ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: September 21 Phone Meeting Recording Uploaded
Upcoming:
Oct 19 – LA, Nov 16 – Sacramento, Dec 14 – Phone | details

Emotional Support Group Meetings (Los Angeles, Sacramento, Phone)

National

ME: Sanford sex offender residency ordinance would cite landlords, property owners

The Sanford City Council is considering a sex offender residency restriction ordinance that would cite landlords and property owners for violations. …

Sanford Police Chief Thomas Connolly said is was his understanding that the ordinance would fall under licensing and permitting as a zoning issue, and so would be enforced against the property, rather than the sex offender. He said the police department would have little to do with the ordinance unless there was a problem at the location.

Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

    “In the future it really is an obligation of the owner of that property to make sure the sex offender isn’t living there, and then it is also the responsibility of realtors or someone at the time of the sale to make sure they aren’t selling a property or allowing a sale to take place to a sex offender,” if the ordinance is adopted, said Sanford Community Development Director Ian Houseal.” “Penalties for the civil violation would range from $100 to $2,500 a day, under the city’s business licensing code.”

    You see, increasingly, everyone is being forcibly conscripted into the war against “sex offenders.”

    • David

      Yes, Notorious D.I.K., BUT….. maybe when OTHERS start suffering the effects of the Registries, perhaps they will join the voices against Registries.

      (But wait, remind me again why those convicted of DUI offenses are allowed to drive their children to school and pick them up at school? With the verified high DUI recidivism rates, why aren’t the public safety advocates concerned about innocent school children getting maimed or killed by a DUI driver? If it saves one child…blah, blag, blah …… They commit the crime [DUI] hundreds of times before they are caught….blah, blah, blah …. Most [DUIs] go unreported…. blah, blah, blah…. )

      [I know many will frown at the DUI comparison, but it does put the focus on the lies told by public safety advocates who constantly attack registrants.]

      • Will Allen

        Obviously it makes a lot more sense to keep people who have committed DUI away from schools than it does people who have committed a $EX offense. Even the genius Registry Supporters surely recognize that.

        You can’t really tell right away if someone is driving drunk through school streets. However, if there is ANY adult walking among the students, you do need to keep ALL of them from molesting anyone. And you probably shouldn’t let ANY adult go walking off with a student, or do whatever/however the Registry Nazis fantasize these random $EX crimes would happen.

        It’s fairly indefensible to try to justify keeping people who committed a $EX crime a decade ago away from anywhere. Really doesn’t make sense. But Nazis don’t care, of course, because it’s not for public safety anyway. It’s for harassment and making them feel good.

        The fact that the Nazis don’t keep all people who have committed any significant crime away from schools is 100% proof that it’s not really for public safety, protecting children, or the rest of their lies.

      • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

        David, re: “I know many will frown at the DUI comparison…” They shouldn’t. DUI is demonstrably far more dangerous than any of us are (and vastly more dangerous than the great majority of us) and takes an actual death toll far-and-away greater than anything even the worst sex monsters can provide. So, if anyone should be complaining about the comparison, it should be us. DUI is far worse yet treated far more leniently.

  2. FinallyOffTheReg

    Here we go again. Just another group of idiots passing idiotic rules for the idiots that don’t take into account that residency restrictions do nothing. I wonder if they have thought about Heroin dealers and the like and given THAT a good review. Idiots. Just blazing *&%%%% Idiots,

    Cheers.

    • Facts should matter

      We’re singled out for this abuse because it’s socially acceptable discrimination at this moment in history. As far as housing, they want us to live in rural barns with the rest of the wild animals !

      If they tried this crap with drug or gang felons, there would be swift and indiscriminate retaliation with bloodshed in the streets stemming from random acts of violence. Cars flipped and set on fire in front of City Halls, etc.

  3. Timothy

    The ever expanding onerous USES of the databases, by Law as per leadership. When Tavern owners in WI had to opt for law permitting underage college kids ( potential & LIKELY near future customers\ clients) to be sued by Taverns for attempting to ACTUALLY NOW PURCHASE what taverns are designed to do (selling swill) I knew they we’re responding to LEOs recruiting college kids currently seeking degrees in criminal justice to engage in attempting to purchase alcohol as someone not lawfully permitted. That is how protection rackets operate. An artificial villain is created.

    • TS

      To add one more thing to NDIK comments, DUI is far more relatable to people whether they or someone they know has been caught or not or even involved in DUI at some point(s) in life.

      If more elected officials were caught in DUI had the same level of treatment as those who are registrants, the uproar would be huge. Instead, they go to treatment, get cured, get deferred sentences, etc.

      • Timothy in WI

        Victims advocates MADD, prompted for tougher law to PREVENT.(to .08BAC) it Doesn’t work though.
        Better to Demand the hiring of a driver to haul to and from by law upon 1st conviction. Make a pick up and drop off service for a small fee to volunteers ( if they’re so concerned as MADD).

        INSTEAD they opt expensive electronic breathalyzer attachment & probation. Lawyers, civil workers, rinse and repeat. DUI pervasive in my state. 3-5th common. Many cases are local and less than 20 min drive to bar, tavern or pub.

        The very purpose of ex post prohibition was to down grade victim stance. It breeds distrust of government and each other. Consider the administration agents that suffered civil suit from holding position over Dr. Nasser and others. Collateral second hand damage.

  4. Anonymous

    I wonder if Sanford Police Chief Thomas Connolly has ever done anything that would land him on the rregistry . . I wonder.

  5. Matthew

    Just keep record of all these failed bills and when the supreme court reviews a case, we can cite all the cases that failed due to enforcing everything that doesn’t involve a simple “tracking” for law enforcement.

  6. Eric

    How in the world can a group of adults sit down and say, “Yeah, this sounds like a good idea,” and nobody says, “You know, if these were gays or blacks or Native Americans or women or basically any other identity group on the planet we would be in big trouble for this.”

    • Will Allen

      “Group of adults”? That is not what those “people” are.

  7. Bruce Ferrell

    I would imagine MOST states prohibit discrimination for a number of things on the basis being registered including employment, housing etc. I know Janice has spoken on it at meetings.

    I wonder what happens when one is sworn to uphold the letter of the law and then openly advocate that others break that same law?

  8. AJ

    I wonder where is the breaking point in SCOTUS’ eyes on these things. Contrary to what SCOTUS stated in Smith, RCs are not “free to move where they wish and to live and work as other citizens[.]” Granted, this phrase was speaking in reference to comparing things to parole, probation, or some other supervision. However, it’s a bald-faced lie to say RCs can move, live, and/or work as other citizens can. The reason for this being a direct, not collateral, consequence of a public registry. SCOTUS really needs to pull its buttcheeks off its shoulders and realize how they royally screwed this one up.

  9. e

    I hate to be the one that says “I told you so”, but……….

    The powers that be will always find a way around the laws implemented to give us a chance. If a court says a person can live in a place within a set of parameters, L.E. and politicians will change those parameters.
    I suggest you watch the movie “Cool Hand Luke”. “You put boss’s dirt in my hole”. “ Now you have my dirt on boss’s ground!”
    They will keep making it impossible to follow and then will arrest you for not following the law, even if , as so many of us have been witness to, they themselves don’t really know it!

  10. Time for a Change

    I found this new “restriction ordinance” hilarious. As a matter of background, someone in my family is on a sex-offender registry. I think the registries are all ridiculous. That new restriction ordinance is about nothing more than a localities creative attempt to find yet another way to pad its own coffers. Many sex offenders live in close proximity to schools without any incident. Many sex offenders are allowed to pick up their own kids at school, again with no incident. But wait, we need to restrict where they can live, and now we can punish not only the sex offender for living where he is not allowed, we can punish the property owner too, where it hurts most–in the wallet! It’s NOT about pubic safety it’s all about money and creative ways to get more of it for a city or county.
    In the case of my family member who is on the registry, he’s been out of prison for nearly eight years. He’s not had so much as a speeding ticket. He follows the rules, wouldn’t ever engage a child in a conversation out of fear of what “could” happen to him (what he might be accused of), and he works and pays his taxes. His fines are paid and he’s completed his treatment program. But, someone did find it necessary to look him up on the registry, call him at his work (which is on the registry website info), and try to dupe him into believing he had three warrants that all could be taken care of if he just made a payment on the phone. The state police did nothing to investigate this attempted scam and extortion, other than tell my family member that if they wanted him, they’d come pick him up, not call him!
    I find the whole idea of sex offender registries just another excuse for bureaucrats to make jobs for themselves and suck up more public money that could be used for far more useful things!

    • Will Allen

      All sounds about right.

      Except that it is inaccurate to call people who are listed on the $EX Offender Registries “$EX offenders”. So I wouldn’t do that if I were you. It is inaccurate and nearly always just hateful name calling (not in your case obviously).

      I don’t think these ordinances are about money though simply because it’s just a pathetic amount. Monetary fines are in place to encourage the property owners to do what big government wants them to do. About it.

      These ordinances are just NIBMY BS by stupid people who need to feel better about themselves. That is truly all I think it is about.

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 *

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

.