ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (4/17 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings
ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18, 2021


CA Legislature Passes Senate Bill 145

On the last day possible, the California legislature passed Senate Bill 145.  The bill now goes to the Governor who has up to 30 days to sign or veto it.

“Senate Bill 145 has been controversial since its introduction,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.  “Due to the dedication of its author, Senator Scott Wiener, Senate Bill 145 was passed over the objections of the Appropriations Committee chair and despite multiple threats of physical harm.”

If the Governor signs the bill, judges will have discretion regarding whether to require an individual who performs certain sexual acts with a person 10 years or younger to register as a sex offender.  In the past, judges have lacked discretion in that area and as a result many gay men have been added to the sex offender registry.

ACSOL has supported Senate Bill 145 since its introduction and more than 100 members of ACSOL have testified in support of the bill during committee hearings.


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 do not solicit funds
  • 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.  
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

That’s good news! But it’s so disheartening to keep reading how much the general public seems to misunderstand what the bill actually does. All anyone thinks this allows is making it perfectly okay for a 20-year-old to have sex with a 10-year-old.

Please explain the bill then. Because the way I am reading it if someone(27 years old) has sex with person 17 years old then the judge can make the a sex offender or not??? If you’re over 18 yes it’s your choice but if you’re under 18 and they had sex with you. They should be a sex offender. Not bashing the bill just trying to understand it

That’s correct in what you said. The bill has no affect on victims 14 and under otherwise, so my original example stands.

Also, because you don’t seem to be aware of it, majority of our states have the age of consent set to 16. CA is one of only a handful of states that has it at 18. So judges having this discretion puts it slightly in line with how it’s not even a crime in majority of the country to do what you described in your example.

So what if it’s a 23 year old and 13 year old?

No. Your example DOES NOT stand. The law is written as follows: a person convicted of a violation of subdivision (b) of Section 286, subdivision (b) of Section 287, or subdivision (h) or (i) of Section 289 shall not be required to register if, at the time of the offense, the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor, as measured from the minor’s date of birth to the person’s date of birth, and the conviction is the only one requiring the person to register. This paragraph does not preclude the court from requiring a person to… Read more »

You’re responding to my answer that literally addressed that with the first paragraph. Victims 14 and under are unaffected by this law. You do anything like this to someone 14 and under, and you’ll need to register. The judge will have no say about it.

What did I say that wasn’t accurate? I said this won’t prevent mandatory registration in the case of a 20 year old and a 10 year old. That this only affects gay acts with those 14+, to bring into the same alignment as hetero acts. I pretty much assume most judges will still want to register the person. They now just have an option not to unlike before.

My bad. Read it wrong. I thought you were saying that the law would allow a 20 year old to sleep with a 10 year old, which it doesn’t. But I stand by my opinion that this law won’t change anything as long as a judge can use 290.006. As a straight person, I’m not required to register but The judge ordered it anyway. Rep. Wiener thinks straight couples have an advantage not afforded to gay couples when in actuality they don’t.

It is not OK. Period. Just the elite and the trillion $$ child trafficking easier to control. When in reality they all should be well you know. Its sick

This bill didn’t change anything on what the laws already allowed for heterosexual crimes. All it did was bring into alignment what the law allowed for gay crimes.

You’re absolutely right! It’s aimed at making sexual predators safe in California. 14 is a child!

What section speaks to bill only applying to 14+? The way I’ve read it, this law doesn’t change any prosecution of illegal acts, only the need to register. As a father of 2 toddlers, I would feel much better knowing individuals that had been convicted of sexual acts with a child were visible in the registry. I’m all for equality and I applaud the strides in that direction, but what I do not appreciate is the apparent grey area with the 10yr range. Why was 10yrs chosen? Why not 5? Why not 2? Why not 15? I agree that if… Read more »

The TS who wrote this reply is NOT the same TS that has been writing here for the past several years, but another one with their own concerns.

TS (

Good, because I thought you’d lost your mind. Talking as if Registries are sensible or acceptable, LOL. What a joke.

I have not lost my mind on that point! They’re a joke!

@mimi, are you one of the million moms against registrants or something! This page is not welcome to you. We do not judge our FELLOW registrants. We offer support. Learn how to read the law before opening your mouth. This law was passed and will be law! It supports the gay community understand that! It does not allow legal sex with a MINOR!! It protects for example, a lesbian relationship, for example she was 19 and the other 16. If she goes to court the judge would have no choice but to make her a registered sex offender. If she… Read more »

You are correct, and what else matters? Sex with a minor, oh hell no

You are a predator if you seek out a person who is not an adult and you are an adult…. Because the younger person is easier to manipulate and they don’t have the life experience and lessons and practice at getting or even knowing what they want. Your desire to “get off” at the expense of their innocence and taking away a chance to figure out what they like and who they are with their peers and people who are at their level or close to it on the playing field. They should not be taken advantage of for the… Read more »

@Christina: Your comment has nothing to do with bill 145. More than 95% of sex crimes do not involve a predator.

Explain to me what’s good about this because I’m lost.

@ Reice

Read my earlier comment about this if you want to know what’s good about this.

Your right it just allows a 24 yr old to have sex with a 15yr old but sb345 which starts next year has no provisions for under 14 year olds so hey maybe your example will still work for that one

Its not “allowed”. The gay person just might not have to register. All other punishments still stand. This is something the judge was already allowed to do for a straight person.

The fact that they have that leeway in cases involving heterosexual activity is wrong. The legislature should be working to protect minors, not sexual offenders.

Praise The Lord! Let fairness prevail for.LGBTQ, the law failed ME and hundreds of others on the Reg that had Real relationships not 1 nihht stands, suffered the judge wrath w/o any wiggle room to hear The Truth and the Jury ignorance of houth live less than 10.yrs apart. WOW ,.maybe Gov. Newsome signs k÷Epona Lorema.b I nit away from the Gov Treating A sex worse than V sex . Gov sign this has been So Unfair! New youth in courts may prevail equal rights under the law.for.the same.youth that exists for str8 youth. SO many under LGBT’s have… Read more »

Keep crying, this is a disgusting bill
Why anyone thinks it’s ok to have sex with a child is beyond my understanding

If not the bill should be more detailed. It should be a felony to have sex with anyone under 18 if the age difference is over 2 or 3 years (and not consensual).; salutatory rape. It should be a misdemeanor if there is or was consent from the minor because it’s still wrong!

Nope. If a “minor” is allowed to operate a motor vehicle on roads that my family uses, then that “minor” is mature enough to consent (or not) to sex. It is not the job of big government to raise our children either. Parents – do your fucking job. Stop trying to grow big government to solve all your irresponsibility.

The age of statutory rape needs to change. 14 year olds have sex, that’s the reality. No one should be punished for having consensual sex. Laws in this country are dictated by religion and that is where the whole problem is! The taboo surrounding sex is so strong that law makers can make any stupid law and it will boast their name and power.

So will a 25 year old having sex with a 15 year old have to register as sex offender? Will they still be charged with statutory rape?

@ All The People That Are Railing Against This Bill This does nothing to change CA laws in regards to having sex with minors. People who are caught are still prosecuted and punished. Only difference is the judge has the discretion to label or not label the prosecuted. In a Registry that is bloated with individuals caught peeing in public and other non-contact crimes, this is the first step in alleviating the hysterical paranoia that the public has drunk and politicians has used for political gain. There’s nothing to back up the efficacy of the Registry in protecting the public,… Read more »

People crying against this bill saying it protects predators or the like have clearly not spent enough time practicing basic reading comprehension. The bill is about who and who does not have to register, not who or who does not get either jail, prison or probation. That consequence is still applicable.

What is telling is people clearly view registration as punishment and not some civil regulation. These people want people punished (read: forced to register), and for them that is being put on a registry.

They should all have to register, staright or gay, no body should be allowed to hide that kind of behavior if convicted. This bill is regressive.

100%. Instead of proposing this, they need to make them all (gay and straight) have to register.


Registries are idiotic social policy and a lot worse than just worthless. They aren’t needed, aren’t beneficial, are counterproductive, harm all of America, and put every single person in America in more danger than we would be if Registries did not exist.

Today, there are no informed, moral people who support Registries. Not a single one.

@Jameson Cunning. Who in the world made you judge and persecutor. an 18-year-old high school senior could have a relationship with a 17 or even a 16-year-old and you’re telling me he should be subjected to a lifetime of this crap. Please do not get on our website which where we support one another we do not judge and break down one another for what might or might not have happened in their past. Registration does nothing for the public. It is meant to give law enforcement loads and loads of money and a false sense of security for the… Read more »

We should register all criminals. Why should the DUI guy get a pass after pass after pass? Or my stepfather that nearly beat my mother to death and went on to multiple more divorces for the same reason. Or burglars and robbers with a mile long rap sheet. Why would you not want to know about all the wrong things people did in your community?


please show me exactly where this talks about children of certain sexes or ages. It just states minors???

Can someone that ACTUALLY understands this give me the CLIFF NOTES because what I’m understanding is that this makes it legal for 24 year old adult to have sexual intercourse with a “consenting” 14 year old, if that’s even a thing.

It in no way makes it legal. Its still a crime. It just now brings up a gay person doing this to the same standard as a straight person doing it, in that the judge has the discretion whether or not the person will have to register. It would be incredibly unlikely a judge would not require the 24 year old to register in your example.

Again, a judge already had this discretion with straight person in your example, but not gay. Now they do with a gay person as well.

I found this description online and it summarizes the bill well. The bill does not legalize any form of pedophilia, but rather addresses issues regarding sex offender registration. “SB 145 does not legalize any kind of sex with a minor and does not change the potential sentence for having sex with an underage person. Rather, the bill simply gives judges the ability to evaluate whether or not to require registration as a sex offender. To be clear, this judicial discretion for sex offender registration is *already* the law for penile-vaginal intercourse when the minor is aged between 14 to 17… Read more »

I don’t know if people are looking to be offended. But the law didn’t change by much.

Before if a straight couple that was 18 and 16 had P in V sex the 18 y/o wouldn’t automatically go on the sex offenders registry. But if the couple were gay and had anal sex the 18 y/o would automatically go on the registry.

It doesn’t say that someone can have sex with minors without consequences. It just doesn’t punish same-sex couples more severely than straight couples.

Nonsense. Any straight couple having any kind of oral, anal or digital sexual contact goes on the registry. It has nothing to do with sexual orientation or the gender of the participants. While same-sex couples, admittedly, lack the required parts to avoid mandatory registration, it applies to boy / girl AND girl / boy just the same (i.e. the 17 year old senior quarterback fingering his cute PE Teacher – the teacher will go straight on the registry, and the 17 year old high school senior will sue the school district for millions for being a child victim of child… Read more »

This article is SO POORLY WRITTEN that it gives people the wrong impression of the law. PLEASE read the law and edit the article! It says that judges will be given discretion on whether to register a person if they have certain sex acts with a child 10 years of age or younger. This is so not the law! Read it! Understand it! And if you can’t understand and write intelligently, shut up!

This is why California is a shit show. Anyone who has sex with a minor gay straight whomever should have to register and not “avoid” the registry. Y’all people in California can keep that energy over there we don’t play that on the east coast.

Your friendly reminder that in 80% of the US, including many if not most places on the East Coast, sex with a minor – gay or straight – is not only NOT a registerable sex offense, it is perfectly legal and no crime and certainly no sex offense at all. Who is the shit show now?

On the topic of shit shows…. who are all these hysterical people here – who obviously lack basic reading and comprehension skills? What is happening?

@jesse, the hysterical people you are talking about who also lack comprehension skills fall under the same category as vigilantes who have done very awful things to people they think haven’t been punished enough by having been to prison and in most cases put on a registry. They are actually very dangerous people and I would not even engage them or in any way respond to their very stupid comments. Because they are such dangerous people they should (but won’t be) placed on a registry of potentially dangerous person’s likely to take the law into their own hands and accordingly… Read more »

Yep. Registry Supporters/Terrorists don’t care about facts or reality. I also think that most of the time those people themselves tend to have lengthy criminal records. I’ve had active, career criminals speak to me as if I’m scum, LOL. But most of them are just demonstrably stupid, so I wouldn’t expect them to act intelligently. Personally, I think that nearly all smart, moral, successful people do NOT support the Registries, and certainly not the “extra” harassment “laws” that the Registries have enabled and promoted. RS/Ts are the dregs of society. I would LOVE to see a study of who actually… Read more »

@WillAllen I wish registry supporters were all “idiots” or “stupid” but sadly I learned even smart people impacted by registries still quietly support them for others. My wife who says that its injustice for me to be on it because she knows me and that I am not a “sex offender” (her words) every one else is. She wants to end just my obligation, because it hurts her and our daughter, but to hell with everybody ele. All because a british quack doctor says we cant change because that how were wired in the womb. We can’t help ourselves, we… Read more »

@KM in SoCal ( Hmmm, I’m not sure I can do this justice. I might start by suggesting that perhaps, no offense, that she isn’t that smart or perceptive because she has been dealing and living with Registries very directly and has not determined that Registries are worthless. I’m immediately suspicious of her cognitive skills. But perhaps that is due to how you live? I don’t know if I have enough time to think about this, LOL. I think that if she lived with me, and even if I never spoke to her about it, that she would realize that… Read more »

@KM in SoCal, My wife apparently had been the same way but it wasn’t really brought up until recently because I’m not on a registry right now. I was on the registry before we were married but were together. It came up recently when I tried to discuss the proposed changes by the Attorney General and how that would likely force me to re-register. She mostly disagreed with making anyone ‘re-register’ but defended the registry overall and did not think anyone should ever come off it. She changed her tune since I presented her with many examples of people who… Read more »

@ E: Please stay on the East Coast.


Don’t worry, sounds like he would have a hard time scraping up enough money to get this far.

Just another showing of why the registry should be abolished, and that no amendment or modification will make it clearer, “better”, or useful in any kind of way. To registry supporters, do you seriously carry a copy of your local sex offender registry around on the off chance that you might run into someone on it? Do you background check every single person you ever meet and leave your children alone with them if they’re not registered? Do you check the registry frequently and update the copy you keep? Do you dig into court records of individual offenses? Are you… Read more »

Good summary. Registries are for dumb people. They are just intended to be a pacifier. Here, stick this pacifier in your mouth and stop whining. When I raised my children, I had no need for Registries. If anyone told me I ought to get big government’s help to raise my children, I would’ve lmao. I have new neighbors right now. They seem like extremely nice people. But I won’t for one second assume that they are not all maniacal, active child molesters. Not for one second. Do I need a big government list to show me that big government doesn’t… Read more »

@ Dustin

If someone really carries around their precious registry with them 24/7 or when they go out I’d bust a gut from laughing. Oh no that person matches my hit list better call the cops, “ Hello someone looks to be one of them perverts please come and protect me.” Cops arrive and that person is not on the hit list, but we have another Karen.

This is not a sexual orientation specific bill. It is conduct specific and applies to all combinations of genders and all sexual orientations. While same sex couples would be, for lack of alternatives, be more impacted by this, it is not a homosexual issue, and certainly not a gay male issue. Sen. Weiner is shamelessly pandering to his base by packaging it that way. Fundamentally, this restores Hofsheier. That is a good thing. But specifically, the inclusion of the age band is problematic at best. Those are always absurd. Because a 17 year old having a relationship with someone who… Read more »

Providing discretion to judges is always a good thing. This seems like a victory to me. Kudos to ACSOL for helping it pass.

What I find interesting is that all these people come out of the woodwork now as though SB 145 is introducing something entirely new, which we know that it is not. It is instead updating already existing laws. If these people are so concerned about the possibility of say a 17 engaging in sexual activity with a 27 year old, where were they all this time? The very thing they are so adamant that SB 145 is allowing was already in place before the introduction of this bill. So my question is this: what is the narrative being espoused that… Read more » Again, another example of people either unable to read without comprehension or honesty. It is important to again note the use of punishment in connection to the registry. For this person, the punishment *is* the registry, as he makes a passing comment that a person may receive other types of punishment. This is the problem that is faced, people turning off their rational brain in exchange for emotional hysteria. No one, not even one person is either saying or implying that sexual activity with a minor is okay and should be allowed; no one is arguing for the decriminalization… Read more »

“The California Supreme Court upheld the legal difference in 2015, arguing that because vaginal intercourse can lead to pregnancy, forcing a father to register as a sex offender would subject him to social stigmatization that could make it difficult to find a job and support his child.“

Anybody know this case? It’s like the CA Supreme Court is just taunting people on the registry.

@David, This leads me back to this mostly academic paper I posted awhile back suggesting a way to convince courts that the registry is in fact punitive. In the paper, it is suggested that if the majority of the public believes something to be punitive through properly done scientific surveys, it would be likely to carry much weight in a decision as to the punitive nature of the registry as a whole in a court. It seems like the media and everyone commenting on the registry clearly thinks it is punitive and not just a regulatory measure. Just look at… Read more »

Anyone know how we can find out who voted yay and who voted nay

Date 08/31/20 Result (PASS) Location Assembly Floor Ayes Count 41 Noes Count 25 NVR Count 13 Motion SB 145 Wiener Senate Third Reading By Kamlager Ayes Aguiar-Curry, Bauer-Kahan, Berman, Bloom, Bonta, Burke, Carrillo, Chiu, Chu, Cooper, Daly, Friedman, Gabriel, Cristina Garcia, Gipson, Gloria, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Kamlager, Levine, Low, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, O’Donnell, Quirk, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Mark Stone, Ting, Weber, Wicks, Wood, Rendon Noes Bigelow, Boerner Horvath, Brough, Calderon, Chau, Chen, Choi, Cooley, Megan Dahle, Diep, Flora, Fong, Gallagher, Gonzalez, Gray, Kiley, Lackey, Maienschein, Mathis, Obernolte, Patterson, Ramos, Rodriguez, Salas, Waldron… Read more »

Thanks for the interestingly enough for Senator.Wiener’s bill passing the 2nd time around w/o Ms. San Diego’s nose her radical values. LGF
Oops, politics.
We needed to know, now Gov will come through. LGBTQ sufferers.dont want a repeat of our younger LGBTQ youth to.go.through what we’ve been posted as! THX SB145 decades too late…4 decades to be exact but its about time!

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x