Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of Jan 2026. 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.
New Bill Would Decriminalize Prostitution in Colorado (Westword 13 Feb 2026)
“Pimping, defined as living on or being supported by money earned by another person through sexual activity, would remain a class three felony.” I see this needing to be amended because you cannot tell a married couple how they are supporting their family what they can do for work. If they are ok with it, it is not any business of the state’s.
Rec’d my new Passport today. I’ve been of Ca registry for almost 1 yr, but getting this and having no mark of the devil tells me I’m finally done with this nightmare. Headed offshore next month. Buying my tickets tomorrow.
There is an 18 yr old male PA high school student facing more than 300 felony charges for running a ‘sextortion’ scheme that exploited fellow students (minors). It is crazy reading what is alleged, but will they be charged as an adult due to their age or a minor because they are a student still (class president at that and an athlete).
Re: AB 1568. It took me 5 mins to call the 9 members to oppose (vote no) and I urge everyone to do the same.
elow is a list of committee members as well as their phone.
Nick Schultz (Chair) (916) 319-2044
Juan Alanis (Vice Chair) (916) 319-2022
Mark González (916) 319-2054
Matt Haney (916) 319-2017
John Harabedian (916) 319-2041
Tom Lackey (916) 319-2034
Stephanie Nguyen (916) 319-2010
James C. Ramos (916) 319-2045
Dr. LaShae Sharp-Collins (916) 319-2079
Another person in a position of trust who thinks he can get away with committing the crimes he is supposed to protect against.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndny/pr/nassau-county-detective-charged-attempting-sexually-exploit-child
This is directed to those living in Florida. My wife and I live in the Northeast, are in our 70’s now, and need to be closer to our children and grandkids who happen to live in Florida. I am no longer required to register, but I’ve seen some horror stories about what happens if you move there. I would like to hear it first hand from those in the group: Is it really the scorched earth hellscape they say it is for past and present PFR’s? How has your info being posted impacted your life and your children and spouses? And how difficult would it be to actually find a place to live? For those who are already there, what has kept you living in Florida if things are so bad there (as it seems they are?. I’d like to hear from those who are living it, rather than talk with some attorney who may or may not be up to speed on what is actually happening on the ground.
I dont post a lot here, but i check the site out at least once a day and this is a question I have been pondering for awhile. I would like some imput from Janice and/or those more legally inclined than I am. Also, this is in no way a criticism of anyone, but I am curious.
There has been a number of laws targeting PFR’s as there are every year. Each one of these laws only adds to the list of evidence that the registry is punishment. In addition, more and more research comes out showing that these policies do not work and cause more harm.
My question is that with all of these studies and a Mount Everest sized pile of evidence that these laws are ineffective, hateful and clearly punishment, why hasn’t a lawsuit been filed challenging the registry itself? Is it resources or lack thereof? Are we waiting for the right plaintiff to come forward? Are we waiting on a change in political climate?
Again, I am asking out of genuine curiosity and am in no way criticizing anyone involved with trying to bring change. Thanks to anyone who takes the time to answer!
The Fo-fhollaiseach Truth Would or Could
Written By Quiet Too Long — 02/19/2026
In Any County, U.S.A., the map glowed with the confidence of a system that claimed to show everything. Streets were traced in soft blues and greens, dots pulsed where “county or community calls for service” had been logged, and the interface promised transparency with every filter and chart.
But for one man — a lawful resident compelled by a civil label under duress — the map was a mirror with a blind spot. The system hid the very calls made against him, redacting digits, erasing categories, and sealing away the patterns of harassment that shaped his daily civil existence that was placed upon him.
The county insisted this was to “protect the innocent,” yet his own full address and photograph were displayed without hesitation due to civil enhancements forced unto him.
And so the burden fell on him alone: to prove what the system refused to show, to request records the public dashboard would never reveal, and to navigate a maze of agencies where each district, town, and county stored its own fragment of the truth on separate systems, ensuring that any summary was partial and that harassment remained undefined for those making the calls and separating the facts to what was identifiable by constitutional laws.
What made the situation more troubling was that the blindness was not limited to the software. Enforcement relied on the same curated data, treating the absence of documented harassment as evidence that none existed. Meanwhile, the civil apparatus — built on labels, assumptions, lack of reasonable doubt and automated risk assessments — expanded quietly in that blind spot,
growing like a procedural cancer that fed on omissions and spread into other registries and control modules that decay the constitution as we “knew” it.
The map could analyze burglaries, traffic stops, and noise complaints with algorithmic precision, yet it refused to acknowledge the civil fallout that mattered most: the false alarms, the retaliatory calls, the neighborly panics — like the man mowing his lawn and simply wiping sweat from his brow being treated as a threat as appointed by status and constitutional withdrawals toward the pursuit of happiness —
that drained resources from genuine emergencies. These calls were not trivial; they shaped the perception of safety for the few but not for all as if this is the way laws were meant to be ,
diverted attention from genuine risks, and placed an ever‑increasing weight on the lawful person who had no access to the evidence used to civilly judge him. In a justice system that claimed impartiality, the omission was its own indictment —
a reminder that when a system hides the truth, the burden of disproving it falls entirely on the shoulders of the one least able to provide the information to prove it and the lack of a impartial jury system to judge it.
Disclaimer This narrative is a dramatized depiction intended to highlight structural and procedural concerns within public‑facing data systems. It does not allege wrongdoing by any specific agency or individual. The situations described illustrate how gaps in transparency, data design, and administrative policy can create practical barriers for lawful residents attempting to understand or challenge the information used to evaluate them. Any resemblance to actual persons or events is coincidental, and the piece should be read as commentary on systemic processes rather than a statement of fact about any particular jurisdiction
Roman overtures
Written by Quiet too long 02/19/2026
in a world that chooses to go into remission and roll the laws back to a time when romans were gods then the mystery fades to black and clears the way for a new outcome and the new ways will prevail as it is written, history will and always has, repeated itself.
Expanded Comparison Table: Criminal Protections vs. Civil Regulatory Systems
Right to a Jury • Criminal: Often guaranteed for criminal charges. • Civil: Many civil systems use administrative hearings with no jury.
Presumption of Innocence • Criminal: State must prove guilt. • Civil: Uses compliance standards, not “guilt.”
Burden of Proof • Criminal: Beyond a reasonable doubt. • Civil: Preponderance of evidence or clear and convincing.
Right to Counsel • Criminal: Guaranteed. • Civil: Not guaranteed; individuals must secure their own representation.
Right Against Self‑Incrimination • Criminal: Cannot be compelled to testify. • Civil: May require information or documentation even if incriminating.
Double Jeopardy Protections • Criminal: Cannot be tried twice for the same crime.
• Civil: Civil actions can occur alongside or after criminal cases.
Uniformity of Laws • Criminal: Laws apply uniformly statewide. • Civil: Rules vary by county, municipality, or agency.
Housing Restrictions • Criminal: Not standard penalties. • Civil: Some systems impose zoning or residency rules.
Proximity Restrictions • Criminal: Not typical sentencing. • Civil: Some systems impose distance‑based rules.
Movement / Travel • Criminal: Restricted only by sentencing or probation. • Civil: May impose travel or reporting requirements.
Association Restrictions • Criminal: Requires specific findings. • Civil: May include association rules as administrative conditions.
Compelled Signatures (“sign or consequences”) • Criminal: Pleas require court oversight. • Civil: May require acknowledgment of rules to maintain compliance.
Duress / Coercion Standards • Criminal: Strong protections against coerced statements. • Civil: Compliance may be required regardless of disagreement.
Pursuit of Happiness / Liberty Interests • Criminal: Penalties must be proportionate and tied to conviction. • Civil: May impose ongoing conditions not classified as punishment.
Free Movement • Criminal: Protected unless restricted by court order. • Civil: May impose geographic or reporting constraints.
Family Life Considerations • Criminal: Courts must consider constitutional protections. • Civil: May indirectly affect family arrangements.
Notice and Hearing Requirements • Criminal: Strict procedural rules. • Civil: Administrative notice and limited hearings.
Right to Confront Accusers • Criminal: Guaranteed. • Civil: Not guaranteed.
Right to Discovery • Criminal: Broad discovery rights. • Civil: May limit access to internal records or data.
Right to Appeal • Criminal: Formal appellate process. • Civil: Appeals may be limited or administrative.
Punishment vs. Regulation • Criminal: Penalties are punitive. • Civil: Rules are classified as regulatory, even if burdensome.
Duration of Restrictions • Criminal: Tied to sentence length. • Civil: May be long‑term or indefinite.
Geographic Consistency • Criminal: Statewide. • Civil: Varies by county, town, or agency.
Public Transparency • Criminal: Clear public records. • Civil: May redact, filter, or withhold data.
Standard of Review • Criminal: Strict constitutional scrutiny. • Civil: Often lower standards.
Mens Rea (Intent Requirement) • Criminal: Requires intent or negligence. • Civil: Often does not consider intent.
Collateral Consequences • Criminal: Considered secondary. • Civil: May impose primary, ongoing obligations.
Administrative Discretion • Criminal: Limited by statute. • Civil: Agencies may have broad discretion.
What This Expanded Table Shows
This is not about attacking any system — it’s about understanding how civil mechanisms differ from criminal protections, and how those differences can create blind spots the public may not fully recognize.
civil systems can expand quietly, and the public deserves to understand the long‑term implications.
And loss of the structures that we call constitutional and correct.
Enjoy life before you are subjected to your civil scheme as one is coming to home near you.
Bringing this as a reminder to the masses here you can speak up/out and be ok about it as long as it is within the bounds of being respectful. Read on…I hope this guy gets a big fed civil rights payout from the city:
Iowa Officials Arrested This Guy for Criticizing Them—Twice. A Federal Judge Says They Are Liable. (Reason.com 24 Feb 2026)
BTW @Athena, I see Chicago has a $163M penalty against them in court from a parking ticket scheme gone wrong…in case you or other IL people who were wrongly caught up in it and would like your money back.
Illinois taking on PFRs who own drones (HB4332) and want them to register their drones. Not the first time they have done that but it is again another example of the expansion of the punishment the registry continues to evolve with.
The U.S. Supreme Court can grant emergency relief (via its “shadow docket”) and strike down legislation through judicial review if it violates the Constitution, such as by inciting imminent lawless action or endangering public safety. The Court can halt laws causing irreparable harm, though this power is used sparingly. United States Courts (.gov)
+3
Key Aspects of Supreme Court Emergency Authority:
Limitations and Considerations:
The government is charged with protecting US and they know that their actions are inciting violence and killing us!
THEY ARE RECORDING IT FOR C. SAKE!!
A duck is a duck is a duck, quack quack quack!
EMERGENCY RELIEF NOW!
The State uses the conviction to create the S.O. creature that must live against its will, in subservience to it!
The ridiculous claim is that they aren’t punishing you for the conviction, they are punishing you for a new crime, but only the creature THEY CREATED is capable of committing these new crimes!
Other than their paper-created creature, No other being is capable of committing these crimes!
SORA IS the very definition of punishment, and also a “racket”!
They create the “monster” so they can claim the hero, “here we are to save you from the monster.” That THEY created!
All while their true goal is the 10 – 12 BILION dollars a year they charge the taxpayers for the privilege of being taught to live in fear of the monster that they used your conviction to create!
Actually, they forced your hand to sign on the line and create it under threat!
Once a conviction is satisfied, the government CANNOT use that conviction to create more burdens for anyone!
The label itself IS A BURDEN, even without the felony penalties, and they know it is an indefensible fraud!
No one can be that creature after the sentence is satisfied, but they can “claim” to be through a “legal instrument.”
They can only “have been one in the past” while the sentence was still alive!
The real crime here is when the government forces someone to sign a registration contract (Yes, it IS a contract, where you agree to the terms, liberty for duties) under threat of felony coercion, to extract free public safety services, duties, which they keep increasing.
That is PEONAGE! Because it is all based on the debt (for the conviction), they say you owe to the state!
Did they all skip the “What a Civil Law is” class?
This is NOT a CIVIL law by any standard, and every legislature and court in the country should be ashamed of themselves for perpetrating this fraud on the American people to steal BILLIONS of taxpayer money!
We need an EMERGENCY RELIEF Class action now!
SCOTUS must save us from this life-threatening, irreparable harm before it is used to kill another American!
How do we coordinate this to save lives?
This chipping away at it slowly doesn’t work because all it does is allow more irreparable harm to accumulate and every argument that goes through the courts gives the corrupt interpreters the ability to create new reasons for this racket to continue harming people.
West Point cadet booted from Army after using AI to create nude image of woman (Military Times 27 Feb 2026)
A modified image of a real female mind you who was clothed, not just any nude image of a female.