ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (7/10 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Click here to sign up now for ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18
Download a PDF of the schedule

General CommentsGeneral News

General Comments April 2019

Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of April 2019. Contributions should relate to the cause and goals of this organization and please, keep it courteous and civil. This section is not intended for posting links to news articles without additional comment.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

As I was watching Les Miserables for the first time with Liam Neeson (Jean Valjean) and Geoffrey Rush (the Inspector) the other night, I saw a parallel between the storyline there and the real-life stories of those who are or have been impacted by SO laws.

The Inspector’s incessant feeling of needing to tell all about Jean Valjean’s criminal history by chasing him around France when all Jean wanted was to live his life in peace as a new man after being shown mercy and grace by the priest who he stayed with after being paroled.

In today’s world, the Inspector is a bunch of 0’s and 1’s collating data that’s then shared further by other Inspector’s who run around with it doing what the Inspector originally wanted, inform the world.

My wish is in due time (much sooner rather than later) the Inspector today would do what the Inspector did in the story and handcuff itself and drown so Valjean could live his life in peace through the mercy and grace shown to him as a new man. That’s my Good Friday wish.

Probably will never go anywhere, but who knows.

Headline for BREA SCHOOL DISTRICT in Southern California:
Pedophilia Being Taught As “Sexual Orientation” in California Schools
Parents were told it is something that is natural and the students should know about this
I do not want to comment any further …

This is a Christian fundamentalist, hard-right canard that they have been milking forever. This is what you do when you’re losing the culture war, you spread disinformation and sow outrage.

Could you imagine if we were able to get 50,000-100,000 signatures on this petition? I really think a petition such as this could have real effect.

“With We the People, you can easily create a petition online, share it, and collect signatures. If you gather 100,000 signature in 30 days, we’ll review your petition, make sure it gets in front of the appropriate policy experts, and issue an official response.”

Interesting, I wonder how they would respond to a petition like this?

What’s up everyone, quick question don’t know if this is been brought up lately, but has anyone heard anything on Gundy v US?. Isn’t there suppose to be a decision on that case by the end of July. Just wondering, thanks in advance.


You can follow it on scotusblog by googling Gundy vs United States scotusblog.

Nothing yet.

@ TS, Thanks for the heads up and link.

I read the articles here and can’t help but recall what the county approved therapist remarked to me durrong s session. “Don’t feel dispair”, she said, “ the pendulum is definitely swinging in the right direction”. Really?

From NARSOL, a boy at age 7 is diagnosed with HIV, 37 years later he is convicted of a crime and given 12 yrs sentence and placement on the sex offender registry. His partners did NOT get HIV; he was convicted of not telling them he had HIV. Yes, not telling them is wrong… but 12 years imprisonment and the registry… for something he had nothing to do with in obtaining (HIV) at age 7? This is why I hate society and cry and cry for me and us all.

Do not agree. The guy should be required to tell a sex partner if he has aids. 12 years is easy time compared to what I would have done to them if it was me on the receiving end. I guess it is kind of up to the person to make sure they are protected, but if I got AIDS from someone because they did not tell me they had it we would have a SERIOUS problem…

If you can read this, you might find it interesting about someone having a hard time finding a place to live who isn’t a registrant but is a convicted murderer who has a lower recedivism rate than registrants.

What Happens When a Convicted Killer Moves to Town? – The New York Times

“Legally, Mr. Kokoraleis can reside anywhere he can afford to, so long as he registers his presence with the authorities. As a convicted murderer, Mr. Kokoraleis’s photo and address are listed on the Illinois sex offender registry website. But because he was not convicted of a sex crime, he is not prohibited from living within a certain distance of parks and schools.”

A murderer on the registry. How interesting. It’s the same thinking and treatment overall as what a registrant gets.

Well, of course there is a rational basis for this.

If you know where a murderer lives, it is much easier to avoid being killed by him. Oh, wait…nope…can’t think of a situation unless his conviction was for gunning down an annoying door to door salesman. In that case, no wonder he is out on parole.

Lets just get to the end game and register all of those with any previous conviction and be done with it.

That will put all those sleezy background check businesses out of business. It will eliminate plea bargains because everyone will want a full blown trial to avoid lifetime pariah status. That will require 20 times the amount the judiciary currently costs taxpayers and all of those registered people being out of work for life will bankrupt what is left of the US.

Sounds like a plan.

Sex Offense Registries in many States will also include individuals convicted of arson offenses. I suspect many sex offender restrictions also do not apply to them.

Well stated Chris…. Happy Easter people….

““There was mass concern in our community,” said the mayor, Richard C. Irvin, in an interview. “People felt insecure — they felt like their safety was in jeopardy. And people were scared.””

People are scared. LMFAO… Good. Pussies…. Get a pair and stop being pansies that are afraid of their own shadows. They guy did his time leave him the hell alone…. I kind of hope he breaks and starts at it again and gives them a reason to be scared lil feller….

what I have noticed over the years is the more money someone accumulates, the more scared they become of the bogeyman (imaginary or real)..threaten that person with said bogeyman and you threaten their main concern.. money

One more case for people’s freedoms (from the Sixth CCoA):

Federal appeals court says tire-chalking by parking enforcement officers is unconstitutional

We have discussed this here in this forum previously and it is getting more Orwellian by the year:

US facial recognition will cover 97 percent of departing airline passengers within four years

And here I thought your facial-recognition post was going to be this one:

I think this type of stuff getting out there will only help push a data privacy law into place. People are slowly realizing just how pervasive privacy loss is and how out-of-control it’s gotten and continues to be.

In a wholly unrelated story, did anyone else see the 6th CCoA struck down parking-enforcement tire-marking as an illegal search? I have yet to read the decision, but it made my day! I wonder what other topics one can leverage out of US v. Jones (GPS tracking case). I think Jones is fast becoming the keystone in any sort of government surveillance when on is in plain sight during innocent behavior.

Argh…re: tire marking, I should have looked a post higher.


I saw that headline and moved on figuring it was a travel complaint. Had I known the content, I’d have shared it too. That’s even better than my post and much scarier. No opt out! For exit at that!

So, registry info isn’t the only thing sent to WDC for flying the friendly skies, but I bet DOL/DMV photos too as well as passport photos and USG employee ID related photos.

I wonder if I can seek ex post facto parking fine refund plus interest as well for using an unconstitutional method to determine a violation? Doesn’t it go with ways? You go after people late with add ons, should the reverse not happen to?

*Doesn’t it go BOTH ways? and *…should the reverse not happen TOO?

@AJ, et al

There is a way out of this facial system (as they say), but you need to read this article here to learn more of details of the entire thinking and the opt out method:

Skip the Surveillance By Opting Out of Face Recognition At Airports

“Trading privacy for convenience is a bad bargain, and it can feel like the deal isn’t always one we have a choice in.”

Thanks for digging into this and supplying the EFF write-up. I’ve fired off emails to my Senators and Representative, along with the EFF URL. Maybe some extra light on this in particular, and privacy in general, can get the yoohoos in DC to do something.


No prob. It needs to be highlighted and seriously reconsidered.

Hmmmm🤔 Maybe we are overreacting. In practice, this may be another opportunity for TSA to increase its already phenomenal failure rate!
“….. the TSA screeners failed to detect weapons, drugs, and explosives almost 80 percent of the time.” (Source: )

In Texas, a school principal has proposed a dress code for parents. With that known, does anyone really think that they would repeal anything that would make it better for registry parents? If you do, you are dreaming!

And in NJ, Rep Chris Smith should be smiling from ear to ear as locals help provided justification for his IML legislation through their taxpayer efforts. What am I discussing? The internet ploy many here are already aware of which 16 there obviously were not. It won’t be named, but can be searched for your reading leisure. The stats will show prophetic by those listed if it goes to a bad ending for them.

What is this cryptic post regarding? Usually I can divine what you’re saying. Not so on this one.


There was an internet sting in NJ that nabbed 16 people including those in positions of trust the other day. Being Smith’s home state, he’s smiling.

Holy soup cans Batman! I don’t know if this would pass constitutional muster even though the ACLU agreed with it’s correct use and not long term. Define correctly and not long term. Could be no different from tracking cellphone with GPS on or the cell towers.

This will pass muster.

As long as they use it to assist in stopping someone that is avoiding our legal system by running and dont use it to monitor someones location to gather evidence then it wont have any issues.

However, if they stop pursuit completely and use the device to purposefully wait until the suspect leads them to a chop shop or drug house, then they are stepping into territory that needs a warrant. I see that happenning by some over achiever cops and bringing the program to an end.

@Chris f

It would be interesting to read the CONOPS WRT GPS tracker soup cans attached to a vehicle for the purpose of a pursuit only as intended after being shot at by LEO. I think the temptation to do more with it will be too great for the DPD to avoid and someone will be smart to challenge it in court. This truly is spy level thinking here in IMO.

A helicopter can follow you overhead, a motorized vehicle can follow from behind, but the fine line of GPS tracking WRT to security, privacy, and one’s rights is a continuing dance.

@Chris F

FYI – EFF is watching the soup cans I learned from them today.

I see we’re in rare company: “[Senator Sanders] was pressed on whether it was appropriate to enfranchise sex offenders or someone convicted of a heinous crime like Tsarnaev, who with his brother carried out the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing that left three dead and injured hundreds more.”

@ AJ: Voting patterns are closely related to sex offenses and allowing those individuals convicted of sexual offenses to vote could adversely affect elections. Why else would lawmakers oppose their voting rights?? (Sarcasm intended.)

Bernie or Biden will never, ever engage in a dialogue about humanizing us, much less acknowledge the colossal failure of Megan’s Law They’ll only dance around what’s safe for them by claiming we’re not 2nd class citizens blah, blah blah. Our restorative voting rights means nothing if they continue to stonewall on this issue. But hey, not surprised in the least we’re mentioned in the same sentence as the Boston Marathon bomber(s).


AOC also agreed ( with Uncle Bernie on this point while others disagreed (

This will get to be very interesting soon with the 2020 voting season upon us.

I was surfing the web chasing random info, when I came across The Adam Walsh Act – which indicated. That Tier 1 offenders are only mandated to register for 15 years. And being passed in 1996… 2021 is the 15 year mark.

I’m curious if we have considered asking the government to follow its own policy?

At which point in 2021, tier 1 offenders are removed from the registry.

Just a thought…


No, the 15 yr point would be 2011 with 2021 being the 25 year point.

Does it really matter, because they will move the goal posts anyway.

Regardless what AWA says, dual sovereignty means you’re still subject to whatever your State says. Also, AWA’s time frames were merely floor requirements for States. This means if a State imposes lifetime registration for all Tiers, no matter what, it meets AWA standards. IOW, the timeframes in AWA really don’t mean squat.

Find it interesting that a judge has helped a twice deported person avoid ICE, yet those of us having misdomeanors as an ONLY offense and otherwise law abiding citizens are treated with distain by the same judicial system for missing a regustration date by a few days Shows where we fall on the judicial ladder. I myself have become so law abiding that I move my car over if I park too close to another car! Oh well, so goes life.


I am trying to figure out what is needed to visit California. It’s very confusing. Do I need to register within 5 or 14 days? I’ve seen others ask this but I’ve never seen a clear answer. For instance. If I fly in on a Tuesday, and leave by Sunday, which is 4 “working” days, do I have to register or not?

If I do end up having to register, do they take me off the registry after I leave, or is it like Florida where they keep you on for life?

Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!


Under the Legal tab above will have the visiting to CA info. CA keeps you on for life and with your detailed travel info, you are fine without registering. Read the CA line from side to side.

A California school district has pulled a classroom course that essentially presented pedophilia as a normal part of human sexuality. The Brea Olinda School District, near Yorba Linda, California, yanked the curriculum after a conservative watchdog group raised the alarm over the program


“Did a California Public School District ‘Teach Pedophilia as a Sexual Orientation’?
A Christian conservative website and a group of activists in California responded with outrage to a classroom presentation’s reference to the Ancient Greek custom of pederasty. Claim:
In 2018 or 2019, Brea Olinda Unified School District in California “taught pedophilia as a sexual orientation.” FALSE!”

This is one of the religious right’s spurious and recurring falsehoods. We need to recognize this as a continuing motif in their campaign of disinformation. I realize that that may be difficult when one is, oneself, vulnerable to their predations but it’s essential that you step outside of the cult-bubble in order to identify reality.

Here is a and people impacted by the registry story from the national office folks here may find of interest as a couple impacted by the registry are looking to take on the aforementioned company, possibly in CA. I highly encourage people to read it. They could be in the market for a CA atty too if it gets that far since it is a CA based business.

I wouldn’t expect a banning or discrimination suit against nextdoor to be successful. Likewise FB. Private companies, and all that. They can ban if they want. As long as such sites are not legally recognized as public fora, the first amendment doesn’t apply.


The situation is a spouse of a person on the registry at the same address. That extends the harm beyond the person but to family at an address. Without an assessment of the spouse, they’re discriminating against them, an innocent person without cause beyond an address and another person living there. This creates bad press as well. As a private company, do they want to do this? It’s their right, but is it right?

The question also becomes are they extending this policy to other type of registry participating members, e.g. DV, DUI, etc? If not, then it could be bad press there. If so, then it could backfire altogether.

What about those families who have mischief laden children or adults with convictions for prowling, break n entering, burglary, etc, which are all neighborhood issues? People could scope out their neighbors from inside.

It’s a slippery slope even for a private company, IMO. It could squeeze to modify their policies.

Yeah, I’ve wondered about that. I certainly don’t know enough to give an intelligent legal opinion about it.

But it does seem wrong to me that if some platform blocks some U.S. citizens from using it, then why should any government be allowed to use that platform to serve citizens? Governments simply should not be allowed to use any platforms that intentionally block some people. That seems like an easy attack.

And BTW, is there actually anything much more idiotic than these bans? Truly what kind of moron does a person have to be to think it is useful? Perhaps only the Halloween stupidity is more idiotic. It’s a competitive race.

I wouldn’t use Geek Squad to put batteries in a flashlight and you shouldn’t either.

Interestingly, beneath the article was click bait featuring clearly under-age cheerleaders with come hither expressions, the headline something like “Yearbooks aren’t what they used to be.”


Thank you for posting that article from Iowa. We’ve discussed here before about not using Best Buy for our computer work but it’s always good to receive another reminder with an example of one of the finest citizens from the state of Iowa as the prime example.

I’m sure their bonus checks will be in the mail shortly from the management for doing such a fine extended job from the federal government in their computer work.

Those who are registered aren’t the only ones now banned from FB.
There’s company from some prominent people. Whether you use it or not, a fan of it or not, this what we need, more blocked.

Facebook Bars Alex Jones, Louis Farrakhan and Others From Its Services

I’m going to add this right here on this banning topic:

Banning, suitcase tossing, phone searches, marked passports…

Nice article. But.. The government should not interfere by setting rules protecting free speech and forcing businesses to comply.  Companies have a right to ban anyone they want to if it is not doing so against a protected class.  Even then, I would say they could ban someone who spews a message they dont like if that message is declared off limits.  A competitor is free to start a new service without restrictions on speech.

There may be a right to speak, but that does not convey a right that I must listen to you.  I should be free to communicate on a forum that bans those I wouldn’t care to listen to.  The mistake Facebook made is that it should allow all to speak and allow the end user the option to filter out those deemed unworthy.  Now, they open themselves up for competition.

The failure here, is that our government shouldnt be allowed to create a list of “sex offenders”.  At that point, a company cant afford to look at all sex offenders on a case by case basis and just has to ban all.  This means to satisfy due process, it is on the government to make sure all those on the “list” it created are worthy of all the potential deprevations of liberty forced on them.  That isnt possible either, which is why no list should be made and it is the judge’s job to ensure any restrictions placed on a person are needed, and for how long.

DPS is putting out rewards for leading to the capture/conviction for failure to register.

Wow, now they have citizens looking for these technical violators. What a way to incite more vigilantism.

This is akin to mob courage, spite work and lynching. They’re actually inticing vengeance masquerading as a “proactive” initiative. We’re no longer living in America.

This is exactly how John Walsh got rich – from overzealous tattletales and “do-gooder” snitches.

nothing has really been said of john walsh when he was fooling around with underage girls while he was married, he is nothing but a slime ball in a sea of puss along with the dps nuff said!

@R M & Facts

It’s one person in particular they’re looking for and broadcast via a news station on the Texas Mexico border! Where do you think he might go eh? South perhaps? Think someone in Mexico might want or need some money in return for his whereabouts?

This is no different than the newspaper showing people in the crime stoppers section with the daily top ten people of criminal interest or asking for the public’s help on a post office posting of a wanted person. Yes, this is how Walsh rode Adam’s back to riches but long before him others did the same.

If it was a wanted dead or alive posting, then that’s inciting possible violent action or possibly vigilante justice. No, you can’t say what someone would do to him, but to think the worst? Both of you need to stop the sky is falling thinking.

i agree, this is just a standard short news broadcast for a wanted person. News broadcasters do it all the time for lots of crimes. If this was a real vigilante type post on YouTube, it would likely be taken down by YouTube. I’ve seen several vigilante groups that follow registered citizens and post it to YouTube and once YouTube receives complaints, they will suspend that account. YouTube doesn’t want problems and is quick to take down videos or suspend accounts for the smallest of content violations. If you see any real vigilante videos, bullying or hate speach on YouTube, make sure you report it to them.

@TS: One problem I have with it is they label him as a “most wanted sex offender”. How is failure to register a most wanted person, especially with the low recidivism rates? Aren’t there hundreds more unsolved crimes committed that actually hurt people? Second, this is how it all starts… offer one reward, others follow. Eventually people will form groups to hunt us down and do whatever it takes to capture us and their reward… oops, that’s already happening.

@R M

See your first point and don’t disagree. Consider the mouthpiece and their mission to get your answer. Stats don’t matter to the irrationals.

I see your manhunt premise but that is applied to anyone already regardless of the violation and any $$ reward applicable.

Absolutely. “Failure to Register” is a “crime” that harms no one at all and is not dangerous in any way. Completely insignificant. Further, anyone who does not Register has likely greatly improved public safety.

People need to stop letting these big government employees talk as if Registering matters.

Just a vent here…
I’m really stressed out as my daughter’s 5th grade culmination rapidly approaches. I’ve not been to a single school function for her or her little brother and last month she was utterly crushed when I missed her class play in which she work so incredibly hard to perform the lead role. Now she’ll she’s likely to give a speech and sing the national anthem. What excuse can I give this time, or do I go? If I go, do I get the approval of the principal, which outs me as the father of two of the school’s most outstanding children (boast, boast) and their mother’s husband, or just go, maintain a low profile, and leave at the first opportunity? My inclination is toward the latter. What do you guys think? And if someone can recommend another support forum for such matters I’m most grateful.

@C: I really want to answer your questions as I missed out on many years of my son’s life but I can not. I am so sad at what you had/have to go through. The only thing I can say is, keep yourself out of imprisonment as this will only wreck tears on you and her.

I refused to miss anything of my 3 kids. I went to every graduation and sporting event. Low profile is the way to go. Don’t use a bathroom on campus If they are going to arrest you for being a good parent f them was my attitude


So sorry that you are in that situation. I will probably get criticisms and expressions of disbelief for saying this, but I didn’t realize until recently (maybe a year ago) that we were banned from school property. I would like to know when that ban actually occurred so I can determine how much risk I was actually in.

I went to all my kids school events, but my youngest graduated 11 years ago. I have been to graduations of friends and neighbors kids, as recently as two years ago. I have occasionally taken neighbor kids to school when they missed the bus, and I have had friends call me to pick up their kids from school when they got tied up. In this case, they had to call the school to let them know I was the one picking them up. About four years ago, I picked up a friend’s kid from morning kindergarten two or three times a week during the school year and took him to his day care. To do this, I had to fill out an information form at the school, and get the parents signatures authorizing me to pick him up. I had to sign him out each time. On three occasions, the school actually called me to come and pick him up, when the one who was supposed to didn’t show up. About three summers ago, I took a friend’s son to a summer school class and picked him up every day for about six weeks. My wife is a middle school teacher. I went to her classroom many times, mostly after school. A couple of times during the summer, I spent a few hours at her school helping her change classrooms.

So when did the school prohibition begin? I am sure it wasn’t there when I was sentenced, or while I was on probation. Was it Megan’s law? Jessica’s law? or just some policy change along the way?

I’m not sure if my point is that ignorance is bliss, or was I just extremely lucky? I guess as @steve commented, I was keeping a low profile, and no one noticed.

I wish I could give you a definitive answer @C, but whichever way you choose to handle it, I hope it works out for you.

Do not go without approval, the risk is that you would be put back in jail and lose more time of your childrens life, think of explaining the arrest to your kids. Go through proper channels, explain the situation and hope that they are reasonable people.

They are worried they will have to explain how it works in IDing people during court cases. Hmm, let’s see, will they use it as a hammer to get pleas or will the person challenge it in courts like they do currently with other cases where the USG does not want to give up their secrets? If they get it wrong, can Amazon be sued too or just the user who incorrectly applied it?

Oregon became a testing ground for Amazon’s facial-recognition policing. But what if Rekognition gets it wrong?

Hopefully the irony of WaPo reporting on this wasn’t lost on anyone. I also wryly noticed that they beat us to the punch by spelling the system with a K, not a C. Amerika indeed!


Very ironic indeed. Corporate sibling punch. That raised my eyebrow.

This is probably the single most dangerouse technological advance with least constitional protections in place that has ever existed.

Once enough recognition cameras are linked, it is like the government putting gps tracking on everyone. They will know where you are and where you have been.

In addition, by linking the name returned by the scan of their face to any and all criminal databases or even lists of people in certain groups it will enable almost instant discrimination or rude treatment by businesses and anyone with a Ring doorbell.

There is no way to “opt out” of this intrusive technology short of moving to Amish country.

Imagine if all you had to do was look at a person and instantly know everything that person had ever done wrong and any undesirable groups or people they have associated with, but none of the circumstances or details of why, and no info on the good things that person has done or is doing?
How can that possibly help society?

@Chris f

You mean like Google glass one wears (or similar technology) and could maybe do what you say in knowing about someone without even an introduction or maybe using a cellphone to do the same in a location?

Spot on comments.

I think 100% government surveillance of everyone in public is inevitable UNLESS the American public restricts government. If we don’t fight them and restrict them, it will happen. Just a matter of time.

If it does happen, I see people completely masking their identities. Then of course they will have to create new “laws” to make it illegal for those super dangerous “$EX offenders” to do that.

I am visiting San Diego from Illinois with my wife, and we are renting a house for six weeks. I guess I have to register with the local police. Anyone know how to do this, where I go, etc. Do you have to do it in person? Do you then go again when you are leaving or can you give them the in/out dates in one visit?

@Illinois Contact

If someone from San Diego replies, you can ignore my two cents worth.

If the house you are staying in is within the city limits of an incorporated city (one with its own government and police department, i.e. the City of San Diego) then you would go to the police department of that city. If the house is outside of any city limits, or in an unincorporated city, you would go to the San Diego County Sheriff’s office. Chances are, you can find the information on their website.

You will have to go in person, and you will probably need some sort of proof of address, such as your rental agreement. If you are lucky, they may allow you to let them know when you are leaving by phone or email, without having to go in. Also, they may want to contact your registering agency in Illinois to verify specifics about you.

Otherwise, have a great visit! San Diego has a lot of attractions and the weather is usually very pleasant.

@IL contact

Please review the CA line of the state matrix under the legal tab above, especially the last box about not being removed per Rolfe Survey once registered. This, IMO, makes you a possible prime litigant in a case v CA for not removing you after you’ve left.

Wow, sounds like a great trip! I love SD – we’re down there several times a year and always regret returning to this festering s-hole, LA.
Sorry I can’t speak to the registration req’s, but just do whatever you gotta do to be legal, then relax and have a great time!

Highly encourage people hear to read this and think on it. We stand here pretty firm on our rights since we are subjected to harshness from others in life, so I’d imagine most here would say “No”. However, not many do when you read this:

Would You Let the Police Search Your Phone?

As @AJ says here from time to time 1) Am I being detained? 2) Am I free to go? 3) I don’t consent to this search

You have a right to say “no” and be within those rights legally despite what the popo says. Also, when the popo moves a hand to the belt area, you can pretty be sure they are creating a threatening gesture by getting close to a stick, firearm, or incapacitating device, e.g. taser, and thus can be potentially seen as coercive in court.