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)


CA: Prop 57: Letting Californian Sex-Offenders On The Loose [Editorial]

Initially, Proposition 57 seemed to be a feasible solution to California’s prison overcrowding. It promised that nonviolent offenders would be offered parole if they had already served their primary sentences and did not pose any threat to society. However, this changed when Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Allen Sumner ruled that thousands of sexual offenders would be eligible for parole under Proposition 57’s “nonviolent crime” clause.

On March 5, the state of California announced that it will appeal Judge Summer’s ruling by arguing that those convicted of sexual violence should be denied the possibility of parole, despite Governor’s Brown promise to exempt all sexual crimes from Proposition 57. The current definition of violent crimes is problematic for Proposition 57 because it neglects several atrocious sexual crimes such as rape of an unconscious victim and pimping a minor, as well as allows potential sex criminals and predators to roam free into society. Full Editorial

Join the discussion

  1. AlexO

    Written by a 4-year Political Science major. And it absolutely shows it in the context of this article.

    Prop 57 isn’t a get out of jail free card. Everyone gets out eventually, barring a life time sentence. If the person has taken correct actions to rehab themselves, they should not be denied the credits to regain their freedom earlier. You either believe our justice system is an actual form of rehab, or you’re advocated for life time sentences. You can’t straddle both sides of it that someone is only a danger up to the point of their original incarceration limit. Someone that actively participates in rehab and gets out 2 years earlier is going to be a far better person than someone who grows bitter, spiteful, and avoids all rehab because there’s no point to it and leaves the system according to the original date set.

    • Joe

      What does it show? I see a person a few weeks from graduation from a top-50 public university exhibiting almost zero comprehension skills or analytical capabilities.

      What I see is an epic failure of the higher education system. A colossal waste of tax payer funds. And these are the people on whom I will depend for my social security….

      • AlexO

        My comment was in jest as his entire article was written like a politician trying to get elected, not someone actually trying to present true facts. And he’s doing quite well as I would expect someone from a Political Science major.

  2. Jack

    Haha. Janice would eat him alive in court. So would Mark Leno on the senate floor come to think of it.

  3. Fb

    He wants a violent crime to be anything that causes physical or psychological harm. Isn’t that virtually every crime?

    • David Kennerly, The Government-Driven Life

      He would also prefer to not really understand the nature of a crime. When everything becomes “violent” then it becomes impossible to identify someone who truly is violent. It’s an endorsement for being unable to differentiate between acts and circumstances and individuals.

  4. Tim Moore

    Public safety should be the main concern when releasing a person from prison. People who commit violent and sexual crimes generally do not pose a high risk of violence again. Facts, man, not perception are needed. The public needs to learn the difference or democracy is doomed. You can’t simply release all the drug users and solve mass incarceration.
    I wish I had the time and was retired, Does anyone have the time and the grit to submit a rebuttal to this piece? It appears there is no comment section at the end of the article.

  5. Intentionally Left-Blank

    what this is about is the GREEDY CDCR Keeping ppl in prison LONGER so the GREEDY CDCR can rake in the CASH for more incarcerations, THATS IT Plain and simple… Im not on parole myself anymore (I scammed the CDCR and got over on them so so many times lol) But Ive heard now ppl that are being let out the CDCR is CHANGING what a judge ORDERED and giving them 10 and 20 years on parole…) Again its them in a attempt to RAPE the citizens via taxes in CA !!

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 *