rudy101

rudy101

49p

159 comments posted · 115 followers · following 0

357 weeks ago @ Canon City Daily Record - Becky Jones: Overexpos... · 0 replies · +1 points

There is no way to limit the exposure of a registry that is allowed by law to be used in unlimited ways to discriminate and harass. The State has packaged up this list and given it out to the public. Everyone has access, including those that are violent, vindictive, or has no purpose to have that information.

I left the sex offender registry. NOBODY can get me back on it! WHY? Because, as that list was created and evolved it clearly has become a list that is dangerous to be on.

Ex-post facto, completely controlled by a legislature, no forums to ever challenge any assertion or placement on the list, and all it does is makes the community more dangerous.

You all have lost your minds thinking your laws are credible.

362 weeks ago @ KCPQ-TV - Avoiding sex offenders... · 0 replies · +1 points

There is a reason many don't register. Registering only makes the community less safe. There is no relationship between re-offense and compliance with a registry.

BUT you do make a great case for NOT registering (newspapers, mailings, public meeting, and renal companies using the registry to deny housing).

It is ILLEGAL to use the registry to systematically isolate a person from the community that has no ability to challenge or appeal this policy or even a registry.

BlackBelt? Your registry has no credibility. Even having a level 3 has no meaning as to dangerousness. Do you know why? Because it is not done by a COURT OF LAW under established standards. It is a FICTION of a dangerousness because all it allows the State to do is to tell you a person is dangerous. They are getting away with the fiction because you are satisfied you hate them the most.

You know why you'll never do that (take them to a court)? Because it will take all the fun out of the humiliation that is the only outcome of your registry. THANK GOD I have left your illegal registry.

393 weeks ago @ Pomerado News - County starts sex offe... · 0 replies · 0 points

Believe me, Sparky, the registry IS illegal and unconstitutional. Why? Because it is a PUNISHMENT outside of a sentence passed by a court of law. I know when the State finds it convenient it calls the laws civil and when it is convenient it calls the laws a punishment depending upon who the State is trying to justify the laws to.

But in order for a CIVIL law (as the legislature passed it as) to actually be civil, there must be a civil outcome, defined as some protection of the community. The ONLY outcome is the loss of safety and/or security.

Let me put it this way: Nobody can force me to choose between following a law and losing my safety and/or security or going to jail. That is well established in law.

Not only does the registry not protect, but it inherently makes the community more dangerous by making isolated and alienated individuals who have no hope for the future.

Gardner had no hope. What do you think he lost when he murdered those two kids? Not much at all. He lost his freedom? He had none to begin with and no hope to get any.

Oh, yes, the registry IS illegal on so many levels. It needs some DUE PROCESS. Rational restrictions based upon individual circumstances and mostly the legislature needs the power to name whomever they want to this list ripped out of their hands and placed in a court of law where it has belonged all along.

I am not worried about IP addresses. I don't hide. I laugh and ignore the registry and live a free life that does have hope. I can do that BECAUSE the registry IS illegal and has no due process, recourses and has ONLY threats, isolation, banishment and fear as outcomes.

You think anyone is going to challenge me? They won't dare!

393 weeks ago @ Pomerado News - County starts sex offe... · 0 replies · -2 points

The sex offender registry is an illegal, ex-post facto law that is used to isolate, banish, threaten and put fear into offenders. The State has allowed no way to challenge a placement on the site, legislatures use the registry to pass ever restrictive laws, a person on the site is presumed to be dangerous and the outcome is a person isolated from the community, aliented from society and unable to bring stability to his life.

THIS is called, "protection of the community."

It is irrational at it core. The registry assumes because the neighborhood is aware that person will have no opportunity to re-offend. A short bus ride takes care of the idea that everyone will know what that person did.

The registry has been around in California for over 50 years. What changed? What ex-post facto law changed the registry that gave imputes to communities to start banishing people that have lived for decades crime free?

It was the passing of laws that allowed for unlimited public dissemination of registry information.

The registry is irrational because it doesn't require dangerous people to be listed and for the community to be warned about their existence. The registry strips basic and fundamental civil rights to live in peace and has no relationship between public notificaiton and reoffense levels.

These things are not in dispute. However, they just don't matter. Freedom and justice are ideals that are held to the LOWEST of standards.

NOW, with that being said, the registry, as a matter of law, becomes ILLEGAL and does not have to be followed and can be fled from in any way possible.

Society is not allowed to make up a list with no judicial oversight and then use that list to systematically banish from every single social avenue of the community.

I left the sex offender registry. I will NEVER go back on it. NOBODY can make me. THAT puts an end to any sex offender email notification.

395 weeks ago @ WPRI.com | Eyewitness ... - State Rep. Pushes New ... · 0 replies · +1 points

Ex-post facto laws are prohibited by the U.S. Constitution. Laws whose only outcome is the loss of safety and/or security of the individual are illegal. There is NO PUBLIC SAFETY value to the sex offender registry AND it has been shown that there is an INVERSE public safety effect (the more public notification the HIGHER reoffense levels). There is also no relationship between a person not registering and reoffense rates..

All of those things are PROVEN. But the State will pass these laws anyway.

It is a RIGHT to flee any laws that ONLY bring harm to the person who is forced to follow them.

I WILL NOT FOLLOW ANY REGISTRY LAW that results in MY HARM.

You all think you can legislate the world flat (legislate that public notification protects the public), when it is well known that a person marginalized, alienated and hopeless, without friends, stable housing and stable employment (all results of unlimited public notification) protects the community.

The State uses the sex offender registry for political purposes. There is NO DUE PROCESS, no ability to challenge and the State can increase time on a registry and/or restricitons at their whim. The State is the sole body who defines who a sex offender is, and can name any person in any crime a sex offender.

Do what you like, but don't expect ME to follow ANY illegal laws. Does everyone understand that?

396 weeks ago @ KSWB-TV - Deputies warn communit... · 0 replies · +1 points

I can and do live my life. I do have my rights. NO LAW takes away or can take away my rights. That is why I left the registry to PROTECT MY RIGHTS!

396 weeks ago @ KSWB-TV - Deputies warn communit... · 2 replies · +1 points

It isn't about protection of children. You are making a connection between not sleeping in a bed and the protection of children. Human rights is not about protection of the rights of the popular, but inherently the protection of the rights of the UNPOPULAR.

What does this man sleeping in a bed, verses sleeping on the streets have to do with protection of the community? Well, there is LOTS. A person with a bed is LESS likely to be dangerous than one without one.

I don't know this man. I don't care about who he is. What I do care about is, that IF I register, there is a reasonable chance I will become homeless. If I become homeless I will be looking for a bed to sleep in. I will not let a LAW tell me I can't sleep in a bed that if I tell the police I am sleeping in it, I won't be able to sleep in it.

This is about MY safety, of which that registry doesn't seem to care about. That being the case, AND because that registry is illegally applied, I won't register. I won't register to PROTECT my rights to sleep in a bed. Undesrtand?

396 weeks ago @ KSWB-TV - Deputies warn communit... · 0 replies · +1 points

That is a veiled threat. They give you information and you believe you can give veiled threats of death.

You know what is toast? It is your stupid laws that are putting the community in obvious danger.

396 weeks ago @ KSWB-TV - Deputies warn communit... · 5 replies · 0 points

You know what? Throwing a person into jail for having a bed, of which he will not have IF he tells the police where he is at IS illegal and a violation of human rights.

I know none of you care as you strip safety and/or security, calling it a punishment or protection of the community; whatever is convenient for you, but is ONE of the main reasons you will never get me onto a registry. Sorry, but you people have no sense.

397 weeks ago @ Hawaii Reporter - 9-Year-Old Jessica Lun... · 0 replies · +1 points

It is easy to pass a law and impossible to implement a law like this.

Why won't the vast majority of those brought in on charges that require 25 years minimum in prison not get that?

Cases have to be proved, "beyond a reasonable doubt". It is a high burden, and every time a prosecutor takes one to trial there is always a chance there will be an aquittal. It doesn't take many loses to ruin a career.

Many times, (even in the most egregious of cases) the victim cannot testify due to trauma. A victim who cannot testify will not get a conviction.

Many times a victim will REFUSE to testify when the outcome will be imprisonment for 25 years minimum. This is because most sexual abuse happens in families. It is just not reasonable for all families to want that sentence, and will refuse to cooperate under those conditions.

In the interests of justice. Many people believe that the average person on a sex offender registry is of the John Cuoey type. That is just not true. Many people are rehabilitatable. Many are remorseful. Many will not re-offend. I understand nobody here has any sympathy ONLY because they know nothing of specific cases except John Cuoey's. Prosecutor's deal with these cases a lot. They judge them and offer plea deals on what he believes to be in the intersest of justice.

There is not enough money, time or room in the court system to take everyone (or even most) to trial. Even now, with sex offender registries, more people are going to trial. The registry, as a consideration of punishment is leading many to conclude that all or nothing is the only palatable outcome to a conviction.

So, add a zillion years to the punishment. It still won't be the punishment. And remember, no matter where you are, that between 50 and 75% of all accusations never result in an arrest. All laws like this do is puts the highest of stakes on the outcome of the criminal justice system that ultimately is shoving sexual abuse right back in the closet.

Yes, the law will get a few; will have some ridiculous outcomes and ensure that people can't even talk about sexual abuse except in the context of forever in prison...