Good News!

From California….

The City of Carson has agreed to settle the final presence restrictions lawsuit pending in the state of California. A total of 31 lawsuits were filed starting with the City of Lancaster in December 2012. As a result of these lawsuits, the only presence restriction that remains is a state law that prohibits registrants on parole from visiting public parks without first obtaining permission from a parole officer.

Read the full article at the CA RSOL website.

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

Avatar

Viewing 14 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #10110 Reply
      Avatar
      James Townsend

      Believe it or not those in power are finely seeing the light in all these sex offender restrictions as anyone can see that a lot of these rules that the sex offender had to go thru was a lot of man made crap.
      I never believed in lawsuits myself but sometimes its necessary to get the attention of government as a lot of those restrictions were discrimination.
      This should send a message to the whole USA.
      Sandy does that mean one doesn’t have to have a chaperone to attend church is they so wish to.

    • #10111 Reply
      Avatar
      Robin
      Admin

      Each church would retain the right to put in place any regulations that they deemed necessary or desirable. And remember that anyone still under supervision must adhere to those terms and conditions.

    • #10112 Reply
      Avatar
      Paul

      This is a small victory. Municipalities, cities and ordinances should always know that they are going to be slapped with a suit or injunction if they try to get away with this. I hope this sends a message though since it won’t be given much media attention, I doubt it will.

      As far as churches go, protecting children has to be balanced with a church’s overarching emphasis on redemption on reintegration. Given that many offenders are religious by nature, it seems cruel that many churches see it necessary to inform the entire congregation that a “sex offender” is joining their ranks, if they allow that person in at all. Usually the registered citizen’s response will be “well damn! That kind of defeats the whole purpose of joining this congregation in the first place. There’s no way in hell I’m going if all members are going to be mailed home a notice about me and my status.” The compassionate thing to do would be to meet with the registered citizen, get to know him, vet him a little bit and then reintegrate him back as much as possible. If churches want to help with reducing recidivism and promoting healthy lifestyles, that’s what they would do. I’m totally fine if the registered citizen can’t teach Sunday school, work with children or attend a children’s service (assuming he doesn’t have a child who attends the service). But churches should start adhering to what they preach or they too are helping to perpetuate a government conspiracy that all sex offenders are evil and not worthy of redemption.

      Thanks for sharing the good news, Sandy.

    • #10113 Reply
      Avatar
      Dad

      Counties in New York lost their residency restrictions on “registered sex offenders” in the states highest court. Legislation(s) for even worse laws has already be introduced but I doubt they will succeed. NY seems to understands the indisputable facts/statistics and the unjustified cost. Sex offenders once convicted tend to be a very, very small problem EVEN BEFORE the registry was ever “invented”. Of course we don’t want any sex crimes ever by anybody!!

    • #10114 Reply
      Avatar
      JR

      Tell that to Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office, Laura Ahearn and Parents for Megan’s Law.

    • #10115 Reply
      Avatar
      Rachel

      Yeah, it’s possible she gets a nice fat paycheck from this.

    • #10116 Reply
      Avatar
      Richard

      Paul, what you said about the reintegrating back into the church is on point. I personally had reached out to the pastor at my church (within 2 weeks of attending). I wanted to be upfront with him so that 1) he didn’t found out through someone in the congregation and 2) so that we could work together to ensure the safety of myself and the congregation. Of course he said that working with children would be out of the question (I agreed and made the decision beforehand that working with children wouldn’t be wise), but he wanted to make sure that I was able to become a contributing member of the church community. I have read many stories about how RSO’s find a way into a church and begin to work with children…that would be ill advised. Now, I know that not only offenses against children can get you on the registry, but once people find out…it’s all over. AND we know all to well that the media will sensationalize the story and make the church look like an accomplice.

      My suggestion would be to be open with the pastor or elders of the church so that you are protected incase any information gets out.

    • #10117 Reply
      Avatar
      James Townsend

      Now Rachael I don’t know where your comments came from but be nice. We are all hoping for Good News about this man-made sex offender law as it is a Scarlet letter on a lot of families. Now without giving a biblical issue on this as man should think before he pulls the wool over another here is a bit of news from Kansas .
      Check they to have ruled that this is a scarlet letter and that comes from the supreme court http://www.hutchnews.com/news/local_state_news/sex-offender-registry-compared-to-the-scarlet-letter-in-fiery/article_cf94f14a-e203-5129-bfe0-f89123e02e3a.html
      Now if we can stop these abusive sex sting operations that law enforcement do on people on the internet net. Everybody makes mistakes but is the law promoting evil in all these operations?

    • #10118 Reply
      Avatar
      Rich

      Reportedly Alabama has some of the toughest, most draconian sex offender laws in the country. While it is good that this group goes after California laws why does it not file suits against the laws in Alabama? Wouldn’t it make sense to attack the worst most oppressive laws ?

    • #10119 Reply
      Avatar
      Paul

      Good point, Richard. Believe it or not, I’ve heard too many stories where pastors will conditionally accept an RSO ONLY if every member of the congregation is notified which in my opinion totally defeats the whole purpose of joining. No other felony would call for that, not even second degree murder. I agree that it’s always a good idea to let the pastor know if only to not give any appearance of impropriety, even if that’s not the intent of the RSO. As far as working with children go, I think most of us would never hurt a child again. I do truly believe that. At the same time, if an RSO tried to work with a child and didn’t disclose his status, that can only reflect badly upon the individual in the eyes of that church. That would be a foolhardy thing to do. It would be a little like offering to balance the church’s books after being convicted of embezzlement. Even if one never intends to embezzle again, the church wouldn’t want to give that particular person that responsibility.

    • #10120 Reply
      Avatar
      Paul

      I have to throw in my two cents here. A strict biblical new testament interpretation would be helpful. In fact though, some of the most religious people are the least tolerant when it comes to reintegrating us back into society. Some (I should add) do correctly interpret scripture. I should also say that this this phenomenon can be true for atheists as well but many religious people USE religion as a way to justify why God would throw all of us in hell. When people use religion in a hypocritical way, I am a little less forgiving than a person who is wholly ignorant of the issue. I know the founder of the Christian religion would not be proud of the fact that the USA (which is supposedly a Judeo-Christian nation) has produced a segment of society that are literally outcasts and untouchables and many of them have done it in his name.

    • #10121 Reply
      Avatar
      Paul

      Let me clarify that last sentence. Many of the people who have called for the creation of a registry have invoked religion in doing so.

    • #10122 Reply
      Avatar
      Richard

      I know that there are only a few members in the church that know what’s going on with me (I haven’t gone to sentencing yet). It actually has helped me reach out to those people when I needed some encouragement. I also have a friend who is a social worker and can understand the situation (without too much judgement) and is still willing to talk to me. I don’t know the laws too much here in Virginia, but I still believe that I can attend church without issue (unless my PO says otherwise).
      You’re right about this type of felony being the only one that certain church elders would require public knowledge to all members…which is stupid and misguided. Luckily for me, I wasn’t the only person he has had to console with this matter so he has been very helpful. His father also is a pastor of a church with several members who are on the SOR (that he knows of), so there are certainly churches out there who are willing to help.

    • #10123 Reply
      Avatar
      Maestro

      “Of course he said that working with children would be out of the question (I agreed and made the decision beforehand that working with children wouldn’t be wise)”

      Richard, why did you prosecute yourself by saying “working with children wouldn’t be wise”?
      Not knowing what your offense was, I have an offense of having a consensual relationship with a girl that was 1 yr under the legal age (16 for CT, and almost all of the men in the SO treatment group I was FORCED to take by probation had the same issue), but this ‘young woman’ was not some Micky Mouse Club looking kid, which is a major factor in why I was drawn to her (hmmmm…Elvis gave pretty much the same justification for his interest in Priscilla when she was only 14).

      My point here is this – I have worked with, babysat, helped raise and joyfully showed kindness with children loooooong before I got caught up with a post-pubescent teenager just shy of being able to operate a motor vehicle all on her own. I have no interest in “children”, as my idea of “children” are those you’d see in the Micky Mouse Club.

      But I would NEVER in a million years, give someone else a means of judging me by having my own words VALIDATE my Scarlet Letter by saying I think it’s a good idea not to work around children.
      I don’t know about any of you here but I personally have come to DETEST the very sight of a child because of all the mental nonsense from the probation dept and most of all the ludicrous S.O. “treatment group”. Those people couldn’t treat a minor cut with a bandaid.
      I seriously have come to hate kids because of their psychological game they play on us – no matter what the backstory of our crime was – by basically forcing us to believe that we want to molest every child we see.
      Hate me for this if you will but I am at the point that I most likely wouldn’t try to lend a helping hand to a child about to get hit by a car. SERIOUSLY!! This is the type of mind f*ckery the legal system does to us.

      I dunno man. I just would never had said such a thing. Did you say it because it seems like the right thing to do, to allow these church folks to validate your Scarlet Letter, or do you honestly not trust yourself around kids?

    • #10124 Reply
      Avatar
      daryl a young

      Absolutely, it is absolutely appalling. All a woman has to do here in the commonwealth of Virginia is make the accusation PERIOD. Aren’t they already passing a law to make it legal to shoot a sex offender on site. does that mean I can shoot a judge who has been convicted of molesting his granddaughter on site LOL. Why don’t they just take us all to the local police firing range & be done with us. I wish they would take me to the firing range. “To live is Christ, to die is gain”. I am in the process of suing the state of Virginia via Leesburg general district court not only for “age of victim unknown BS on the sor website (so called VICTIMS age was 35yrs old) but also for luring me down on Super Bowl Sunday in Febuary of 2000 to take a polygraph test without informing me of my right to have a lawyer present. I got the BEST LAWYER in Virginia. J.C. Jehovast III, esq. Attorney at Law, He has NEVER lost a case. 🙂

Viewing 14 reply threads
Reply To: Good News!
We welcome a lively discussion with all view points provided that they stay on topic - keeping in mind...

  • *You must be 18 or older to comment.
  • *You must check the "I am not a robot" box and follow the recaptcha instructions.
  • *Your submission must be approved by a NARSOL moderator.
  • *Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • *Comments arguing about political or religious preferences will be deleted.
  • *Excessively long replies will be rejected, without explanation.
  • *Be polite and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • *Do not post in ALL CAPS.
  • *Stay on topic.
  • *Do not post contact information for yourself or another person.
  • *Please enter a name that does not contain links to other websites.

  • *DO NOT POST LINKS TO OTHER WEBSITES
Your information:





<a href="" title="" rel="" target=""> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <pre class=""> <em> <strong> <del datetime="" cite=""> <ins datetime="" cite=""> <ul> <ol start=""> <li> <img src="" border="" alt="" height="" width="">