CO: Neighbors protest facility run by Colorado mental health agency over sex offender claims

Source: 4/6/24

Northglenn neighbors were out in their community to voice their opposition to a mental health facility run by the state of Colorado. which is set to open in a residential area.

They say their biggest concern is that there may be sex offenders housed near families’ homes and schools.

“If places like this are going to be coming into our communities, the people who live here need to know about it, and we want to have a say in it,” said Danielle Luciano.

Read the full article (Write and call, Colorado residents!)


Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. 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. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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

Pure Speculation: These concerned citizens LOVE the idea that Registrants are released from prison into supervised facilities that will continue the, “Treatment efforts” they were required to participate in during their incarceration?

Love that idea, so long as it is done way over there and nowhere near them! For you see, the potential efficacy of these facilitates is strongly influenced by geography. What is sure to work there is doomed to failure here?

I do so enjoy my trips to registry fantasy land… but back here in the real world…He either will, or he will not. If he will, nothing is going to stop him. If he will not, then geography is irrelevant. This is true for all PFRs, the same as it is for everyone else.

Speaking of everyone else:
In the AA big book, there is a suggestion that there is no reason why a recovering alcoholic shouldn’t take a job managing a brewery. Why? They are either going to start drinking again, or they will not. If they are, they will regardless of what kind of job they have, or don’t have. If they are not, then they will not under all circumstances.

It further suggests that, using other language, one of the best ways to maintain sobriety in all circumstances is to belong to a group of supportive people that understand your situation, and can encourage you make the wiser choice. Doesn’t change the “Will or will not” reality, but it does help people choose the “will not” route.

This is the very same logic used in all traditional “12 Step recovery” groups, including the ones courts order people convicted of a variety of substance involved crimes to attend. There are some groups that differ from the traditional approach established by AA, but I am unaware of any that disagree with this particular logic.

A variety of scientific research has established that, the Supportive approach to recovering from destructive behaviors of every kind, is beneficial. Decades of research agrees that an individual seeking to discontinue destructive behaviors of every kind is substantially more likely to succeed in their efforts if supported by others.

This research agrees with the results of the COSA approach, which claims up to an 88% reduction in recidivism can be achieved through this method. Couple this with the scientifically established findings of recidivism rates that remain considerably lower than average for felony convicted, you get….

Highest rates of recidivism for any category of PFR is between 20-30%. These individuals, at the highest echelon of risk, are thankfully few and far between… and, because some of the enhanced risk is time dependent, such as age and years out of prison, they do not remain at this level indefinitely. Apply COSA to this and… even the most extreme risk individual goes from….30% to as low as about 4%.

Apply this to an individual that is already at a very low risk… such as a Female, with no other arrests, who is over 65 that was convicted for non-prod CP and has been out of prison over 10 years…. you get an individual who’s risk of recidivism is lower than all fully functioning males below the age of 25?

Speculation, inferred from the recent study conducted in Canada that found that PFRs are no more likely to commit an SO than anyone else…

Continuing to speculate with the woman described above: All males, in possession of unimpaired cognitive and physical faculties, who are below the age of 25 pose a significantly higher risk to children than Grandma could even dream of being… especially these days. Perhaps, if for no other reason, because Grandma doesn’t want to die in the big house… which is what would happen if she doesn’t change her ways?

Nope, just best to presume that all these gals get out of prison and instantly become master criminals of Professor Moriarty like levels, and that’s how they are able to continue to commit incalculable numbers of additional crimes without ever being suspected of anything!

Who knew Grant Aunt Marge was so crafty?

He either will, or he will not. If he is placed in a supportive environment, with hope for a better future that can only be achieved in an offense free life, there is a far greater chance he will be in the latter “will not” group, and not the former “will” group. That is true for all people, in all circumstances, regardless of geography.

Ms. Luciano and any other concerned citizen:

The individuals whom you rally against have ot be placed somewhere. If you are not comfortable with the location chosen by the state, you are free to move elsewhere without penalty of any kind. Nothing in the US or Colorado Constitutions gives you the right to select your neighbors, no matter how liberally you choose to interpret it. All available research indicates that if any of the children in your neighborhood are accosted in any way (God forbid), it will not be by one of the individuals living in the proposed facility. It will be by a teacher, coach, pastor, friend, peer, or relative.

No matter what they promise or when, neither this nor the next wave of failed lawyers (read: those who have changed career paths to writing law since they weren’t terribly good at practicing it) in the state legislature, county commission, or city council have the capability to protect you from the product of your own imaginations.

What they don’t realize is the alternative, placing them into their community without direct supervision. They most likely will be locked in the facility at night. The other option is to disperse them into the community where they will be able to go out at night.

Here’s the comments made by the woman interviewed about the possibility of [PFR] being in the facility,

” I was confused at first, and then angry, and worried for all my fellow residents, and all the children in our area”

This comment highlights the moral panic threat response humans are susceptible to.

It is this aspect of human nature that has driven all of the worst atrocities in human history.

Fear, confusion, anger, and a moral obligation or even compulsion to take action based upon that perception of danger or threat, even if it is not found or based upon truth or facts.

All reason departs when moral panic ensues.

This has been repeatedly demonstrated throughout history.

Would people rather have other human beings unaccounted for living in the woods with nothing to lose because of an unfair society? All human beings should have shelter, food, and basic needs to sustain life regardless of their background. If you have a problem with that you should stop pointing your finger and start looking at the skeletons in your closet. If things bother Coloradans so much why not get a Rocky Mountain High!!