NARSOL envisions a society free from public shaming, dehumanizing registries, discrimination, and unconstitutional laws.
NARSOL opposes dehumanizing registries and works to eliminate discrimination, banishment, and vigilantism against persons accused or convicted of sexual offenses through the use of impact litigation, public education, legislative advocacy, and media outreach in order to reintegrate and reconcile affected individuals and restore their constitutional rights.
• promote laws targeting harmful acts rather than entire classes of people;
• advocate for the abolishment of dehumanizing registries as they are ineffective, wasteful, and contradictory to rehabilitation and public safety;
• support removal of residency and proximity restrictions against registrants after their court-imposed sentence is satisfied;
• support litigation and legislation which remove or prevent retroactive increases in registration requirements and restrictions;
• promote laws which replace lifetime supervision/parole with a system that includes ongoing assessments for termination of supervision;
• encourage fair and balanced trials, proportional sentencing, reasonable statutes of limitation, and the elimination of mandatory minimum sentencing;
• discourage discrimination, violence, and vigilantism toward those accused or convicted of a sexual offense;
• seek out and support programs which effectively reintegrate and rehabilitate former offenders;
• seek out and support programs which effectively prevent new sexual offenses through intervention and community education; and
• promote healthy, trusting human interaction by replacing fear and panic with solid facts and reason.
On the issue of civil commitment:
NARSOL opposes the use of post-sentence civil commitment as it is now practiced with those having sexual crime convictions, which is as a means to extend the incarceration period beyond the court-imposed sentence.
Until such time as post-prison sexual offense civil commitment can be abolished, NARSOL will advocate:
- to limit it strictly to extraordinary cases where the state clearly proves, using evidence-based and best-practice clinical procedures, that the person presents a danger to the community;
- that state authorities be required to lay out a “clear path home” for each person entering the ‘program’ so that each committed person is aware of exactly what they have to do to obtain release, including treatment;
- that states be required to provide persons who are deemed indigent legal representation and financial resources necessary to engage experts on their behalf;
- that treatment be evidence-based, using best-practice clinical procedures, with the goal of reintegration back into society;
- for a thorough review of all currently committed persons to determine if they meet the dangerousness criteria as defined above with an appeal process that provides representation and financial resources as described above for those who are deemed indigent.