ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: Jan 16 Recording Uplaoded Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings

General News

Kat’s Blog: Make a Difference

Like many of you, before I knew someone on the registry or became involved in advocacy, I never gave much thought to how our justice system worked.  I knew very little about how or why state bills were proposed and even less about who was responsible for getting them pushed through to a vote. I naively assumed my state representatives were looking out for my best interests and those of my family, friends and neighbors when proposing and voting on key issues.

Boy, was I wrong.

Now that I’ve got a stake in this, now that I know people on the registry and I see the uphill battle they are fighting, often with their hands tied because they can’t access the internet to do research, I got involved. I started small, researching registrant issues and the proposed bills that might affect them. I began writing innumerable letters and sending countless emails to state representatives and government officials. I did whatever I could to educate myself to help fight this maddening registry.

This blog is for those using the same excuses I once used “I can’t help, I don’t have time, I don’t know where to begin, what I say or think won’t make any difference, nothing’s ever going to change.”

Here’s an example of a proposed bill in TN, but it could be in any state, it could be in your state. And here’s one small example of how you might make a difference.

TN Senate Bill 425/House Bill 407 proposes an increase from 1000 ft to 2000 ft for residency and presence restrictions for registrants and to change the current laws restricting registrants, even registrants that are parents of minors, from residing within the same residence as minors.

It seemed like an outrageous proposal to me, knowing what we know about registrants. Registrants have low re-offense rates, evidence has proven boundaries keep no one safer, that they do more harm than good and that registrants belong in supportive family settings.  I decided to reach out to the Senator and House Representative who proposed the bill to find out where they got their “evidence of need” for this bill. I wanted to make certain they had done some research prior to proposing it.

First I contacted the TN State Senator.  I briefly explained that I was doing research on all the TN bills that are being proposed that have to do with “sex offenders”. (You’d be surprised at how many bills have wording hidden in them having to do with more restrictions for registrants.) I asked the Senator where I could locate the research information that the bill was based on, any professional journals, state or government articles, statistics, etc. that were used as evidence that the bill was necessary.

I received a short reply that the Bill was actually brought to the Senator by the House Rep. so he would be the one to ask. (Sounded like he was passing the buck but I was assured my email would be forwarded and someone from the House Rep.’s office would be in touch.)

I waited 10 days and heard not a word.

I emailed the House Rep. with the same request. I inquired as to where he had obtained the information, upon which the need for this bill was based. Section 4 of the Bill clearly states that “the public’s welfare requires it”. Surely there must be some new empirical evidence for its basis if public welfare was in danger.

But no, there was no new evidence.

Although the House Rep. was kind enough to respond to my inquiry, his response which follows was a bit unsettling.

Here is what he responded, “The impetus for this bill was based on my own experiences in law enforcement in the district where I reside.” He goes on to say that “from his past experience, registrants from surrounding states were relocating to TN because of its lax sex offender laws. And that there have been several children assaulted by “sex offenders” in the past few years in his area.” After consultation with law enforcement and court officials he put forth this bill to deal with the pressing issue.

Is that all it takes to propose a bill?  Someone’s personal experience? Shouldn’t there be some empirical evidence to substantiate what they are proposing, not just their “well, in my experience….”?

This is a Bill that may be voted on by Senate & House Representatives, a Bill that would affect the lives of all registrants living in TN.  Will the legislators only hear the House Rep.’s viewpoint from his “personal experience” and nothing else? How can they vote wisely when they don’t have all the facts?

If we want “change” then we need to be willing to stand up and do something to make that happen.

This Bill may or may not make it to the House floor for a vote? I don’t know, but I’m not willing to take the chance that the House Rep.’s “personal experience” is all that the other legislators will ever hear before they vote. I am making certain that all the legislators hear both sides of the issue, not just one side.

Every day I send out a few emails to those Senators and House Representatives that will have a vote if this Bill comes up.  I want them to have all the facts about registrants, facts based on research and empirical evidence. I want them to know the statistics, the low re-offense rate, the difficulty registrants have finding jobs and housing with the current restrictions and how detrimental further restrictions will be not only to registrants but to their families as well.

If this Bill comes to a vote I want my state legislators to take into consideration the research I’ve done to present them with facts. I want them to remember my emails and letters, above and beyond the thoughtlessly proposed bill of a Rep. whose only facts are his own personal experience.

Will my letter writing and emailing make a difference?  I don’t know, I can only hope. The legislators proposing the Bill want to push it thru by July 2019.

No matter how small or inconsequential, we each need to play some small part, even if it’s just sending emails and writing letters to your state representatives. Perhaps when the next registrant issue comes up for a vote, your words will still resonate in their ears, perhaps your letter or email will make a difference in the way they choose to vote. That’s how we will change things.

To do something, is more productive than to do nothing.


Join the discussion

  1. Eric

    Kat, thank you for all you do and I enjoy your blog, it is very informative. So this TN House Rep said some children were assaulted by sex offenders. He didn’t say they were registered sex offenders. I wonder if it was just a play on words, as we know, the vast majority of sex offenses are done by people not on the registry. And also, the big fallacy that all sex offenders and people on the registry are grouped together for every and all offenses is an injustice. The categories are vastly different. Mnay never had any contact with another person. Also, We had a representative here get a federal indictment for bribery, so by the TN House Rep logic he should resign because obviously all reps are prone to crime, that is why they go into the business, uh… I mean public service.

  2. Dustin

    Agree with Eric – your posts are awesome. Can’t find your blog, though. Please post a link if you can.

    In my experience most politicians nowadays turn to writing more inane registry laws for to make a name for themselves (for the more obscure) or to cover their own questionable activities.

    Specific to the TN House Rep that replied to you, I’d be asking him which law enforcement and/or court officials he supposedly consulted with. Many LE have gone public with the ineffectiveness and other issues associated with the restrictions he’s (re)proposing now and virtually any court official can show how similar (as in THE EXACT SAME) restrictions are being struck down in numerous courts.

    As shown recently in Alabama – – it’s actually quite comical when these legislators are put on the spot to orate their justifications and reasonings for their proposals; they can’t do it more often than not.

    Letters and emails to those that make these proposals might work on occasion. I do it myself. But their biggest drawback is that they’re easily ignored (I have yet to receive a response from any legislator I’ve ever written). Many legislators aren’t interested in facts if they conflict with their chosen platforms. I think those like the posters in the above thread and Derek Logue have the right idea – confront them at the public hearings when they’re introduced and make them look silly defending their often indefensible proposals. It doesn’t always work, but still…

  3. kat

    Previous blog pieces can be seen at Women Against Registry/Scarlet Letter Echo

    • Dustin

      Added to bookmarks. Again, your posts rock. Keep them coming.

  4. Just Beachy

    Kat, thank you so much for what you do. It gives me hope.

    As for contacting state representatives, does it make any sense to contact them if you dont live in their state?

    We need to stand up and fight. If we don’t, they will take our lives away.

    • TS

      @Just Beachy

      I do reach out to those who represent districts or states other than my own, but do so anonymously to ensure they read what I have to say (within my own state is a bit different since they usually will listen to in-state constituents). My concern is they will dismiss what I have to say altogether since they don’t represent my area/state or merely forward it over to those who do, e.g. Congress in WDC (which I do have experience with by a former big elected official who thought they were too good to listen even though they serve the nation while on a committee). It can be seen as a bit of a chicken move, but to be safe and more sure they will read what I have to say, I use what I can to make sure it is heard. Reach out, you have the right to do this in this country at least.

      • Will Allen

        It is legitimate for anyone in the U.S. to contact anyone else about political or social issues. I’ll contact any legislator, law enforcement criminal, anyone. It’s legitimate because:

        1. It is very easy to not live in an area and yet still have a stake in it for various reasons. Also, I could decide to buy a home, business, or property, anywhere on any day. So it is not legitimate that “local” people think that a town/city/county/state/whatever “belongs” to them. That is not legitimate at all. I can buy anywhere. It is no more theirs than it is mine. That is how America works.

        2. All jurisdictions are under federal control. They all get some benefits (even money!) from the federal government. I have a 100% stake in all of that. There is no escaping that they are tied to my money and my share of all of our rights to tell the federal government what they should be doing.

        3. For me personally, I would be surprised if I don’t already own something in every single significant city in the country. If you own a large number of stocks in the U.S. (e.g. via index, mutual, sector funds or whatever), then you likely own things all over the country as well. I do think if perhaps your share in that is maybe only say something like $10,000 then your ownership across the country is still quite real and legitimate, but perhaps not huge. However, in my case, I’m not bragging and only saying this to somewhat justify some of my own insane, militant behavior, I have a huge stake all over the country. It is many multiples of all of the money that most normal *families* will earn in total for their entire lives. It is not insignificant. So when I’m complaining to some of these rube sheriff in some of these ass-backward towns, I know I probably already own part of their town, maybe a very, very significant part (e.g. a large employer), and could buy it all if I felt like it.

        4. These criminal politicians and the law enforcement criminals who support them are a cancer. They are an un-American cancer that has no right to exist in America. If they are not attacked, their cancer will spread. They have to be eradicated. If I can’t eradicate them, I’ll burn where they live to the ground. I’ll survive regardless.

        There are probably more legitimate reasons. That is all that I could think of offhand.

        • TS

          @Will Allen

          It wasn’t a matter of legitimacy, but asking about sense to do so. It always makes sense when one is fighting for a cause, but getting it read/heard isn’t always successful unless alternative methods are sometimes employed. Know your enemy as Sun Tzu says.

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 *