Ken wrote on Nov 15, 2006 10:19 AM:The stupid part of this "intent" and the "alcohol bracelet", should they decide to try to enforce ANYTHING "retro-actively" is that when the ex post facto parts of prop. 83 are declared un-Constitutional and thrown out, so to will anything that is similar at ANY level of government. The same Constitution that allows ALL citizens the freedom of speech and protects ALL citizens from having their land taken without payment (just compensation) also protects ALL citizens from an Ex Post Facto punishment (punishment FOR A CRIME AFTER THE ORIGINAL SENTENCE HAS BEEN SERVED). The sentencing guidelines were too little for a long time and the laws that the Governor signed into being a few weeks before the election fixed that FOR PEOPLE NOT YET SENTENCED. Why? Because those laws were CONSTITUTIONAL. That is why they did not get challenged in court. Is there a part of "un-Constitutional" that you do not understand? The U.S. Supreme Court's job is to keep things that are Constitutional and throw out those that are not. The U.S. District Court Judge did her job by following the law. Is the county advocating that every person just pick and choose what laws they are going to obey at any given moment? Sort of like murderers and molesters and the authors of Prop.83 do? That sounds like lawlessness and anarchy to me. If a judge did feel free to violate the Constitution and the Constitutional rights of one person, even a child molester, why do you think that if you went before that same judge that the judge would follow the law and the Constitution then? Just because you are not a child molester? Maybe the judge doesn't or won't like you or your crime either. Harumph!

Justis2all wrote on Nov 15, 2006 1:09 PM:Too much sex offender hysteria! When will the madness end. You are all losing sleep and wasting tax payer money by going to the extreme. The U.S. Dept of Justice has a sex offender study that shows that on 3.3% of sex offenders released on parole comitted a new sex crime. Recidivism rates are much lower than what our leaders want us to believe. SB1128 was signed into law by Governor Schwarzenegger a couple of months ago. That bill covers loitering in the park by sex offenders.

Brad wrote on Nov 15, 2006 4:42 PM:What is going on in our Country. We have nothing better to do than pick on Sex Offenders. What if these offenders are at the park with thier own children. Are they going to haul daddy off infront of his or her children. Someone has to do something about all of the Draconian style laws that keep surfacing. Lets stop focusing on sex offenders and start focusing on our children. We are the ones responsible for their safety. We can't drop our guard just because a new law passed that "might" save lives. A tracking device isn't going to stop a crime from happening. Wake up everyone!

Fred Lopez wrote on Nov 15, 2006 4:56 PM:It doesn't look like anyone is going to learn from the mistake the State of Iowa made by imposing all of those terrible new laws. California is going to learn the hard way. I hope that the women and children that have direct ties to a sex offender (Daddy) can sue the Runner (R)-Lancaster, family for destroying their families. I don't believe most men would want to drag their spouses and children with them to live out in the middle of nowhere. Because at the rate California is going we are going to lose track of 90,000 plus sex offenders....then we are going to have to worry!

Lisa wrote on Nov 17, 2006 12:11 AM:Ok Prop 83 is full of loop holes, first what is the GPS a dog collar? Second, who is defined as a sex offender? Is it someones nice well behaved son who was ninteen who had sex with a sixteen year old? Come on define it or leave it alone. Witch huntting all sex offenders is unjust. If they served their time isnt justice supose to let them go? We as a society create what is justice dont we. From the beginning of time when beheading took place to the electric chair. Sensible people dont make quick choices so slow down and plot out every possible affect it has on society not just throw all sex offenders out the door because some will stop registering and thats when you will find trouble.

FRAN wrote on Nov 17, 2006 5:52 PM:all you confused and lied to about 83 should shut up for the sake of children as it covers only those14 and under age 14it should go to 18 as they are minors read the law go to the yes on 83 website and it should have been retro like 3 strikes i dont care about adults i care about innocent and believing children and i think i wouldn want to live with a offender by a school or park because i would never be sure if he wants to live there to pursue his mental wants of molesting or not i would move for mental peace period but somehow this is very important to them to live in these areas a the 7 all living across from the park that means they should be moved or voluntarily move why not most of all i would never live with an offender period !!!!!!CHILDREN FIRST THEY TORTURE AND MOLEST LIKE JESSICA BUT MANY ONLY TO EXTENT THEY DONT DIE SO THEY CAN GET OFF AS THEY ARE SICKKK NO CURE FOR THE DISEASE LOCK EM AWAY DONT LET IT SPREAD.

Shella wrote on Nov 18, 2006 11:10 AM:I am terrified of what this state is becoming - especially since it seems to be spreading to all states. I thought I lived in AMERICA - LAND OF THE FREE!! What I see before me is exactly what our forefathers left Europe for! This country is becoming a police state and at a very rapid pace! Before you go passing more restrictive laws on any group of people, stop and think about the fact that this may someday restrict you - either by the law you are passing or by the tide flowing so quickly with restrictive laws that more and more areas are included. Want guaranteed custody of your kids in a divorce? Press charges of molest on your ex-spouse. There is very little need for burden of proof in these cases. Why do you think our sex offender numbers are so high? You cannot tell me that all 90,000 are guilty of grabbing kids off the street. What about your teenage son falling head over heels for a girl. They have consentual relations, but the girl's parents find out and now your son is guilty of statutory rape and has to spend the rest of his life as a sex offender? Is it truly fair to do this to our own children? What about the victims of these sex offenders who happened to be related to the offender (father). Did you know that Megan's Law currently advertises the victim's address by posting the offender's address? How is that fair to the victim? Especially since they most likely are already receiving ill-treatment by neighbors, schools, and the like. Can these offenders who qualify under similar scenarios as I posted above also not ever go to the park with their own children? They can never go to their child's school play or pick their child up from school? Shame on you America! Shame on you Bonnie Garcia for using something that jerks people's emotions just so you can get votes! It is very obvious to me that this Prop. 83 had loopholes because you really didn't care about the details, you only wanted to get society riled up so they would vote for you! How shameful!

louisst wrote on Nov 18, 2006 11:21 PM:Here is what I think, I am so tired of people trying to justify Prop 83 it is not about protecting our children firstly its about the police, buracrats, and governments wanting new facility, New prisons, more social welfare, more money from the pockets of workers, more restrictions on everything from law and gaining their own invested interest. I know several sex offenders and their crimes are old like 8 years or longer. The people I know are great and I would trust all of them in my own home. Sometimes certain things happen like being drunk when young and having sex with a minor or stuped other mistakes. I have a son and he is everything to me I trust that I made the right decision in voting no on Prop 83. I want to know that these sex offenders are registered and getting help and getting a life. I dont want to discourage a sex offender by placeing a GPS device or more restrictions on distance because this will cause them hardship in work, family and their own well being. In return they could loose their job and self esteem thus causing them hardships ..in this event if they have nothing else to do with their life what will they do next? Think about it nothing else to loose and depressed? Hmmm... now what are we going to do cause more harship on them or keep the law the way it is now? They already have restriction laws and Meagans web page this must be difficult for them to do and find work and housing.. more punishment means more restrictions on them which could bight us in the but.

Been There wrote on Nov 23, 2006 8:48 PM:Are you, "Fran", more of a danger to yourself or anyone else just because someone hates a crime YOU committed 15 or 20 years ago and passes a law that says you are? I guess "Fran" wants someone to pass a law that the crime SHE did 15 or 20 years ago, that she has never repeated, that causes HER more punishment YEARS AFTER SHE PAID HER DEBT - DID HER TIME AND HAS NEVER DONE AGAIN. All those who think child molesters deserve harsher sentences ARE RIGHT, BUT NOT AFTER, I REPEAT AFTER, THEY HAVE ALREADY SERVED THEIR TIME. The Constitution FORBIDS punishing ANYONE MORE THAN ONCE FOR THE SAME CRIME. Get that through your head. ONE CRIME, PUNISH ONCE, THAT IS IT. What part of that do you not understand with what remains of the rational part of your mind that has not been whipped into a paranoid frenzy by politicians seeking votes for being "tough on crime"? If the horse is dead, does beating it make it any more dead? If someone has not committed ANY crime against ANY person in the 15 to 20 years since their crime and sentence, what makes them suddenly become any more of a danger? A law? Your outrage?

lincolnmontana wrote on Dec 14, 2006 2:17 AM:Megans Law in California is Unfair!! Unfair to those of us who are FORCED to REGISTER as OFFENDER every single year for the rest of out life? for 1944 MISDEMEANOR convictions? The pasadena police refuse to register manditory registrations ON TIME now many of us are facing PRISON TIME for a 30 year old MISDEMEANOR sex CONVICTION!! this is totally unfair !!!!!!!!!!!!! back in the early 1970s i was railroaded into a false arrest wrongful misdemeanor past conviction in los angeles county california in fear for my life ... i was forced to take a guilty plea i was ionnocent!! in 1996 the state of california made all former sex convictions from check this out 1944 on to have to REGISTER at the POLICE / SHERIFFS stations every year on thier birthday !!! on or about the year 2003 they finally caught up with me and i did not know what was going on at all!! suddenly i was ARRESTED in rough hard HANDCUFFS and on my way back to JAIL for failing to REGISTER form that point on i am FORCED once every year to go to the pasadena police station only to get DELAYED and put off and told to go away even after repeat APPOINTMENTS i am told everytime ... ''the lady who does that is not here'' !!! and so what usually happens is my regestration s are always LATE ''the pasadena police'' this last time i was ARRESTED and BOOKED for not registering ... I WAS TURNED AWAY FIVE TIMES !! finally after 4 weeks i finally got to tha' LADY now i face court AGAIN for something i did not do back in he early 1970s !!!!!!!!! WHERE IS THE JUSTICE HERE !! none for black men !! and none for me !! i may have to leave california when i become a old man i do not want to have to do this forever!! the state of california megans law is wrong!! it must be reformed completely !! i have never been charged or even accused of any nothing like this ever since the 1970s and i did not do what they said i did then !! WHY AM I A FORCED REGISTER NOW?