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)


NJ: How N.J. determines which sex offenders are dangerous, explained

Keeping track of New Jersey’s registered sex offenders falls to Megan’s Law units in all 21 counties. That includes classifying offenders based on the potential danger they pose to the public. When offenders registered in other states move to New Jersey, they undergo a fresh classification process based on Garden State guidelines. Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. David Kennerly, The Government-Driven Life

    “How N.J. determines which sex offenders are dangerous, explained”

    This is interesting and something I had not seen before.

    • Tim Moore

      Imagine every state having a different “scientific” study to determine how dangerous lead in paint is to the development of neurons in a child’s brain. If the feds are basically requiring states to classify us as dangerous commodities, then there needs to be a federal standard based on science. I have seen studies that show that smoking increase the chance of dying from cancer by ten times. Is there even any equivalent report to show how much more likely (or less likely) someone is to becoming a victim of crime by living near a registrant or a former offender whom is not registered? Then that standard can be challenge as one, instead of all these willy-nilly state tests that make no sense at all when compared to each other, and make it nearly impossible to have a clear picture of what registration or non registration actual does for public safety.

  2. Gralphr

    Going by their grading scale, I’d be reclassified as a tier 1 if they really do all of this. Cant say I’d want to live in New Jersey though.

  3. Joe123

    I never could understand the lack of common sense in humanity: so because a rare freak violently killed a child, and happened to rape her, that somehow translates into the Registry and now International Travel Restrictions all because this disgusting waste of humanity that should have never been born decided to be VIOLENT and kill another human being? How the hell does that make it OK to register people who have absolutely NO history of violence nor does their ‘sexual crime’ even have any violent elements to it? What about pornography? Where the hell is a single damn link of evidence that proves what these idiot politicians passed actually makes any factual sense?? There is NONE. Our society, particularly American society I suppose, has a serious mental disturbance when it comes to VIOLENCE. This has Nothing to do with anything “Sexual” or remotely Sexual. Yet we have these people with Little-to-No Life Wisdom sitting in elected positions of power that pass laws pulled out of Thin Air and with no backing. When will this country actually have more than 1 lawyer with a damn backbone to challenge this ‘Registry’ abomination to human society? This whole scheme has NO Backing, NO facts or Proof, NO links to 98% of the people on there that they are truly a threat, yet lawyers ALLOW this to continue. There must be more Lawyers out there that have backbone and actually want to try to do GOOD for the world, not just Janice Bellucci. Christ. It’s unbelievable how normal, seemingly intelligent people lose Do much Brain power when it comes to logically looking at problems. All of these Megan’s Laws and Adam Walsh’s were the result of REPEAT OFFENDERS WITH VIOLENT TENDENCIES. Keyword is ‘Violence’, not ‘Sex’. They did not Kill a human being with ‘Sex’ or ‘Sexual thoughts’.

  4. Ridiculous

    So under New Jersey’s risk assessment, I’d be low risk and Tier 1. However, under California’s SARATSO/Static-99R tiered law I’d be “high” risk and Tier 3.

    California is not “liberal” at all. It’s a fascist regime.

  5. David

    I’d be curious how the NJ Offender Assessment has worked compared to CA’s SORATSO(?)/ Static-99 for accuracy in predicting re-offense.

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 *