You are here

NARSOL files amicus brief in premises case before Illinois Sup Ct

By Robin . . . The National Association for Rational Sexual Offense Laws (NARSOL), in collaboration with its foundation and legal fund, Vivante Espero, has filed an amicus brief on behalf of the defendant-appellee, Marc A. Pepitone, in an important case before the Illinois Supreme Court concerning parks and premises restrictions against “child sex offenders” (720 ILCS 5/11-9.3 (f)).

NARSOL is represented by Attorney Paul Dubbeling of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Illinois Voices filed a separate amicus brief and is represented by attorneys Adele Nicholas and Mark Weinberg, both of Chicago, Illinois.

NARSOL’s amicus brief seeks to accomplish two fundamental objectives in support of the Attorney Katherine Strohl’s primary brief on behalf of Mr. Pepitone, who she defended below and successfully won a challenge against the statute before the Illinois Court of Appeals in February, 2017.

First, NARSOL’s brief demonstrates that recidivism rates among registered sex offenders are known with reasonable certainty and are significantly lower than is commonly accepted or understood. Second, NARSOL’s brief demonstrates that restrictions imposed on registered citizens have no demonstrable impact on rates of recidivism and may actually have the unintended effect of increasing it.

In late Winter, 2013, Marc Pepitone, a registered citizen in Illinois, decided to take a stroll with his dog in Indian Boundary Park near Bolingbrook, Il. He parked his van across three parking spots which attracted the attention of a local police officer. The van’s tags were identified as registered to Mr. Pepitone, a “child sex offender” as defined by Illinois law.

Pepitone and his dog returned from the park to find the officer investigating his vehicle. After asking the officer if there was a problem, Pepitone was informed that he was not supposed to be on park property and was charged in violation of 720 ILCS 5/11-9.4-1(b).

At trial, Pepitone challenged the constitutionality of the statute but his motion was denied. On appeal, Pepitone argued that the law was unconstitutional on its face because it bore no reasonable relationship to protecting the public and was overbroad. He also argued that the statute violated the ex post facto clause because it too effect after his prior conviction. The Illinois Court of Appeals agreed with his first argument and declined to visit the ex post facto question.

This is NARSOL’s third amicus filing in the last twelve months.

More information can be found about this and other cases in Illinois on the Illinois Voices website. Illinois Voices is a NARSOL state affiliate. For information about becoming an affiliate of NARSOL, please visit here.

 

 

This topic contains 28 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  Maestro 4 weeks ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #27190 Reply

    Darrel Hoffman

    That law and laws like it are unconstitutional because it denies registrants their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and from participating in everyday societal activities.

  • #27184 Reply

    Saddles

    Wow talk about Karma. For the last three or for days I had some sort of spiritual breakdown. Sure I’ve cried and I really didn’t know why but actually even with something like sexual sexual situations’ or encounters that people are going thru. weather something of a physical nature, hands on nature, or some sexting situation it does seem to play on one’s head.
    Now for me I seem to talk about Christian things on here at times. My sister which is my church chaperone to go to church at times she doesn’t even like to go to church, I can’t force here. A lot of people don’t know or understand some of the restrictions that we have.
    Now I see nothing wrong with walking one’s dot in the park, I don’t care if your a sex offender, a transvestite or a brother Louie, the main thing is honesty.
    Sure I like to obey the law as anyone else but sometimes one has to say, what’s wrong with this picture? Man made ordinance’s like this are a bit too much. Its much in the line of the last article on here.. You see man has more or less in some ways always wanted to be in control. Are we still in a revolution? or should we all take a stand for those. Yes I came from the Martin Luther king Jr. days to. and I didn’t even understand to much about revolution at the time or John Lennon but a lot of this whole sex stuff is really opening up a can of worms on some of these things.

  • #27193 Reply

    SW

    Why does it seem like courts so often “decline to visit” or use some other reason to disregard a case? They seem unusually eager to blow the case off, to me.

    • #27242 Reply

      Darrin

      I agree, SW. Can someone in NARSOL explain why this happens so often? Is it because they see the size of the impact and stay away? Please explain.

      • #27247 Reply

        Robin
        Keymaster

        It’s very simple. Efficiency. The same reason that a mechanic will stop looking for a problem with your car when he has already found the issue you’re complaining about. There’s no point in going any further although there may well be other problems with the car.

        The defendant appealed his outcome at trial. He made a constitutional challenge against the statute under which he was prosecuted. He presented two arguments. The Court dealt with the first argument and determined that he was entitled to relief. There was no reason for the Court to reach the second argument. This is standard judicial procedure. There is nothing other worldly about it. The fact that the Court declined to consider the ex post facto argument does not mean that the argument isn’t valid.

        Pepitone successfully won in the IL COA by claiming that the statute was “facially invalid”…and he did that under a rational basis analysis. That’s a far greater victory than getting relief under an ex post facto claim.

        • #27897 Reply

          Tim L

          The rational basis analysis is a method used by defense attorneys or lawyers who in general apply to regulation efficacy. You will find no mention of the term within the constitution! Such devices are used to mollify “scrutiny itself”.
          Simply put, it makes the hard but obvious choice easier to stomach politically when the decider knows internally a wrong is being advanced.

  • #27246 Reply

    Tony From Long Island

    I can sorta understand these restrictions when someone is still on parole or probation. However, they are 100% unconstitutional for someone who is no longer under sentence.

    • #27250 Reply

      Maestro

      Tony from Long Island,

      When you support the idea of parole and probation, you also support the idea of the registry.
      You can’t say abolish the registry and also say that *some* people might deserve to be on it.
      Regardless of being on parole or probation, the fact remains that you are now out in the *free* world and should be able to carry on with your every day life.
      I’m not even interested in arguing about ‘parole’ but when it comes to the word ‘probation’, that seems to me like the court is saying;
      “We’re going to give you a shorter prison term and let you out and allow you to prove yourself to function in society”
      You can’t PROVE ANYTHING when you’re NOT ALLOWED to do anything.
      Probation officers’ arguments are null and void when they say “What if there’s kids around?” Because the logical comeback that stumps them to give a reasonable answer is; “What about when I’m off probation? Aren’t I still a convicted felon of a sexual offense?”

      Buuuuuuut, people here, from my previous comments on this topic, seem to like to kiss up to the idea of probation being what it is rather than what it should be.
      Just keep in mind that probation is the reason for a lot of homelessness across the country in regards to sex offenders because they determine if you can live with a relative or not based on where or with whom that relative lives.

      • #27259 Reply

        gonzo

        Maestro – I agree with what you say. In Kentucky they once referred to post incarceration as “conditional release.” If anyone researches and understands the term quickly you realize this term is misapplied. Now it is referred to as “post incarceration supervision.” Threatening someone that has served 100% of their time with another (5) years incarceration is insane, no other way to say it, but that is what they do, in some cases (3) years depending on when your offense occurred. In essence my 3 year agreement with the Commonwealth amounted to an (8) year agreement (never on paper at final sentencing). Most return to prison not because they re-offend but due to “technical” violations. Much progress has and is being made. Logic appears to be on our side.

        • #27291 Reply

          Maestro

          Gonzo,

          Thank you for understanding my point.
          When I got out of my 2 yr prison stint, I returned to my hometown. I got a job at a restaurant that has a bar (other than Friendly’s, what restaurant DOESN’T have a bar?) and probation violated me for that. I beat the violation in court but ended up homeless because the 22 days I was locked up going to court, I lost my job and my apartment. So I finally moved to a different county (because I couldn’t stand the probation supervisor of my home town) and guess where I found work? At a restaurant with a very happening bar and live entertainment. And this new probation office didn’t bat an eye about it. In fact, my PO would come in during his lunch break (the typical slick ‘checking in’ of his client) because the restaurant is 1 block from the probation office.
          But that doesn’t mean that any probation officers are our friends. They WILL TRY to find sh*t to violate us for and THAT IS NOT FAIR.

  • #27256 Reply

    Tyrus Young

    While it is a matter of Semantics, as one radio host states, Words have Meaning. Thus our everyday lexicon reinforces the tag we are labeled with… Sex Offender. Unless you are currently offending, you are not a sex offender. You are someone who committed a sexual offense at a point in your life. An episode of misbehavior is exactly that… an episode in (hopefully) a long life… we should not be burdened with a descriptive adjective that is not currently part of our personality.

    If 20 years ago, one was picked up for a DUI, does that make them forever a drunk? If two decades ago I performed some construction work, but have changed jobs long ago… would I be described as a construction worker? If you lived in Ohio for a year two decades ago, are you an Ohioan?

    Stating that someone is a sex offender brings a past action or behavior into the present as if it is still occurring. This is a distraction and a misrepresentation perpetuated to instill fear upon a clueless public. Official recidivism statistics bear this point out.

    A few years ago I saw a report of how the FBI categorizes me…. as a Non-Predator. This same information is likely available for all who have been convicted of a sex offense. Isn’t that determination more informational then just blindly labelling everyone who essentially made a mistake? The Tier system may attempt to achieve that, but it is based more on the actual conviction charge rather than the facts of the case. There are some offenders out there that likely should be on a registry for public safety, but they are the exception not the rule. Further, as long as drug dealers (69% recidivism) and the like are not included on a registry as those who continue to pose a danger to society – then the registry is worthless.

    • #27261 Reply

      Kendal

      I actually have the court papers that state “Defendant is no longer a threat to society or to children” That was long before this registry non-sense was enacted.

  • #27263 Reply

    Tony From Long Island

    Maestro: I don’t think you understand what Parole and probation are. . . . . I don’t how I “support” parole and how that even relates to “supporting” the registry.

    Probation is a sentence for a crime. You are under restricted liberty for a certain amount of time. If those who’s supervision you are under state that you can’t enter a park, then you can’t enter a park.

    Parole is part of a prison sentence. You are still under sentence when on parole. You are simply serving it outside the walls with lots of restrictions. If my parole officer says I can’t go to a park, I can’t. Good luck getting that one changed.

    When someone is not under any form of sentence, they should be free to come and go as they please at any time and anywhere they choose.

    The registry is something else altogether and has very little relation, in my opinion, to not being able to enter a park.

    • #27274 Reply

      Chris in Baltimore

      What about all the former sex offenders that are on lifetime supervision, which is imposed not by any semblance of risk calculation, but at the discretion of the sentencing judge? The federal courts seem to hand out lifetime probation like it’s candy, and according to my own p.o., even for failure to register violations.

      • #27278 Reply

        Kendal

        And there is another thing… I was never, I mean NEVER sentenced to sex offender registration. It was imposed on me by the Colorado Bureau of Investigations. So there, I was sentenced to a punishment, not by the judiciary, but by the enforcement. I do believe that is a violation of the separation of powers clause.

    • #27292 Reply

      Maestro

      Tony from Long Island,

      Thanks for the class on Probation and Parole 101. Gee wiz, I had no idea 🤦🏻‍♂️
      I have never been on parole and I don’t like to speak on it. But I have been and am currently on PROBATION. And I don’t give a damn what they SAY, I want a REASON for it.

      “Don’t go to a park”
      “Why not? What’s the difference if I go jog or walk my dog in a park NOW or when probation is over? Please EXPLAIN THE SAFETY CONCERN, SIR.”

      Thank you.

      P.S. “it’s part of your sentence” is the typical comeback from damn near everyone with NO EXPLANATION for my question regarding SAFETY CONCERNS. So simply repeating that it’s a part of your sentence with its conditions is NOT an answer. It’s a cop out that kisses up to them….as they want us to.
      So explain to me how I am a threat to the safety of the public while I’m ON probation but the same superhero probation officers don’t give a damn AFTER we complete probation. And what exactly IS the idea of completing probation successfully? Just to be able to say you can take a direct order to not wear a red tie if they demand that you do not wear a red tie while on probation? Spare me.

  • #27272 Reply

    Roger

    You folks are doing a great job. Thank you! Keep chopping away at these draconian laws.

  • #27273 Reply

    David Harbour

    I am distressed by the, what I consider misuse of terms regarding crime statistics and sex offenders. The term recidivism needs to be put aside, and the proper term reoffense rate needs to be applied. Recidivism includes new sex offenses, new non-sex offenses, parole and probation violations. Unfortunately, this skews the number that we should be talking about, reoffense rate, as in how many previously convicted individuals go on to commit additional sex offenses. Those who have an agenda, as in passing new and tougher laws no doubt want to continue using the former rather than the later, as it serves their purpose. However, those of us who are attempting to get at the truth, as in what the evidence shows, need to start using the later.

  • #27307 Reply

    Saddles

    I actually have to give Robin a high five for that word ….Efficiney. Now Tony wants to agree and maestro wants to disagree with this probation, parole law. Now I was never into the star trek thing, or the beam me up scoty thing, but I was more into night court. I’m sure some of you all remember that TV show back in the early 90’s. Believe it or not I was more interested in law and justice things. Parole has its good merits’ and probation has its walk the chalk system but this sex registry seems for life
    I would say its like apples and oranges but one of the main things is we are all here for a sex offense charge. Appears things have gotten that bad or a bit out of line. We all make mistakes and even police , government and even human beings and sometimes its better to take wrong than right but than you can also say two wrongs don’t make a right maestro.
    Tony you have a point and Chris has a point, even gonzo agree’s with maestro. Now here’s the point I believe everyone is seems to want to get a hold on and understand better is this sex registry thing. Maestro, you have a good point also but the thing is we all need to work together. Hey I’m nobody myself but with God your somebody. Ain’t nothin wrong with a little bit of faith.
    Sometimes we have to think of others better than ourselves, isn’t that what NARSOL is doing? Sure we can all breakdown and cry just like I did the other night but we all have to stand talk. Their is a reason for all seasons. You people on here are not that bad.
    Sure they are going to believe that boy or girl you touched or that person one was talking to but here’s the thing, who know’s the thoughts of man and when someone pulls the wool over someone’s eyes that’s another matter entirely and believe it or not even government wants to be right just as the people want to be right. Sure feedback is good and that’s why NARSOL is good understand about this. Now I know everybody on here has words about all this sex stuff but keep them under your hat for the right opportunity comes along to speak out and we all still have free speech.
    Actually I give all you all a high five on here as your helping your neighbor in a way and that’s good.

  • #27312 Reply

    Tony From Long Island

    Maestro. I am on parole. I am fully aware of what it (and probation) entails.

    “It’s part of the sentence” does not require further explanation. It’s pretty self-explanatory.

    Every one of my parole restrictions is negotiable. I have been able to do pretty much what I’ve wanted to do (within reason). I go to concerts. I go to sports games. I have joined a bowling league. I have a job with full access to a computer. . . .However, I am always fully cognizant that I am still under a sentence for crimes I was convicted of. After 12 years of incarceration, I had 6 years of parole – i.e. restricted freedom (14 months left). I am also, however, on the registry as a level 3 (the “most dangerous” level in New York).

    I would guess that you don’t have such success just judging by the tone of your posts. I have dealt with dozens of people like you as a paralegal – people who have very good points to make but are unable to put aside their emotion when trying to make them. . . . .

    I have also found that this is harder for people on probation to do since they usually have not done a long stretch of time with absolutely no freedom. . . . . .

    I think the better approach for people in our situation is pick winnable battles. Baby steps. Working on how the registry affects people who are no longer under any sentence is a great example. It’s finally starting to come to fruition based on recent court decisions. . . . .

    By the way, I don’t consider this an argument and I hope you don’t either – rather just a passionate back and forth. We are all on the same side here.

    • #27317 Reply

      Maestro

      Tony from Long Island,

      ““It’s part of the sentence” does not require further explanation. It’s pretty self-explanatory”

      People like to put aside the draconian conditions of parole/probation by saying “its part of your punishment”. If conditions can and have been ‘modified’ then they have no reason to even exist as conditions in the first place.
      Probation officers like to use LAME excuses as to why I can’t go shopping at a mall; “What if there’s a bunch of young girls hanging out and they don’t look their ages”. Pardon me Mr Probation Officer Person, but does the probation department have it in their minds that I’ve never been shopping at a mall in my entire life time? Do you think I’ve never SEEN ‘kids’ or teenagers in my lifetime?
      I hooked up with a teenage girl as a way to boost my own ego and self esteem after a divorce. I don’t go around trying to get with teenagers in my every day life.
      One of the biggest lies the probation dept and/or SO treatment group leaders say is that they want to know WHAT caused you to offend and they base their assessment of you on that. BULLSH*T!
      When you tell them WHY/WHAT caused you to offend, they tell you “You’re using excuses and minimizing the offense” to which I reply; “Then STFU and stop asking me if you’re not going to accept the answer.” Thankfully, I’m done with those ridiculous money grubbing ‘group’ sessions.

      Someone else here said that if they drove drunk ONE time, does that make them a drinker/drunk/alcoholic, no, it doesn’t. If you picked up a cigarette ONCE in your life and tried it and never did it again, does that make you a “smoker”? No, it doesn’t.
      And I am NOT a “sex offender”. And i am pretty sure that pretty much everyone here are not sex offenders.

      So telling us we can’t go to a mall or a movie and using LAME EXCUSES for it makes NO SENSE since this ‘punishment’ eventually ends and we’re STILL felons when probation ends. Nothing changes that. But suddenly…..we can go to a mall! Oh my gosh! Well look at that. No more being given stupid reasons why we can’t go to the mall. All of a sudden our money is just as green as everyone else who’s going shopping. Wow!

  • #27327 Reply

    Tony From Long Island

    Maestro, you and I seem to have a lot in common in terms of our past misdeeds. I just seem to handle them better.

    It appears to me that you still do very much need some sort of therapy. Your frustration and anger seem to be eating you alive.

    When I was 24 and 25, I was a High School teacher who also hooked up with teenagers to boost my self-esteem, which was pretty much non-existent at the time. After years of legal issues and appeals, I ended up with 6 to 18.

    I am 43 now and am almost done with the 18 years.

    I have been able to do things that generally are on my list of restrictions because I approach them calmly and rationally. I explain what I’d like to do and why I feel I should be able to do it. Nine times out of ten I am able to.

    Probation and Parole have incredibly broad powers to restrict our lives. Trying to fight them is truly futile. Instead, I focus on things that are doable, such as modifying the registry.

    It seems to me that New York might be close to changing the way the level of registrants is done. Rather than using their completely baseless point system, they may be on the brink of using scientifically validated risk assessment instruments. That would be a game-changer for me.

    I hope things get better for you. I don’t like to see anyone as frustrated as you seem to be.

    – Tony

    • #27449 Reply

      Jonny everyman

      As someone who has tussled with maestro before I will say he feels strongly with his convictions. However I think like you said his frustration with the registry outweighs the strategic plotting it will take to bring it down

    • #27478 Reply

      Maestro

      Tony from Long Island,

      “It appears to me that you still do very much need some sort of therapy. Your frustration and anger seem to be eating you alive.”

      I do not need therapy, Tony. What I need is to be off of probation.
      When I was nearing the end of my marriage, my (ex) wife and I got into a heated argument that turned almost physical with only a few things being thrown at me (by her) but no ‘hands on’ contact.
      My wife, at the time, was still waiting for her GREENCARD approval. And we both knew that marriage was going to hell in a hand bag really fast.
      Her cousin who lived in NJ had put the bug in my wife’s ear that if she says I was abusive to her – INSTANT GREENCARD! So guess what….
      I ended up on probation with a promise to divorce her and go our separate ways.
      That probation was a piece of cake. No need for travel permits, no being told where I cannot go, not even being told that I cannot date women again (ya know, because I apparently abused the wife). The only thing my PO wanted to know is if I had any contact with her which I did not nor wanted to.

      Then I met the underage teen. I had NO IDEA of the conditions of ‘sex offender’ probation until AFTER I took the plea. Then I was given a copy of the conditions I’d have to follow once I was released. Too much, too little, too late.

      But unlike what you mentioned about YOUR situation, I did not chase after teenagers* , I hooked up with ONE and only ONE teenager in my entire adult life.
      Probation treats EVERYONE as if we are HABITUAL offenders. Funny how I can move on to date or marry other women (being that I’m such an abuser of women) but hooking up with 1 teenager means I cannot be sexually stimulated by printed/video materials, can’t live too close to a school, can’t go to a mall or movie or festival (without someone close to me that has been approved by probation), etc, etc, etc.
      So tell me, how can the state that prosecuted me admit and recognize to the court that the relationship was consensual, albeit illegal, but somehow I’m a threat to the entire world at large for that but I’m not a threat to the safety of any grown woman who dates me if I’m such an abusive partner/husband? I guess the state and the dept of probation doesn’t really care about everyone , eh?
      I’d my point any clearer now?

  • #27467 Reply

    Tony From Long Island

    Jonny: Nothing Maestro said is “wrong” per-se. He has valid points and the illogic of some of his restrictions is also valid. However, I have always found it better to focus on things that can realistically be changed.

    Frustration and stress can be a killer – literally.

  • #27498 Reply

    Saddles

    Who know’s the thoughts of man. Yeal tony you are right. Fustration & stress can bring you down quick & yes it can be a killer if one lets it. Have we all not done wrong? Everybody in the USA has in one way or another. Sure this sex offender stuff can get one down and yes sometimes we do get a little violation here and their but seldom does the courts give one second chances but its up to you how you live your life.
    It appears today with this sex offense thing or this sex offender ordeal those in government are quick to draw their two edged sword, whether they set you up on the net or you were playing house with some gal you didn’t know her actual age or you groaped someone or didn’t. The point is people don’t seem to want to forgive and forget, they either want some compensation out of it, tarnish one’s reputation, or be some viglantie type of person.
    Are women just as bad as men? Sure court system’s try to settle it all out but a lot of this issue on the lives of thousands of people all over the USA of being on the registry for life is a hinderance and yes it is a bit shameful. Are not we suppose to respect all people… of course I sleep most of the time in my Government and civic’s classes but American History should set an example for all. Sure what do these people want that are accusing Government officials as groaping and other things. Shoot is sex is more powerful than telling a white lie than we are all sinnners. I know we all have our ups and down moments and sometimes need our space too. Why can’t we all learn to live together or come together like the beatles said.

  • #27506 Reply

    Saddles

    Maestro, actually most of us shouldn’t be on the registry. Sure I know sense when someone’s “pumping me” Yes PO officers like to do that.. Now this amicus thing is a way that they can weed around all this issue as government don’t have the answer themselves. I feel for those that had to go to jail or prison that are involved in some of this ordeal.

    I remember when I got wrapped up in this whole mess 5 yrs. ago I told the detective straight up when he said you thought you were talking to a girl. I said you don’t even know my thoughts. Sure I had a potty mouth. Should I have said sure I’ll be right down and I’ll even come to your house and bring rubbers show you some dirty pictures things of that nature, see all that was a ploy. Second night while I was on the site they were the one’s that interrupted me as I was talking to someone else.. The main thing was to get me down there. I hesitated going down there but they called me up and wanted to know if I was coming down there and even thought I wanted to back out and I told them on the phone they reassured me. My conditions when I went down there was no sex. So they got me for attempted to travel to meet a minor.
    We were meeting in the park but she had suggested I come to the house which was a dead give away. I know what they were up to but still even after the phone call as I was traveling down their and asked to back out they reassured me what could happen we are meeting in the park and the rest is history.
    Yes they want to protect and serve but in certain scenario’s that is not the best way. Even the bible says’ try the spirit and just look at how many commandments they broke and I ask him if he was a Christian. The detective finely told me he was when I was going into see the judge. Would you call that justice or a cheap form of justice?
    Sure I was scared as everybody else and took a plea deal or bargain. I didn’t really want to but at the time I didn’t quite know how to go about all this and needed more understanding about others are coping with all this.
    but something good comes out of something bad and to this day I don’t know why some courts want to pass the buck so to speak. Getting one’s house is good but I think the government needs to do a bit of house cleaning today.

  • #27635 Reply

    Saddles

    People I have to tell you things are not all that bad. Sure I never wanted to get mixed up in all this but sometimes like one guy told me sometimes we all learn a hard lesson. I wish I still had my mom and dad at times but we do the best we can with what resorces we have. Yes I have tro give a hi five to NARSOL as they are fightening for you and for me.
    Sure it saddens’ me about a lot of this but when you let things get you down you have to build yourself up and at times that takes patience.Courts actually don’t know what to do if you really think about it, and I don’t like to think as that overloads what brain I have. Sure we can all exchange stories about getting caught up in all this but we all need to think about the other person or that kid that got caught up having sex at 19 with some 15 yr. old gal and is on a lifetime registry or that person that exchanged nude pictures to some gal over the an adult internet chat or those e-mails one gets to coax one into talking to some good time charlie’s angel. Remember Charlie’s angels were detective’s and can set that weak person up in a minute.
    Like maestro said on here its all about money. Yes most of my savings is gone to the state to pay this mischarage of Justice. NARSOL and WOW and a few others are trying to work with all these courts and even let the general public know that a lot of this isn’t right.
    Don’t they still have sex education back in Jr. high even warnings posted on the internet or ad’s like they did in the drug culture? Even smokey the bear has a warning about preventing forest fires. How much more better is a bear speaking than a human? Courts sometimes don’t want to listen but we all have to stand up and enlighten those that think we are some type of throw away’s. We are people.

  • #27792 Reply

    Nick

    What is the status on this and other positive things for Illinois

Reply To: NARSOL files amicus brief in premises case before Illinois Sup Ct
We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

  • *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.
  • *Excessively long replies will be rejected, without explanation.
  • *Be polite and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • *Do not post in ALL CAPS.
  • *Do not promote your business, your blog, your website, or any other business, blog, or website.
  • *Please enter a name that does not contain links to other websites.
Your information:





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