ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings: Mar 30 – San Diego [details]

Emotional Support Group Meetings – Los Angeles:  Mar 23, Apr 27  [details]

Registration Laws for all 50 States

Save the Date: ACSOL Conference June 14/15 in Los Angeles

National

MD: Maryland House GOP to push for state income tax cut, violent offender registry

[baltimoresun.com – 1/25/19]

Republican leaders in Maryland’s House of Delegates on Friday released their legislative priorities for 2019, including a state income tax cut, a registry for violent repeat offenders, and single-member districts in the General Assembly.

Flanked by fellow Republicans, Anne Arundel Del. Nic Kipke, the House’s minority leader, and Baltimore County Del. Kathy Szeliga, the minority whip, also said they would push for authority for greater use of so-called “special police” in Maryland in an effort to try to keep schools safer.

Kipke said that Republican delegates represent about 2 million Marylanders, and their constituents expect them to press for change, just as Democrats’ constituents do.

He called the GOP proposals “common sense” and “nonpartisan” ideas.

The four priorities of the House GOP leadership are:

The “Murder and Repeat Violent Offender Registry Act of 2019,” which would establish a searchable, public registry of violent offenders, modeled after Maryland’s Sex Offender Registry. It would require people convicted of murder to register for a period of 10 years following the completion of their sentence. In addition, defendants convicted of multiple violent crimes would be required to register for a 10-year period. “These are folks who’ve done really bad things to others,” Kipke said.

Read more

Related:

Md. GOP caucus wants a violent offender registry, a tax cut and redistricting reform [washingtonpost.com – 1/25/19]

 

 

Join the discussion

  1. Bo

    Lol, so everyone with a gun in their crime, and at most sex offenses violent? Will they have to register twice?

  2. Eric

    So a person who murders, or a person who commits multiple violent crimes must be on a registry for 10 years, but a person who looks at images on their computer in tier home is on the SO registry for life. Ok, just wanted to make sure I understood that.

    • Joe123

      Absolute asinine! Violent Offenders who go in to kill, assault and seriously harm people get off in 10 YEARS while that 19 year old and his consenting 15-16 year old GF is on the registry for life. This BOILS my blood and it should enrage everyone else reading this drivel.

      Let’s start sending the emails:

      Contact Del. Nic Kipke
      House of Delegates
      6 Bladen Street, Office 212
      Annapolis, Maryland 21401
      Email: kipke@kipke.com

      • Dustin

        Email sent as follows. Thanks for the address.

        Del. Kipke,

        In terms of preventing new sex crime, curbing recidivism and improving community safety, the sex offender registry is, always has been, and always will be a complete failure. All the money on creating and modifying it over the years was wasted because of the false premise that those convicted of sex offenses inevitably repeat their offenses. That was never the case – sex offender registrants are (and always have been) the LEAST likely recidivists, second only to murderers. The sex offender registry has never prevented one single sex crime or played a role in the investigation/prosecution of another.

        Ironically, the only crime the registry is useful in prosecuting is Failure to Register. It has no other law enforcement purpose, as there’s nothing on it that is not available in scores of other databases routinely consulted through normal investigation. Challenge any law enforcement office to show a case where a crime would have been unsolvable but for the registry, in Maryland or elsewhere. Last I saw, no state – Maryland included – reported higher than 1% sexual recidivism of its registrant population. With few exceptions, when registrants are arrested, it’s for frivolous or misinterpreted status offenses (registry, parole, or probation) and seldom with a sexual component beyond the empirically and repeatedly demonstrated false presumption that such violations will inevitably lead to more sex offenses.

        Further, why should repeat violent offenders only have to register for 10 years? I fully agree that anyone who remains offense free for 10 years has proven that he no longer poses a threat, but shouldn’t the same logic apply to registered sex offenders as well? Violent offender recidivism far outweighs sex offender recidivism, so what is the reasoning of requiring sex offenders to register for life and violent offenders a mere 10 years? Will the violent offender’s removal be automatic, or will they have to go through a similar, inordinately byzantine, and expensive court procedure that is by design likely to fail?

        And finally, how is it “common sense” to create another registry based on the sex offender registry? The sex offender registry as absolutely worthless for its stated purposes (prevention of recidivism and community safety), so what about your proposed registry indicates it will be any more successful?

        • Joe123

          Great work on this email! You definitely covered all of the important points. Thanks for writing to them. Every bit helps.

    • RegistrantNotAnOffender

      They have a tiered registry. Child porn is only 15 years on the reg but your point is taken.

  3. Dustin

    Posted the following on the Washington Post article comment section:

    In terms of preventing new sex crime, curbing recidivism and improving community safety, the sex offender registry is, always has been, and always will be a complete failure. All the money on creating and modifying it over the years was wasted because of the false premise that those convicted of sex offenses inevitably repeat their offenses. That was never the case – sex offender registrants are the LEAST likely recidivists, second only to murderers. The sex offender registry has never prevented one single sex crime or played a role in the investigation/prosecution of another. There’s nothing on it that is not available in scores of other databases routinely consulted through normal investigation.

    Why, then, does it make sense to make another registry based on it?

  4. Nicholas Maietta

    I have been attempting to convince others over the years that perhaps the best thing to do is to promote registries. Because that just brings us closer to total abolishment of the registry once it’s challenged.

    • Minor American

      NOOOOOO !!!……more registries mean more business and will lead to more draconian, dictatorship and an out right police state…..Civil unrest and a total breakdown of the US social Infrastructure and wide spead abuses with devastating results !!! Is this the beginning of the end times ??? Polarization in politics and religion are seen and Law Enforcement are being more aggressive, many people hooked on drugs, and arrogance has replaced humblness…what will come next ? Now ! Citizen Police are promoted ! Hatred or other’s is growing along with betrayal…..watch and pray ! People are taught to file suite against another! Will they bring you before judges and rulers to be condemned ? who knows my friends !!! Be mindful of these and many more tribulations to come ! More Registries is a VERY BAD THING!

    • AJ

      It doesn’t seem much convincing is needed, giving the growth of the various other registries modeled on the successful SOR. Having other registries will certainly focus more resources on the legal question. In that sense, the more the merrier.

      • TS

        @AJ

        You’re such a datapoint outlier on the Bell curve thinking we need more the merrier. Sheesh!

        I’ve said before, it’ll get worse before it gets better WRT registries. We all agree they suck
        and don’t work for the purposes stated but until most folks are on them or been on them, no one will know the experience they provide. The more the merrier may be the way for all sorts of infractions until such time.

        The loss of not having a pet hurt? Can’t get a job because of a DUI? People think you have an anger problem after losing your temper and taking it out on your significant other? Name recognized by other students or friends as being the parent who broke a law? Surprised in CA, the truancy law of holding parents accountable doesn’t have registry. Bad parents!

        Just a Price Club membership renewal and photo, right?

        • AJ

          @TS:
          “You’re such a datapoint outlier on the Bell curve thinking we need more the merrier. Sheesh!”
          —–
          I stand by what I wrote: “Having other registries will certainly focus more resources on the legal question. In that sense, the more the merrier.”

          Key words in those sentences being, “[i]n that sense,” i.e., in there being more resources (read: attorneys and litigants) focused on the insanity of registries in general. Only for that purpose do I support the more the merrier, and such is what I said.

        • TS

          @AJ

          I was trying to comically rib you from afar (and nothing more) since many are against them, as many (all?) of us are, but I do understand why the more the merrier works and am in agreement with you as I tried to allude to below in my subsequent paragraph. I would call this a comical failure. 🙁

    • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

      Nicholas, creating more registries is not certain to cause society to revolt against them. They may just come to see them as their “right” and unable to imagine doing without, as with the sex offender registry. At best, it’s a role of the dice. Our culture is enamored with its many vicarious cruelties and I don’t think that we can comfortably rely upon sudden rational insights to dislodge this dark impulse from their psyches. For myself, I always prefer direct routes to liberty rather than circuitous ones which may well turn into dead-ends.

      • Will Allen

        It is quite hard for me to see the $EX Offender Registries going anywhere. So if that is the case, I don’t see any reason that every person who has ever done anything bad should not be listed on a big government list. If there are millions of people listed, at least they will be a lot more common. And truly, there is no legitimate or sensible reason that everyone gets to have their jollies harassing $EX people and not be able to do the same to millions of other people. If they “have a right to know”, then I f’ing have a right to know.

        And truly, it is trivial for these criminal regimes to create Registries and then barely implement them. Look at what a pile of crap the $EX Offender Registries ($ORs) are. Look how useless they are. If they created Gun Offender Registries, as they are starting to discuss, they will surely start out as HUGE piles of crap, just as the $ORs did. They will run them just like the incompetent big governments that they are. They will start out with everyone being listed for only 10 years. Then of course that will have to be “fixed” later. Then they’ll have to close the “loopholes” of those people living too close to schools and parks. Etc., etc., etc.

        Nanny big government can have all sorts of Registries, barely implement them, and then work on them forever. They will forever expand.

        I also think Registries are fine with most people in Amerika. People are competing against one another and they are looking to create huge underclasses of people with whom they don’t have to compete. Those people aren’t moral. Look at the income inequality in Amerika. Registries are going to help it get worse.

        Amerika is devolving and Registries are helping a lot. It’s not something that decent people would have.

        Oh yeah, so how to get rid of the Registries? Making supporting them be un-PC. Frame the people who support them as the stupid, helpless, big-government-loving rubes that they are. Of course most people living in Amerika seem to be pretty proud of being stupid. So who knows?

      • RegistrantNotAnOffender

        I agree people won’t mind registries that don’t affect them, all registries must go.

  5. Joe123

    Here is the contact information below. Let your voice be heard about how their ‘Common Sense’ approach is PURE NONESENSE. Violent threats to society get off in 10 years while people caught in make believe sting operations, or looking at inappropriate images have to stay on the registry for up to life. The Insanity of these Lawmakers:

    Contact Del. Nic Kipke
    House of Delegates
    6 Bladen Street, Office 212
    Annapolis, Maryland 21401
    Email: kipke@kipke.com

  6. mike r

    And so big nanny gov expands the hold on the under unrepresented and mostly defenseless populous. Must have residency and presence restrictions and whatever otger restrictions applied. Soon if nothing changes everyone will be on some registry, might as well put the brand of the beast on each and everyone of us as well. Bar code under or on the skin some where..

  7. mike r

    They keep it up registries will be costing tax payers a huge chunk of change and will have to be considered as part of the nations entire GDP by the time they are finished. Shit, according to CASOMB just the SOR is costing between 10-40 billion, apparently they do not even know the entire cost by my research, but I am sure it well exceeds that sum with all the tentacles of the monster.

  8. Registry for all!

    A registry for every offense! In fact, make it an all encompassing registry with sub sections for different offenses. It would be so confusing that no one would bother looking. In fact, it would be maintained by government employees, which garuantees that people would be wrongly listed in different sections. The whole thing could turn into a complete disaster!

    • KM

      include a traffic ticket section as well! I deserve to know who are bad drivers so i can keep myself safe on the road!

      • Will Allen

        Can’t see how it would help on the road but it would help me decide if I wanted my children to be driven by the person or not. Something that actually is dangerous, as opposed to a pedophile attempting to groom my child, which was always an easy problem to thwart.

        Yep, Register all crimes. I have a right to know.

        • R M

          “Can’t see how it would help on the road but it would help me decide if I wanted my children to be driven by the person or not.” I agree but yet 95+% of us never commit another sex crime. It would help if those drunken driving, speeding, ie unsafe drivers as KM stated are restricted by staying off the road, being branded as an unsafe driver, etc. to the other 100’s of restrictions we endure. (I’m being sort of sarcastic, I’m not sure if I want registries for all offenses or not… still thinking about that)

        • Will Allen

          R M (January 27, 2019):

          Well, of course we will have to have extra restrictions/harassment/punishment for all people who are listed on any Registry. All the better to grow big government, right? Need more jobs.

          We can’t allow people who are on the Dangerous Driver Registry to drive anywhere near any school, that’s for sure. Who else shouldn’t? We can’t allow Gun Offenders to be near schools. In schools?!! Surely not.

          I don’t know there is a lot of fake “public safety” work that needs to be done clearly.

        • Dustin

          Applying the same logic of the sex offender registry to a DUI registry, the latter registrants would be precluded from being within 1000 feet of any vehicle, to include parking lots where vehicles may be and any road where they might travel.

          That would also include any commercial or retail structure where alcohol or narcotics may be present, including but not limited to those with a refrigerator or storage. You know, because they might lead to re-offending.

  9. Tim

    Secret courts for FISA warrant already proven disruptive.
    And easy to lie to.

  10. Eric Knight

    Only ten years on the registry? AND, if a “registrant” leaves Maryland, he doesn’t have to register anymore?

    I’m not making light of this, as I know the politicos are virtual signaling with this proposal with no real intention of creating a registry that will actually work. In addition, the gang and other violent criminal registries were used as badges of HONOR, just like time in prison, for some groups, which make the registries not only ineffective, but markedly dangerous. But when it comes down to it, if virtually every RSO in Maryland can get on THIS registry, they would do it in a heartbeat.

  11. NY won’t let go

    I recently saw in the news that there is a drug offenders registry here, which actually makes more sense than an SOR as most of the crimes are committed by the drug users here(this includes repeat offenses) but the only alternative we have besides this currently in place is 30 years in prison with whipping, or death by hanging. So, not sure which is worse, but the drug offense registry is police only and not public.

  12. mike r

    Hear Hear AJ, we need more people willing to put up or shut up and fight. Or at minimum help those that are willing to fight, and sorry but not just donate blindly either. Like I stated before, that Taylor case is a shining example of everyone jumping on the band wagon, and the judicial notice, which really made the difference. If that would have been one pro se guy on parole without any of the judicial notice or extensive knowledge that case would never have been decided as it was. NEVER…… The only reason I think my case has a chance is because of the extensive research that mostly AJ, Chris F, and myself have put in, and the judicial notice I just recently filed. I am going to push the analogies of a DUI and other registries and all associated restrictions that could be applied and see what the court has to say about that.

  13. mike r

    I was reading one of the 9th’s cases, nit sure which one at this point, and the court was straight complaining that the plaintiff did not give the court any analogies or any descriptions of violated rights or anything the court could even began to analyze. The court seemed frustrated and strained by the fact. I really hope SCOTUS expands and reiterates the gun rights in the upcoming case because I am going after that next. Cannot just say, “hey your a felon, you have no second amendment rights” BS if I do not, narrowly tailor that shit to me or it is unconstitutional no matter what anyone else states, even any old SCOTUS cases. You cannot just take millions upon millions (over 20 million to be approx.) of people’s fundamental rights away like that just because the legislature determines it is for public safety. I bet there are not even any reliable studies or empirical evidence showing it increases public safety either. Could be wrong but I doubt it. Legislature and courts are probably doing the same thing as they are with the registry, just assuming and pontificating hyperbole and skewed facts or studies. A matter of fact this is just like the under reporting, it is hearsay and can never be proven definitively. I bet you take people that have committed gun violence and the laws have absolutely no effect on their recidivism rates or future gun violence. Anyone that wants a gun can go and get it no matter who you are. Shit give someone a hundred bucks on the street and you could probably have one. This is a good little article on our felony populates.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-is-the-american-government-ignores-23-million-of-its-citizens/2016/03/31/4da5d682-f428-11e5-a3ce-f06b5ba21f33_story.html?utm_term=.b949326daf90

  14. Chris f

    This type of legislation should draw more attention to the ridiculousness of any registry or other legislative mandatory penalties or restrictions that are not under control of the sentencing court.

    This will have the obvious affect of making it beneficial to the convicted to leave the state. Then it leads to other states raising the penalties in a never ending war of escalation. It is not tailored to the individual or the crime.

    If legislature wants to create any penalties, lists, or restrictions to be placed on those convicted of crimes, the duration and nees to apply it should be under complete control of the court at sentencing. This would not only keep it fair, but also follow the convicted regardless of where they travel. They would know when or if restrictions would end. There would be no future additions. The convicted would not have to research every law in every city they pass through to make sure they don’t violate some bizzare law that want there yesterday.

    Some day the court needs to have the balls to call out the violation of separation of powers.

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 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 *

Please answer this question to prove that you are not a robot *

Michael Dickson Womens Jersey