a bipartisan solutions that works. Full Article

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

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

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. 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.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. 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.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. 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.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. 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.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. 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.
  23. 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.  
 

5 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

WOW…awesome op-ed! Great read.

And I applaud Senator Leyva for putting past rhetoric aside and for doing the right thing by voting in favor of this bill. Thank you, Senator Leyva!

0
Reply

Again, very heartening to see a positive op-ed about the whole SOR idea. Is the legislation the answer to the problem? Good Lord, no! But is it a step in the right direction? Very much so!

I can certainly understand and empathize with those who think it’s a panacea and/or will be chipped away in subsequent legislative terms, but that’s fearing the what-if instead of accepting the what-is. CA lawmakers have shown they will listen to outside sources (Chiefs of Police, ACLU, ACSOL, etc). Unless and until some entity can sway them back the other way, I think the slope of the hill has tipped in our favor. Will there be ideologues and fear-mongering to try to make it worse? Of course. My point is that there is now a sane, rational discussion and body of experts who have, can, and will push back and bring reason to the argument. A legislator will have a tough(er) time arguing that such and such crime needs to be added or that terms need to be lengthened “for the kids” when everything points against that.

The tide is indeed turning, fellow RCs and supporters. I don’t think everyone truly understands how big of a shift this is. Is there another instance across the nation where any legislative body, from city council up through Congress, has *willfully reduced* the burden on RCs? Exclude any and every court-mandated change and let me know what you find. Again, this isn’t the answer or the end, but this is a HUGE step in the right direction. Huge.

–AJ

0
Reply

We thank the author of this editorial for his clear thinking. The following words from that editorial, if followed, will lead us to ultimate victory: “When it comes to sex offenders and crime generally, it is critical that evidence, not rhetoric and fear-mongering, guides our policies.”

0
Reply
View Replies (1)

Very good article

0
Reply