MO: Proposed ordinance would keep sex offenders from serving liquor

To serve alcohol in Kansas City, you need a liquor card. The public safety committee is considering a new proposed ordinance that would change that, but some agencies are concerned.

The Metropolitan Organization to Counter Sexual Assault, or MOCSA, is speaking out. Victoria Pickering, Director of Advocacy for MOCSA, said, “The goal is to prevent individuals who have a history of committing sexual offenses from being able to work with alcohol which is the number one drug that’s used to facilitate sexual assault.” 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.  
 

22 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Worried about Sex Offenders serving alcohol?

Abolish the registry.

There will immediately be zero Sex Offenders serving alcohol.

How often does this pattern need to be posted for it to click?

The registry is a train wreck, dumpster fire of a policy and need to be reversed, immediately and irrevocably, forever. The longer I am on it, the less appropriate it feels.

Any policy that names and shames anyone who commits a crime, no matter how heinous, misses the mark that members of humankind are fully capable of reflection, remorse and change.

O_M_G! What next? Oh wait, I know:
Because alcohol is “…. the number one drug that’s used to facilitate sexual assault”, those previously convicted of a sexual offense also cannot work or be present at any establishment that serves or sells alcohol (including grocery store, convenience stores, restaurants, and bars)! 🤡🤪

(I imagine this “restriction” will be trending after the accusations against SCOTUS nominee Kavanaugh.)

My god whats next? Just when I thought just maybe we had seen it all…

This Victoria Peckering must be a real dingbat for coming up with such a ridiculous idea a this ! People like her shouldn’t be aloud to be the head of anything.

When are city’s and munisapalities, going to get it, ordinances are NOT LAWS, and they certainly are NOT BINDING PUBLIC LAWS. Ordinances ONLY to employees and employers of said city and or munisapalities. The ONLY ones allowed to pass so called laws are state legislatures. PERIOD.

I’m a bit confused. The headline screams about RCs not being allowed to serve liquor, but nowhere in the article is that actually mentioned as being proposed. If anything, the article talks contrary to such an event. The hair-on-fire MOCSA is obvious about their agenda, but the other quotes and statements are rather equivocal. I suspect a bad editing job chopped out some key pieces.

The answer to the whole ting is staring you right in the face:

Each such city and village shall have
power to adopt resolutions and ordinances relating to its municipal concerns, property and government,
SUBJECT TO THE CONSTITUTION and law.

So, to WHOM does the state constitution delegate the power to make binding public law, to ONLY the legislature or to the legislature AND municipalities and counties? ONLY the legislature, right? So, to whom then can the muni or county apply their ordinances IF they constitutionally CANNOT create binding public law?

Man I can’t wait for SCOTUS to get a real case hopefully challenging the registry on the issues I’ve brought forth. They are going to be like, are you kidding me, and you people have some kind of skewed vision that is so bad ypu actually think these laws are constitutional. I really think they are going to ream whomever tries to defend these laws like that one court did where they told the attorney they need to go read the constitution laughing as the left the bench. We are living in the frigging Twilight Zone or a Doctor Who script…

After my conviction, bartending was the only job I could get. It worked out well until the state added me on to the public website years later. Once I was posted on the internet, the drunk patrons made sure to make my life miserable. And most bartenders are too busy serving drinks to get the opportunity to take advantage of anyone. They should be more concerned about everyone else that is drunk in the bar.

This is nothing but a blatant attack on people on the registry, pure discrimination of a minority group. So can people on the registry go in to bars and drink? But they can’t get a job serving. Ok, got it.