RSOL, RTAG in Washington to dialogue with legislators, staffers, journalists about International Megan’s Law

image_pdfimage_print

Brenda Jones, ED of National RSOL, and Paul Rigney, director of Registrant Travel Action Group (RTAG), are in Washington, D.C. this week to meet with legislative staffers and others to present our joint position on the passage of IML. Our focus will be making our opposition clear on the basis of certain constitutional rights. The legislation violates the 14th amendment right to due process as well as the 1st amendment right of freedom of association.

Another point will be raised regarding the proposal of a “unique identifier” on the passports of registered citizens. Such marks are not only a type of un-American branding but are also unnecessary as registered citizens are already being identified at check-points via instant online background checks.

Additionally, the legislation violates both the equal protection and the ex-post facto clauses, criminalizes innocent travel, and puts American citizens in harm’s way, all with no significant or realistic effect on child trafficking prevention.

The vast majority of us, indeed most likely all of us, oppose the International Megan’s Law. However, very, very few of us are able to go to Washington and seek and gain audience with those who can actually influence policy and public opinion. We are most fortunate to have RSOL and RTAG to undertake that urgent responsibility for all of us.

You are encouraged to go here and take this poll either supporting or opposing IML. The tide is heavily in favor of opposing after RSOL sent this to our affiliate email list several days ago. Make your voice heard.

image_pdfimage_print
Help us reach more people by Sharing or Liking this post.

13 Thoughts to “RSOL, RTAG in Washington to dialogue with legislators, staffers, journalists about International Megan’s Law”

Leave a Comment

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 and language 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.
  • Refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Refrain from comments containing references to religion unless it clearly relates to the post being commented on.
  • Do not post in all caps.
  • We will generally not allow links; the moderator may consider the value of a link.
  • We will not post lengthy comments.
  • Please don not go into details about your story; post these on our Tales from the Registry.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites.
  • Please do not solicit funds.
  • If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  • All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them. It will not be displayed on the site.

  1. John

    You can voice your opposition to this bill here if you can. It’s fast and simple. It went from majority of users supported to majority of users opposed in one day. https://www.popvox.com/bills/us/114/hr515

    Also call, email, and write letters to your House of Representatives to state your opposition to this unconstitutional bill.

    1. David

      Thanks John!

      Yep, that WAS easy. It only takes a few minutes to email or write a letter. If a majority of those being punished under the sex offender laws spoke up….things could really change!

      1. Paul

        I LOVE Janice Belluci. If you look at the map where people either “support” or “oppose” this bill, a huge concentration of people who oppose the bill is in California. That’s no coincidence. You go, Janice!!!!! Keep it up.

      2. John Coffey

        Yes Sir Eeee, Janice is working hard including TODAY at the Oakland (CA) U.S. Courthouse and media was there!

  2. Ed

    Yes Sandy we are fortunate that we had people willing to go to Washington DC and present RSOL views on pending legislation. While there, I hope they can also impress upon these legislators how they are destroying the necessary mystique between the sexes that have kept our species alive on this planet for many hundreds of thousands of years. The great mass of the public is in a state of panic brought on by a few very rare horrific events. The great mass of the public is a lot like the plant in “The Little Shop of Horrors” and the legislators are in a panic themselves to feed this plant with OUR blood. Of course they do this to maintain their own cushy jobs, full-blown Pontius Pilates – all of them. They really should walk a mile carrying our crosses and watch while we are crucified – by their mandate. They are more than rendering unto Caesar – they have become Caesar.

  3. Jay

    If somehow passports were branded with such salutations then we have indeed compromised the security of registrants far beyond necessity. This information can be scanned by individuals who have no privelege to inspect if used for normal identification. The executive and federal abuse of power is outright abhorring. This will make a traveler suspectible to extortion, bribery or blackmail upon arrival to intended destination leaving the United States open to lawsuits. It deserves clarification if it intends to target only registrants or sexual offenses regardless of lack of registry required or not. The transparency is only meant as targeting mechanism of a particular group and monitoring by a certain audience to deter the successful embarkment of a legally authorized expat. So if you systematically encroach on the employment and entreprenual aspect of ones prospects of income then you are thus complicit to violating an individual’s right to thrive, leaving the constitution to remain nothing but a dying sponge of sacredness.

  4. Ray

    If somehow passports were branded with such salutations then we have indeed compromised the security of registrants far beyond necessity. This information can be scanned by individuals who have no privelege to inspect if used for normal identification. The executive and federal abuse of power is outright abhorring. This will make a traveler suspectible to extortion, bribery or blackmail upon arrival to intended destination leaving the United States open to lawsuits. It deserves clarification if it intends to target only registrants or sexual offenses regardless of lack of registry required or not. The transparency is only meant as targeting mechanism of a particular group and monitoring by a certain audience to deter the successful embarkment of a legally authorized expat. So if you systematically encroach on the employment and entreprenual aspect of ones prospects of income then you are thus complicit to violating an individual’s right to thrive, leaving the constitution to remain nothing but a dying sponge of sacredness.

    1. John

      Let your voice of opposition be heard. Call and email your House Rep! Cast your vote where the public can see and be educated on exactly how this bill does not accomplish what it intends and causes more harm to registered citizens.

      Vote and state your reasons here https://www.popvox.com/bills/us/114/hr515

  5. Mike

    This will not sound right I know. The whole registration issue has morphed from a desire to prevent the horrific crimes that created the desire to pass legislation to an ever increasing political movement to secure reelection for politicians using tax dollars. The efforts of the organizations are laudable but this recent law is just an example of how futile the effort is with regard to the legislative process. The comment that Bobby Jindal supposedly made a few years ago something like, “what else can we do to these sex offenders” just illustrates the mentality of politicians.
    Is there any data at all, to suggest that registrants are engaged in international travel to sexually abuse children? This is just ridiculous. I personally think that we are all just sheep, and we take whatever our government inflicts upon us. I wish that we would just target the registry itself in Federal court. In the 03 case, the Scotus decision was in part derived using faulty info. There is much more data to use now and the registry has led to almost unlivable conditions. How is the registry as now utilized not punishment? I wonder how many plea agreements would have been agreed upon by defendants had they known that the current registry is what they would be facing?
    Our country gives lip service to human rights and lectures the world while at the same time, executing citizens, some of whom have been innocent, torturing suspected terrorists, and oppressing registrants without any factual basis. What hypocrites!!

    1. David Kennerly

      Indeed, had I known, nearly three decades ago, that my plea agreement which, at that time, included “sex offender registration”, (which I was assured by my attorney would be a relatively painless, once-a-year obligation with no further encumbrances) would come at such a horrendous cost in social marginalization and incapacitation (and internal exile), I would definitely have gone to jury trial.

    2. Craig

      I agree Mike, when I took the plea I was told that when I got off probation ( by my attorney ) I would be free, many of these laws were not in place then. I agree that the registry or at least a good chance of deregistration should be in place instead of fighting all these new restrictions that are placed on us it seems yearly. When you are on probation or parole yes I get it, you have rules to follow but after that you should get your life back. I really do not see how our government, federal and state are allowed to keep doing this. I help with state groups and even RSOL and have for many years, but I just see more restrictions. WTH, everyone should get together and address the real issue, the registry.

  6. G.R.L.

    I just casted my vote to OPPOSE this stupid bill!

  7. JR

    I have decided that I am mailing my passport to Chris Smith’s office. He wants to control its use so greatly? He can have it.

    Chris Smith
    108 Lacey Rd,
    Whiting, NJ 08759
    (732) 350-2300