ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: Nov 21, Dec 19 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

2020 ACSOL Conference – ONLINE October 10-11
More Info and Sign-Up

National

NE: Advocates call for an end to the public sex offender registry

[fox42kptm.com – 5/20/20]

A shooting in North Omaha has sparked concerns over the state sex offender registry. Following the death of Mattieo Condoluci, members of the National Association of Rational Sexual Offense Laws (NARSOL) are calling for the state to remove the public state sex offender registry.

“If he was not on the registry I have no doubt he would be alive,” NARSOL Vice Chair Robin Vander Wall said.

Vander Wall said the current system requiring sex offenders to register and make their address public is not effective in keeping the community safe.

“The statistical research and the data now that has been done over the last decade just demonstrates almost uniformly that they aren’t doing any good. They aren’t really accomplishing any useful policy purpose. They are kind of feel good laws, they make people feel safe, but at the end of the day they are not really safe,” Vander Wall said.

Read the full article

 

Join the discussion

  1. Jack7170

    Add that to the fact this kind of thing has been happening for years, and you’ve got a great Supreme Court case here. That said, the supreme court is completely political at this point and the only way it’s gonna work is with a court packed full of liberal justices. The republicans have got to GO.

    • Roger H

      @Jack, generalizations like that are no longer as clear-cut today. The courts tend to FOLLOW social norms historically, so they rarely trailblaze social rights without a change in the attitudes of society. Just look how many years gays, blacks, Native Americans and many other persecuted groups had to fight for justice and appear in the news before the courts changed their opinions.

      In fact, some Democratic lawmakers write strongly anti-registrant bills, as we see with California Senate Bill 853.

    • Looking for Answers

      Jack,
      Not so…
      Holding: The judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit that 34 U. S. C. §20913(d) – which requires the U.S. attorney general to apply the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act’s registration requirements as soon as feasible to offenders convicted before the statute’s enactment – is not an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority is affirmed.

      Judgment: Affirmed, 5-3, in an opinion by Justice Kagan on June 20, 2019. Justice Kagan announced the judgment of the Supreme Court and delivered an opinion, in which Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor joined. Justice Alito filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justice Gorsuch filed a dissenting opinion, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Thomas joined. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

      It appears that there were conservatives who did not agree in this case, not liberals.

  2. Jack7170

    Sorry guys I can’t consider republicans as valid. They’re the ones who’ve been literally trying to wipe us out nazi style since 1994. Death penalty for statutory rape ringing in any bells here? Jessica’s law? Sharon Runner’s all too typical of conservative attitudes and they take controlling sexuality far more seriously than democrats.

    • TS

      @Jack,

      Before swinging the hammer on one party, consider this: Megan’s Law was introduced by a Rep (R-NJ) in the House of Reps but was voice passed in both houses unanimously (both parties) and signed into law by POTUS (D-AR),
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megan's_Law

      • Jack7170

        Ok regarding Megan’s law, who’s the architect here? Who came up with it, a republican. Bill Clinton is guilty too yes I agree that’s why we got rid of him. Now, we have people like Elizabeth warren who want to literally REPEAL the Jacob Wetterling act entirely. And then after all of this fucking nonsense who decides to come up with the international Megan’s law? Chris Smith a republican.

        • Roger H

          @jack, remember President Obama signed International Megan’s law and Democratic legislators voted for it with little opposition.

          Democrats have had to show they are tough on registrants so as to not appear soft on crime during the mud slinging that goes on during elections. After years of this, Democrats are closer to anti-registrant than progressive toward us.

          That’s why we have to educate and reach out to both parties.

        • Looking for Answers

          Jack,
          I think there are baddies on both sides. We have some annoying democrats in CA who try their hardest to sway any ground Janice is gaining here, but there are also some who are even-keeled and more understanding.
          Yeah, Chris Smith is a moron. And there are A LOT of terrible republican lawmakers like him as well too. Like that other scumbag in NC (Burr) who switched all of his stocks last minute before the market tanked. That guy was attacking his opponent at the time for being “soft on SOs” because the guy, a former lawyer, didn’t believe in draconian sex offense laws. So yeah, I agree that republicans are not always the right choice, either.
          There are people on both sides of the political spectrum who are dumb, and there are people on both sides who can view it for what it is- punishment and a waste of time and money, and in this case, deadly and wrong.

    • Doc Martin

      Regarding registration and sex offense laws, Democrats can be bad but Republicans are far worse. In California they’ll make you tier 3 and have you register for life for having sexually explicit photos of minors on your computer, but next door in republican Arizona, they’ll throw you in prison for a minimum of 10 years for each photo. Sure you have to register for only 20 years when you get out, but that means little when you’ve been locked up for 10 years. It’s no coincidence that the few states (Oregon, Minnesota, Massachusetts, New Jersey) that don’t publically list every single offender are blue states. You can live in the most conservative republican states in the country (like Oklahoma & Wyoming) and you’ll still find harsh registry laws whipped up by fear & hysteria. And for all you libertarian no govt folks on this forum. Do you really think people would leave you alone if the government stepped out of the picture? You’ll have roaming bans of victim rights vigilantes hunting you down and hanging you from a tree like dogs.You don’t need the govt to create a hit list. Private companies can easily get a hold of court documents, find individuals who commited sex offenses, then create their own private hit list on an app-you already see what neighborhond scout and family watch dog are capable of. And don’t believe for a second they have to rely on state registries to do their bidding. Before the registry came out, the internet was under developed and we didn’t have the technology, but if the state registry would disappear tomorrow, private forces would step in to meet the demand of fearful, hysterical and paranoid people who believe there’s always a stranger around the corner ready to snatch their child. So like I always say on this forum, its not about changing the government, but changing the minds and hearts of everyday people, de-escalating their fears, and good governance will naturally follow.

      • Dustin

        Regarding private companies, you’re right – they can. BUT, most of them just republish the registry. It wouldn’t be cost-effective for them to pay for those records from the courthouse, and they probably wouldn’t get many subscribers, at least not long term.

        Abolish the registry and most of those companies will close, and any attention given to those that remain will wane. THAT’s the reason they want the registry around, not “community safety.”

    • Harry

      I was the liberal stacked SCOTUS said, “that the price club membership was constitutional”.

      • Jack7170

        Wasn’t it Roberts who said that? And idk what you’re thinking but I cannot recall one time in my entire life where liberals have had a majority on the Supreme Court.

        • catch22

          Yes it was Roberts , there is no guarantee for us on which way the court leans but they definitely need to make another decision on this

  3. Brandon

    I wonder if ages of children on the registry and what they were convicted of be placed in the public’s face. The registry was to protect children and save one child; but now could it be your precious kid!! Wonder if that would shock people’s lives or are more people so far gone to face reality.

  4. TS

    Ironic thing about this needless death, it was three days before the 26th Anniversary (May 17) of Megan’s Law going into effect by POTUS signature.

  5. Eric

    It seems like the time is approaching. Our national numbers should reach one million this year so we have the potential to be quite a political force, and this is precisely why they attempt to keep us isolated and restricted. But the time is near to go public and protest. There have been several murders and assaults in California as well, so this registry is just a hit list for mentally unstable vigilantes, con artists, and busy bodies. If enough pressure is put forth then the states will start taking action to modify the registry and move towards ending it or at least not making it public. And if the states begin rescinding it the feds will eventually have to follow. It is time!! This has gone too far already.

  6. Jack7170

    @ Roger H. Yes that’s true he did sign it but about the democratic opposition, that is not true. Smith was working on the international Megan’s law from 2008 onwards and he never so much as got it past a committee when the democrats were in control. After 2010 when republicans got control it kept passing the house but always failed to pass the senate until 2014 when the democrats lost control of it.

    • TS

      @Jack

      You have to wonder if either party from the NJ delegation would have sponsored a bill after Megan was killed because 1) they’d be lobbied from their NJ constituents to create such a bill to be passed (maybe they were but Zimmer (R) from 12th ran with it) and 2) any politician knows when to exploit a crisis or event for political gain; however, I don’t know for a fact either party would’ve done it. Maybe the D’s would’ve passed on it with bad optics to deal with come election time. You can see there were 27 co-sponsors of Megan’s Law from both parties (https://www.congress.gov/bill/104th-congress/house-bill/2137/all-info), even with more R than D in the end as co-sponsors.

      Yes, it was CJ Roberts who said it is just like a Price Club membership.

      Bill Clinton was not gotten rid of but timed out due to term limits in office.

      For ideological leanings of SCOTUS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_leanings_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_justices

      • Jack7170

        Chris Smith would believe me haha. He’s still making appearances with the Kankas. And as for the 90s, what can I say other than, New Democrats were horrible. They absolutely corrupted the party, and luckily Barack Obama was able to limit their influence.

  7. mike r

    Lot of people on this post so, https://ufile.io/xeeyclz2
    Check it out let me know what people think. I am filing in state court as I am tired of waiting in fed court.

    • David

      No, Mike r, not “a lot of people” on this post – just several people repeatedly posting in an ongoing discussion/thread.
      Please post it in “General Comments” (rather than trying to make use of a thread to which it is unrelated.) ☹️

  8. Saddles

    Many of these registry issues are exploiting in this computer way and for an advantage or disadvantage in this carnal issue. Just like a betrayl or a breaking down of someone.

  9. Saddles

    I like this article on advocates wanting to banish the Registry. I’m glad someone is getting a handle on it more at this time as time moves on. So whats the final jepordy question or test for these answers, obey government and trust in Government or just to press on in seeing your loved one’s go to jail for getting mistreated in these internet sting operations, or understand principals of truth and understanding. So were do you start.

    Hasn’t it already started. Even those small win’s that some see as victories but are they actually victories. Seems like authorities are still deceiving via this computer. Is helping to control this trafficking of this internet abuse game helping. One has to wonder who is the traffic cop or who is the covenant breaker. Is it the man behind the scenes that doesn’t know his right shoe from the left shoe or the one that is usurping their government profession.

    One wonders today about those without sin casting the first stone. I’m sure Paul did not partake in stoning Steven. Sure he might have overseen. One wonders if this offense registry is in conflict in many ways. Are governments oversteping their legal bounds say in this manner of thy shall not steal in this crafty way. One wonders about all this double standard.

    Would one say these stings are a political harmony ga,e in this unrest type ordeal. A safety mode of opportunity to usurp another in this diabolical way. Does one leave that all up to the courts of justice and truth, or are authorities in many ways abusing the commandments in vain ways.

    Someone talked about Obama on here while one shouldn’t say anything about another person he sure chopped up the sermon on the mount pretty good and that should tell one something. One wonders who is judging?

  10. Jay M

    Right now, it looks like the petition in favor of the murderer is over 21,000 people. Why don’t we start writing letters to the District Attorney prosecuting the case? How about all of the registrants in Nebraska sign a proclamation stating they intend to use Nebraska’s Castle Doctrine as their first option? Just a thought.

  11. Saddles

    While we can all look at the registry in many ways wether one wants to go the christian way with their bit of faith or whatever I’m sure all want to be right on the subject matter at hand. Well tell me one person thats always right or dont’ we all make mistakes and error. Besides I hate giving out bars of soap (no offense) but do we all think on this registry ordeal. I’m sure we all do.

    Are we enticed in our own evil desires or do we all have to know an attack of demonic proportions. I mean the flesh is sinfull and yes its weak, we all can fall into temptation. Who needs that soap now? Remember Satan can only influence but not control. So who is bringing up the evil desire to make hay with some teenanger that say they are home alone. Is that making some sense to some.

    What about these Commandments that I’ve mentioned to you all who is the breaker of these or is government on a highter platform than the creator which may be the case and point. Sure we can all try to puff each other up with good news but the good news is Jesus died for each one of us and thats fact enough for me.

    This sex offender issue that came up about some killing, was it right, was it the internets fault, or some vengful ordeal, who knows the thoughts and intent of another but their is one thing that and we are all weak and war within ourselves, we are all like filthy rags according to the bible. So sure I would say that this registry has to go in many respects. Now if police wants to play lamppost in this way i’m sure that type of camalofluge is ok, but than law enforcemen show stick to the outside crimes of catching bank robbers and things of that nature.

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 *

.