Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of Aug 2025. 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 relevant comment.
Registry-Based Exclusion and Compelled Speech: A Constitutional Warning
Churches, schools, parks, and civilian institutions that require PFR to disclose status, sign disclaimers, or submit to surveillance may be violating the First Amendment’s protection against compelled speech. The right to remain silent is foundational—affirmed in Barnette, Wooley, and Becerra. When exclusion is codified and speech is coerced, these entities risk unconstitutional conduct.
Under Bob Jones University v. United States, tax-exempt status can be revoked when discrimination violates public policy. Denying PFR access to publicly funded spaces—while compelling speech—may trigger similar scrutiny under §501(c)(3). Equal access is not optional when others are taxed to enter freely.
Disclaimer: This is a constitutional critique, not legal advice. Affected individuals should consult qualified counsel
Has anyone considered “Slab City” as a destination to live.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slab_City,_California
It’s located in the Sonoran Desert and is a honest to god rent free community that leaves people alone. It’s on public land (an old military base) so zero state/fed government oversight, no police, no state or fed taxes. Residents are mostly alternative lifestyle types, such as artists, homeless, seasonal travelers, etc. Not sure, might need to be off the registry, but if you like RV style living, this could be an opportunity. There are no public utilities, so most have power generators, solar panels and go to town for water and supplies. water is sold there for $15/gal. I saw an article where a couple had lived there for the past 7 yrs and it was costing them approx. $5000 a yr in expenditures. The man had an online job and the woman did errands and chores for others. They had a 50 gal water barrel and said if they needed something that residents there used a barter system. Talk about being left alone! only about 150 permanent residents with an annual pilgrimage of about 2000 people throughout the yr. You simply inquire about a “slab” ( where a bldg was removed) or an open area and walla! there is a a kind of council that meets informally to discuss disputes, community events etc. Sounds interesting.
Just a heads up for those that visit HomeDepot, Targets and Wal-Mart.
They all use an API software that law enforcement has access to via: https://www.auror.co/
Bascially, loss prevention and LEOs have access to “Auror” software that can tell all the stores you’ve entered with all the microdata including – day, time and locations of all stores. Once you walk in, they basically have your tag number, name and address. If that weren’t creepy enough, they catalog your height, weight and gate using that as a “fingerprint” to identify you. It goes far beyond facial rec because law enforcement can spy on and track OUR movements without a warrant all from the comfort of their local sherrifs’ office using a desktop. They can monitor our buying habits clandestinely and can validate their reasonable suspcion claims when case building.
Store managers can clandestinely snap your photo with their cell phones then upload it to Auror database and cross reference your analytics, purchase history and if you’re a registrant.
Just something to be aware of is you frequent a Wal-mart or Sam’s Club.
Does the sherrif’s department still conduct compliance checks even after probation? Been off for a while now. I wasn’t home but they came looking for me today stating they were doing a compliance check. They asked my roommates if I lived there and if I would be there later tonight. Worried that something may be up. If I’m not at work, I’m with my girlfriend. Because I’m not home very much, it doesn’t look like I live there even though I sleep there. All of my stuff is in storage while my girlfriend and I find a place that will accept me. I ended up giving up my room to my roommates daughter and her son so I’ve just been crashing on the couch. Plus I find it odd that they stopped by on a Sunday. I’m going to be there tonight but I’m getting worried. Any help or advice would be really appreciated. Residing in CA.
The charge of a Person Forced to Register (PFR) being in an “unlawful place” invites dismissal under multiple constitutional doctrines. The term itself is unconstitutionally vague, offering no clear definition or fair notice, and thus violating due process. Simultaneously, the statute is overbroad, criminalizing peaceful, tax-contributing presence in public or quasi-public spaces without individualized review, chilling constitutionally protected conduct. When exclusion forces PFR into isolation or surveillance, the state-created danger doctrine applies, exposing the state’s role in affirmatively placing individuals at risk. Moreover, such exclusion infringes on the fundamental right to travel and access public land, especially when the space is tax-funded and open to the general public. If enforced by a private actor claiming state authority—such as church staff or fairground security—it may constitute abuse under color of law, actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. When a tax-exempt entity weaponizes public subsidy to exclude a class of people, it risks constructive tax fraud, violating public benefit standards and inviting IRS scrutiny. And when exclusion is based solely on status, not conduct, it echoes historical systems of civil servitude, where legal classification substitutes for individualized guilt—raising equal protection concerns under the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments. The forced exclusion of PFR from public or quasi-public spaces, under vague statutes like “unlawful place,” functions as a modern scarlet letter—a state-imposed mark of shame that enforces servitude and denies sanctuary. This exclusion is not based on behavior but on identity, echoing the unconstitutional vagrancy laws struck down in Papachristou v. Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156 (1972), and the compelled identity exposure in Doe v. Shurtleff, 628 F.3d 1217 (10th Cir. 2010). When PFR are barred from tax-funded spaces, forced into visibility, and denied refuge, the state enforces a regime of group-based stigma, violating the Constitution’s deepest protections. These arguments may not yet be codified in a single case number, but they form a constitutional constellation—one that must be argued case by case, with facts tailored to the nature of the exclusion, the entity enforcing it, and the harm imposed.
Disclaimer: This statement is offered for educational and advocacy purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as a substitute for consultation with a qualified attorney. Constitutional claims described herein depend on jurisdiction-specific facts, enforcement patterns, and evolving case law. Readers are encouraged to seek individualized legal counsel and to verify citations before use in formal proceedings. The author disclaims liability for any reliance placed on this material outside its intended context of public education and reform advocacy.
Teens don’t have the mental and emotional capacity to know what they are doing when it comes to sex but sure do when it comes to gang killing of another teen in SC or the abuse in a position of trust as a teen of other teens when requesting nude photograph in FLA. Right…those who hang on to the idea they don’t have any idea in any of these areas or what else they can think of as teens is delusional at best.
In 2025, a poet-advocate known only as Quiet Too Long penned a fictional lament: “Courts are frightfully unresponsive to the suffering they codify.” The line was metaphor, not data-an elegy for those buried beneath legal silence. But the phrase struck a chord. A judge, fatigued by nuance, cited it in a footnote. A legislator, hungry for urgency, echoed it in a bill. Soon, the fictional line was repeated, reprinted, and reified. It appeared in court briefs as evidence of systemic risk. No one asked for a source. No one checked the context. It was “frightfully persuasive.” New laws followed-banning registrants from libraries, churches, cooling shelters. The phrase justified exclusion, surveillance, and silence. It was cited in tax exemption rulings, zoning bans, and parole denials. All born of a fictional line. Quiet Too Long responded with a public comment: “I wrote that line as metaphor. You built a wall with it.” But the courts were unmoved. “It’s not our job to verify poetry,” they said. “The phrase has become part of the legal landscape.” Fiction, once cited, had become precedent. So Quiet wrote again-not as metaphor, but as archive. He traced the phrase’s lineage. He documented its misuse. He built a memorial to every law born of fiction. And he asked, not with anger but with resolve: “If fiction can become law, can testimony become sanctuary?” Can anyone here guess the actual phrase?
What I want to know is why are we all not clamoring at the doorstep of our respective LE offices forcing them to respond to and clarify the ridiculous laws they are entrusted to enforce. For example, why am I, as a tax paying citizen, and every other PFR and LO of PFR not banging on LE doors demanding a list of all addresses that a PFR cannot be within 500 feet of, including a map with the exclusion zone highlighted. How can we follow the laws if they are not clear? I should have a right to know what it is these laws are demanding. Why am I not banging on their door demanding to understand the registry form even when it makes no sense?
I assume it’s fear. My passive son will never do this, but I think I should. Not on his behalf per se, but as a tax paying citizen. I pay for LE salaries, it’s my right. Is there risk I am targeted as a trouble maker? Is there risk to the justice advocacy organizations I work with? We are all so timid and tip-toing and when I suggest things like asking for a list of addresses of all day care, parks, etc that a PFR cannot reside near or be present in, I have had others get all weirded out like I’m going to ruin this fine advocacy plan we have in place, as if the plan is working.
This is not rhetorical, I truly want your feedback. Am I oversimplifying? I feel like we have a right to be loud and I know a PFR cannot afford to be loud with LE, but why aren’t the rest of us? Is there risk to my son if I become a pain in the arse for the city?
The Tuna Net Analogy (Ampersands Restorative Justice 18 Aug 2025)
An apt writing about all who are swept up into SO registries without discrimination of who truly belongs.
Am researching WA state as a potential move-to state as a former CA PFR. We unfortunately did not get to hear from the woman referenced in Atwo Zee’s matrix, as she was supposed to speak at the now-canceled conference. She is referenced in this quote from the matrix for WA:
“A person who is NO LONGER required to register in their conviction state reports moving to WA in 2024 with WA’s written agreement they are NOT required to register there.”
…[Looking at an online WA state laws summary document dated from Aug 2012,] there is the following clause:
“However, if a court in the person’s state of conviction has made an individualized determination that the person should not be required to register that person is not required to register in Washington. (Werenth fix).”
This clause seems to suggest that if you received a granted petition in say California, that you would not need to register in WA if you moved there as a new resident. Are there any WA State former PFRs out there who can comment on this or their experience moving to WA as a former PFR? Thanks.
Excuse my ignorance, as I am fairly new to being on the exclusive list for SO’s. When I was released last September to go back home to Wisconsin, when I went to the half-way house, located in a crime ridden neighborhood with multiple shootings daily, and dead bodies unfortunately showing up within close proximity, The woman in charge or at least for the eastern district in Wisconsin, met with myself, told me how fortunate I was that my registry started the very day I was released from prison and the countdown began. Only to find only a short time later that while I was on the registry, my time in half-way house custody and on home confinement didn’t give me credit towards the 15 years I have to be on the registry. My true time doesn’t start until my probation ends. So it is more like 15 years on probation instead of 5. How can the DOC say 15 when it’s really 20, in my case, and so many others as well.
Warrantless Use of License Plate Reader Cameras Is Unconstitutional (Reason.com 14 Aug 2025)
A new campaign pushes back against the widespread use of automatic license plate readers without warrants.
Another slippery slope story of alleged good intentions to start has slid to include more unintentionally…
The Anti-Porn Crusade Comes for Online Games (Reason.com 13 Aug 2025)
Activists pressure payment processors, who in turn pressure game marketplaces. The result? A whole lot of video games and visual novels are disappearing.
‘Tracking Everyone, All the Time’ (Reason.com 7 Aug 2025)
The applicability of this paradigm is deeper here than most will know, but it is something we need to be concerned about when it is privatized with intent to use third parties (either countries or companies) to surveil citizens.
Possibly coming to an American country near you? Depends on who you ask and vote for.
10 Examples of Absurd Fallout From the U.K.’s Online Safety Act (Reason.com 6 Aug 2025)
The measure is putting up roadblocks for people who want to read about world news, listen to music on Spotify, chat on Discord, play video games, find information about quitting smoking, or join antimasturbation groups.
As one person here in the forum already predicted, VPN usage would (and actually has) skyrocket because of what this would do.
How did this get missed?! AL shames porn but wants to tax it for more revenue. Is that not hypocrisy?! This is the same as those who are against something but in the closet, love to enjoy it (e.g., religious leaders, drug users, political members, etc). Seriously, how does this country survive with the mixed messaging?!
Alabama’s Porn Tax Starts Soon (Reason.com 4 Aug 2025)
Websites are being told to create “Material Harmful to Minors tax accounts.”
P.S.
Read the tag alongs at the bottom of the article too for some crazy articles to additionally read.
Frighteningly Untraceable By Quiet Too Long Don’t You Know Who I Am? Hypothetically.
Imagine a system where civil settlements and monetary payouts routinely erase the public record of misconduct— where victims are silenced through Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs), and charges dissolve before reaching court.
In such a world, public officials could reoffend at rates far higher than reported. The true reoffense rate wouldn’t just be high— it would be frighteningly untraceable.
These individuals might quietly cycle through misconduct with a 5–10% recurrence rate, shielded by institutional discretion and legal mechanisms that prioritize reputation over accountability.
The true recurrence of harm might be obscured not by lack of evidence, but by its strategic disappearance.
Compared to registrants—whose actual rate of new sex offenses hovers around 5–15%— the disparity becomes stark.
Meanwhile, registrants are governed by laws that manufacture infractions: GPS errors, residency restrictions, and reporting mandates that inflate “reoffense” statistics to 40% or more.
These technical violations, often unrelated to new harm or new victims, are documented and punished as criminal relapse.
The result is a caste-coded ledger of justice: one group hyper-visible and presumed dangerous, the other cloaked in privilege and presumed redeemable— regardless of harm.
Don’t You Know Who I Am? Hypothetically.
update on my petition delay. spoke to my attorney. not good. my petition was supposed to be filed under my original case#. but for reasons I don’t still understand, the clerk had filed it under a different case #. So essentially it has been sitting for the last 4 months at clerk’s office. My attorney said that the DA “Apologized” for the screw up and will do their best to fast track it, but that it’s up to SJPD to push it through. So might be waiting up to another 4 months when this realistically should have been done no later than last week. am I angry ? yes! can I do one d*mn thing about it? no. since my life has been f…ed up for the last 10 yrs , why should I expect any different going forward. you want to know the best part????? I filled out the Paperwork and handed it over to my attorney myself. I had the correct case # his Para legal f…ed this up by changing it. But hey, everyone is REALLY SORRY! I lost my overseas job offer, I’m stuck in this pit of humanity for at least 4 more months, who knows what will happen to the registry in that time. luckily, 15 yrs as a Navy bomb tech means I know how to really make a mess.
No love lost on my part for the death of James Dobson, a strong advocate for spreading hate while cloaked as a so called Christian. He advocated and spread hate towards gay people, and as a straight person, this disgusted me as I lost all my gay friends due to the hate he advocated towards them. My gay friends had to re-locate to another state which was not a so called “Christian” state where they could be better treated.
Dobson for years was headquartered in Colorado Springs. For a short time period, I lived in CO and worked in Colorado Springs. One of my co-workers regularly attended Dobson’s services. Dobson also pushed for women to be submissive to husbands and not question anything. And no surprise to anyone, my co-worker treated his wife like dirt.
I am ignorant of Dobson’s views on us registered people, but I can not imagine there is one ounce of compassion based upon the way he pushed for gays and women to be treated. Nothing like “Christian” hate.
The sex offense registry system in the United States—codified federally through the Adam Walsh Act of 2006 and expanded via SORNA—was not authored by judges, but it has been relentlessly enforced, expanded, and legitimized by them. Federal judges such as Justice Anthony Kennedy upheld its constitutionality in Smith v. Doe (2003), citing flawed recidivism data that has since been debunked. State and county judges, including those documented for misconduct—like Judge Mark Ciavarella, who sentenced thousands of children in exchange for kickbacks, and Judge Les Hayes, who unlawfully jailed indigent defendants—have actively placed individuals on registries while violating their own oaths of office. These judges, some of whom were later disciplined or imprisoned, helped shape the punitive landscape through rulings, sentencing practices, and procedural evasion. Given that judicial misconduct and fraud have tainted the enforcement and expansion of registry laws, and that officers of the court engaged in fraud vitiate all resulting judgments, we demand a mistrial and full dissolvement of any registry placement derived from rulings issued by judges who violated constitutional standards, ethical codes, or due process. The robe cannot shield corruption—and justice cannot survive its silence. Secondary Consequence: Systemic Complicity and Administrative Bias In addition to direct judicial misconduct, the registry system is upheld by a lattice of administrative actors and law offices whose complicity renders the entire framework constitutionally unsound. Judicial district officers, registrars, and state bar officials—tasked with oversight—have routinely failed to intervene in biased rulings, unethical placements, and procedural evasion. The USLAW Network’s judicial profiling, which categorizes counties as “Conservative,” “Moderate,” or “Liberal,” introduces political bias into sentencing outcomes, undermining the impartiality required by due process. Judicial Conduct Commissions, designed to investigate misconduct, often dismiss complaints without transparency, shielding judges from accountability and allowing registry placements to persist under tainted authority. This layered complicity—across federal, state, and county levels—means that registry enforcement is not merely flawed; it is structurally discriminatory and ethically void. When oversight bodies fail to act, and political bias is embedded in judicial profiling, the registry becomes an instrument of caste-coded punishment rather than lawful protection. Therefore, we assert that any placement, ruling, or enforcement derived from these compromised systems must be vacated, and the registry itself subject to full dissolvement under constitutional review.
DisclaimerThis statement is intended for public education, advocacy, and constitutional critique. It does not constitute legal advice, nor does it create an attorney-client relationship. All references to judicial misconduct, administrative complicity, and systemic bias are based on publicly available records, case law, and documented disciplinary actions. While care has been taken to ensure factual accuracy, readers are encouraged to independently verify claims and consult legal counsel for case-specific guidance. The views expressed herein reflect a survivor-centered and constitutional perspective on registry law and judicial accountability. No allegation is made against any individual or institution without basis in public record or documented precedent. This document is protected under the First Amendment and is offered in pursuit of transparency, reform, and restorative justice.
Statement in Response to Documented Violations of Victims’ Rights and Jurisdictional Misconduct within Registry Systems:
The transmission, classification, and handling of case information appear to have breached constitutional and statutory protections guaranteed under the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA), 18 U.S.C. § 3771, including the rights to dignity, privacy, informed consent, and access to disclosures. These violations—ranging from unauthorized data sharing and coerced consent mechanisms to denial of audit access—are not attributable to the victim and constitute administrative misconduct. Based on this review, I support the call for immediate cessation of all registry-related transmissions, revocation of coerced consent, and full procedural audit. Survivor sovereignty must be restored, and no further transmission should occur until integrity, accuracy, and consent are meaningfully upheld. You have the right to determine how your data is conveyed—or not conveyed. That choice belongs to you, not the state, nor any institution or platform acting without your informed, revocable consent. This statement further asserts that restitution for these violations may be pursued from states, agencies, or jurisdictions where shared data was received or mishandled, in accordance with applicable victims’ rights and privacy laws. Based on national estimates, approximately 800,000 individuals are currently listed on sex offense registries. If each PFR’s classification and transmission involves two victims, this equates to 1.6 million impacted individuals—whose rights may have been violated through coerced consent, unauthorized data sharing, or denial of audit access. The resource implications are staggering: over $200 million annually is spent across states to maintain registry databases, portals, and updates; legal liability exposure could reach $800 million if just 5% of victims pursue remedy; administrative overhead consumes thousands of hours in compliance audits, FOIA responses, and litigation defense; public safety resources are misallocated away from survivor services toward punitive tracking systems; and states may face federal penalties for CVRA violations and mishandling of sensitive data. These figures suggest that the registry system is not only ethically compromised—it is fiscally unsustainable. The cost of maintaining harm now outweighs any claimed public benefit.
Disclaimer: This statement is offered as a procedural observation and advocacy position, not legal advice. It reflects a review of publicly available data and documented patterns of misconduct. All figures are estimates intended to illustrate systemic scale and impact. Survivors and impacted individuals are encouraged to seek independent legal counsel when pursuing remedy or restitution.
Stop with the common sense! You will ruin it for people who need the fearmongering of “Stranger Danger” to prop their careers, narrative, presence online, and those who need funding. The damage is long done and will be hard to reverse…
‘Stranger Danger’ Doesn’t Cut It Anymore. Safety Experts Want Parents To Teach This Instead. (HuffPost 21 Aug 2025)
Kids need situational awareness — from crossing the street to navigating the internet. But many parents don’t know how to teach it.
Forget ‘Stranger Danger.’ Here’s What We Should Really Teach Kids To Keep Them Safe. (HuffPost 20 Jun 2024)
Child safety experts now recommend teaching the concept of “tricky people” — and for good reason.
Families of deceased victims deserve recognition and protection from renewed harm caused by retroactive registry laws. When historical cases are reclassified or publicly transmitted without consent, surviving relatives are forced to relive trauma long after closure—often without warning, context, or recourse. This re-exposure violates the dignity of the deceased and the privacy of their loved ones, transforming grief into surveillance. Registry systems must not weaponize memory or impose visibility on those who never consented to public classification. We call for immediate safeguards: cessation of retroactive transmissions involving deceased victims, survivor-family consent protocols, and restorative options for redaction or memorialization. No family should be forced to witness their loved one’s legacy distorted by punitive systems masquerading as public safety.
Disclaimer: This statement is offered for educational and advocacy purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as a substitute for consultation with qualified counsel. All references to harm, transmission, and retroactive classification are based on documented patterns and publicly available data. Readers are encouraged to seek independent legal guidance when pursuing remedy or redress. This statement reflects a survivor-centered and restorative justice perspective.
Woman whose false rape accusation ruined Army doctor’s life gets tiny jail sentence (Daily Mail, 21 Aug 2025)
IIRC, we highlighted this guilty verdict earlier this year in the forum. Now comes the light sentence for her actions and her pattern of behavior if you read far enough into the article to see. She needs some serious help.
Testimony with Embedded Proof
Imagine a courtroom where the judge doesn’t ask what happened to you—they ask what the agency predicted. If the law is unclear, the court lets the agency decide what it means. That’s called Chevron deference, from Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. NRDC (1984). It means the people making the rules also get to interpret them.
Even the President’s decisions can’t be challenged under the usual rules, because in Franklin v. Massachusetts (1992), the Supreme Court said he’s not an “agency” under the Administrative Procedure Act.
And if an agency harms you, you can’t fight back until the damage is officially “final”—even if it’s already affecting your life. That’s the doctrine of Final Agency Action, shaped by Bennett v. Spear (1997).
These rules let agencies use risk models, data forecasts, and predictive analytics to label people—not based on biology or behavior, but on statistical likelihood.
You can be watched, excluded, or registered—not because of what you did, but because of what they think you might do.
They trust the prediction more than the person. The law listens to the algorithm, not the testimony.
Disclaimer
This testimony is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It reflects a personal critique of legal doctrine and administrative practice, grounded in publicly available case law. It does not incite, impersonate, or threaten any individual or institution. The author asserts their right to document, critique, and bear witness to systemic harm, and welcomes respectful dialogue and legal review.