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)

CaliforniaGeneral News

Why kids don’t belong on sex offender registry

California took an important step toward ending the abusive practice of putting kids on sex offender registries when Gov. Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill 384, which allows juveniles to petition for their removal after five or 10 years. Full Opinion Piece

Join the discussion

  1. Gralphr

    Kids? NO ONE deserves to be on the registry, especially if they’re a first time offender. Its beyond me how people can find it cruel and unusual for a child, but perfectly fine for an adult when WE have to find jobs and put roofs over our children’s heads! I’ve been told by apartments in Georgia and North Carolina that no decent apartment in the state will lease to someone on the registry. I even had apartments tell me they would overlook my conviction since its almost 20 years old, but once I bring up registration they immediately tell me they will have to decline me since I’m on the registry. How can one even justify this treatment being ok for an adult? The government and many citizens seem to think We don’t have families as well!!!!!!

  2. Tired Of Hiding

    No one belongs on a registry. The registry does not work. This has been proven. It is a FACT
    No need…Period

    Let’s hope the rest of the world finally accepts that FACT in 2018!

    • Tim Moore

      The registry does not work. If only we could all stick to that simple truth.

      • New Person

        Does CASOMB keep track of when the register was used to solve a crime and how often? Just curious.

        • David Kennerly, the Very Model of "Containment"

          The thing is, the “Registry,” itself is not needed to solve a crime. There are always going to be arrest and conviction records available nationwide to law enforcement, such as the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) that was created by J. Edgar Hoover back in 1967, which allows investigators to search for individuals with any kind of offense, including sex offenses. Abolishing the Registry would do nothing to diminish that investigative capability. That’s something we need to keep in mind when we’re arguing with pro-Registry people. We need to call them out on what is a totally specious argument. The Registry has nothing to do with providing information to law enforcement; they already have all the information they need without the Registry.

        • Tim Moore

          Crime has gone down over the years. There is not a big political return on improving investigation techniques. To show they are doing something to justify continued funding, they create lists and check them, one, two, three times a year, seeing who’s naughty or nice and publicizing their sweeps of paper violators to entertain and treat the masses. They can create a web site and claim how diligently they are monitoring dangerous sex offenders, you know, the ones that after 17 years have the same risk of offending as the general population. Yeah, they would probably like to grow enough to monitor every citizen, cancers are like that, not knowing when to stop growing, but they can’t yet sell such an openly police-ee state without hard resistance. They got to keep the sham limited to registrants for now.

        • Tim Moore

          According to the CASOMB literature, the registry does not solve crimes that would have not been solved without it. They do mention the registry may increase the speed of cases being solved, in some limited cases. I would be suspicious of that, because prosecutors would tend to be biased towards registrants, and registrants would be easier to prosecute.

        • David Kennerly, the Very Model of "Containment"

          It’s in the interest of the pro-Registry people to claim that the Registry aids in solving crimes. Given that information on the Registry is already available to law enforcement without the Registry, this is clearly without merit as are any arguments that it somehow speeds-up the investigative process. Nevertheless, it is touted as a criminal investigative tool and most people will believe it to be so without ever thinking it through.

        • New Person

          1. The registry does not solve crimes.

          2. The recent and most proper categorically correct recidivism rates for registrants are under 1%.

          3. Presence and residency restrictions have been deemed unconstitutional.

          4. Halloween restrictions were debunked due to no crimes have been related to registrants, which corresponds to point 1.

          5. Punishment for the civil scheme is … FELONY.

          Is it just me or do these facts indicate that the registry is retributive to its purpose of public safety? Isn’t this what other states have similarly contested?

          With facts on registrant side, calling registrants “predators” is libel because in Ca, over 99% do not re-offend. Predators are always on the hunt. That would imply they would re-offend. Yet the statistics do not reflect that at all.

          BTW, with presence and residential restrictions having been deemed unconstitutional, then that would already implore that registry has already gone beyond punitive measures to where parts of it have been deemed unconstitutional.

          PA deemed the registry does restrict travel. (There’s a video of the court hearing that was hilarious seeing the state lawyer getting hosed down by the judges about how travel isn’t restricted.)

          Michigan (Snyder) denoted it’s unconstitutional to have programs resembling probation. Registrants have to do in-person registration as well as be subject to compliance checks. Those traits are probation/parole like.

          What is the difference between a registrant and a registrant with a dismissed case pertaining to the registry? Not much. There are some registrants who are not subject to ML before receiving 1203.4.

          All this points that the registration scheme is retributive. Recent developments have some lawmakers wanting to ban registrants from schools. Lawmakers from CA will bar cities and counties from providing information for a “Muslim registry”. I wonder how those statistics are similar to registrants?

        • AJ

          The claim that the registry speeds solving crimes makes no sense. It implies that if a sex crime happens, they go to the registry first or only. BS. They run a global (database-wise, not geographical) search on fingerprint and DNA matches and go from there. The registry serves no purpose, and speeds no process, once they have our fingerprints and DNA.

        • David Kennerly, the Very Model of "Containment"

          We have finally entered into a phase in which there is real push-back against sex offender hysteria. We will hear all of their tired and spurious arguments repeated again-and-again in a desperate attempt to maintain their stranglehold on the minds of America. The mythological conflation of the Registry with law enforcement’s capacity to fight crime will become increasingly more shrill and repetitive. Nevertheless, given that most people are emotionally predisposed for hysteria in matters of sex offenders, we’re going to have to refute these illogical appeals with everything we have in order to destroy them.

        • Harry

          Yes David, the fastest way to “refute” this is to get the soccer moms realizing that their babies have far greater chance ending up on the registry than getting candy from a RC on Halloween night.

  3. mike r

    link the video, I would love to read it…

  4. Nobody listens

    They don’t care about the youth, the California governor just signed a bill (sb312) allowing all juvenile offenses the right to seal your juvenile record as long as your case didn’t result in registering. All 707(b) offense (violent offenses) murder, kidnapping, assault with a deadly weapon, armed robbery all can now petition the juvenile courts to seal their records as if they never committed a crime, But if you were convicted of a 707(b) offense and it resulted in registering you are barred from sealing your record. Infact only Sex offenders are barred from this new change of the law. Which seems pretty clearly to be a violation of equal protection laws and also cruel and unusual punishment as they have been singled out even though they were all previously denied for the exact same reason of being 707(b) offenders. The senate, on their own, made a new class of 707(b) offenders even though there’s no law on the books separating these crimes into separate classes. It even goes further to deny equal protection, if you have your case dismissed or reduced to a lessor crime you can Petition the court To seal your record as if you aren’t a 707(b) offender… except if your case resulted in registering where you are still treated as if your a 707(b) offense dismissed case or whatever. Why did they do this? Because in California if you are able to seal your record, then you no longer are required to register. So even if a judge deems you rehabilitated, a probation department does a background check and finds you rehabilitated, and your record reflects your case dismissed, the law makers believe s.o.’s are a violent autoimmune disease uncurable and dangerous forever! Maybe this website
    Could look into this injustice.

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 *