The following is a letter sent to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
FAC has long appreciated the ACLU and continues to appreciate the ACLU for taking on sex offender issues. This letter reflects our disagreement with the organization on one issue and our desire to open a dialogue with the decision makers, so we can better understand why.
I was registering today and an older guy, probably in his late fifties comes up to the counter and signs in. He tells the ladies that are working there that he hopes they vote yes on amendment 4. They tell him they are planning on voting, so he says he hopes so and he says out loud to everybody in the waiting room to vote yes on 4. So as he was walking to his chair, I tell him you know that all depends on what situation your in. He says no it doesn’t, I done checked on it, if it passes, we all will be able to vote. I say to him that’s not true, it doesn’t apply to murderers and sex offenders, and he balked back yes it does, it’s for everybody. I told him that it doesn’t, and he started to argue with me in a loud voice, but the lady behind the counter told him to let it go and sit down. So I’m thinking there are probably many people in our situation that may be telling people to vote yes, but are ending up hurting others unknowingly on this vote. Just thought I would share this because it happened to me this morning. I had withhold of adjudication, so I can vote. And I am voting no on 4,6,and 9.
“The ‘good’ of the many outweigh the ‘good’ of the few.” The ACLU, like many organizations, depends on donations. Endorsing Amendment 4 will expand their potential donor base by over one million people, whereas supporting registered citizens, who are known to be more cash-strapped than the average felon, would expand that base by only 35K or so. It seems to be a business decision, made without any concern of what registered citizens and their families live through on a daily basis. That being said however, to choose only venues from which registered citizens are prohibited, a fact most certainly known by the ACLU, screams bias. It perpetuates the dogma that since it doesn’t apply to them, they don’t need to be there (possibly stirring up doubt for future donors). If Amendment 4 passes, registered citizens will indeed become persona non grata.
And by supporting BOTH sides, it will increase the voting lot by 1 million 35 thousand.
WHY are they so afraid to have sex offenders get their voting rights back??
Are they afraid that the “little old 35 K might be the difference in voting their asses out?
I would LOVE to have a sex offender run against Lauren Book—- and WIN!!!
Poor daddy/daughter would both have strokes!!
Nobody is afraid of registered sex offenders going to the polls and voting. Not one person is.
But some people are afraid that other people are afraid. If I allow a registered sex offender to vote, how will that go over in the local press, and what will people think of me then?
I don’t doubt that there is a sex offender who could beat Lauren Book. Just not a convicted and registered one. Sex offenders have held public office at all levels, I would argue.
I am truly sorry that you would let other peoples opinions carry weight over what you think and how you act and influence how you vote.
IF ‘people’ as you put it are not afraid to let sex offenders go to the polls to vote, then why even have Amendment 4 to disallow them to vote???
You state ” If I allow a registered sex offender to vote, how will that go over in the local press, and what will people think of me then?”
So…. It is NOT about the sex offenders, but it is about what people will think about YOU and how you vote.
How will they know how you vote….. unless you tell them..??
Sad…… SO SAD
Not sure I follow. The reason Amendment 4 excludes sex offenders is that its sponsors felt that that would help ensure its success in passing.
Jacob,
Then how would that “HELP” sex offenders procure a right to vote by denying them that very right
(to vote)??
The passing of Amendment 4 would amend the Fla Constitution that “felons” (murders who are facing a life sentence and cant get out of jail– and sex offenders, who many are out of jail, trying to live a normal life) could never be able to have that right to vote, ever, taken away permanently.
It would make the Florida Constitution
UN-constitutional, as it would completely discriminate against a specific group/class of people.
Why dont we eliminate ALL the family members of all the politicians who run for office, their families, friends, poll workers, callers, organizers, donators from voting because they are bias towards one candidate.?? (seems kinda silly dont you think)?
Some of us on this site did heinous things (and regret it, and have made, or trying to make amends to move forward with their lives) And abide by the law– for years/decades.
Some of us on this site are on this site because of stings that they were coerced into. (Craigslist stings)
Some are on this site because they were caught peeing on a dumpster, in a park, at 3am.
And some on here were set up by vengeful girlfriends, wives, coerced step-daughters and are completely innocent, yet lack the hundreds of thousands of dollars to properly defend themselves.
And in your last statement you totally confuse me and probably half on here when you say this…
“I don’t doubt that there is a sex offender who could beat Lauren Book. Just not a convicted and registered one. Sex offenders have held public office at all levels, I would argue.”
To be labeled a sex offender you would have to be tried AND convicted of a sex offense.
I would like to know WHO has held office and has been a CONVICTED sex offender.
I am sorry, but your post has made absolutely no sense.
You may be reading more into my own views than what I have expressed. I generally agree with all you have just posted.
Just received an email about where the event is being held a fit in Melbourne a school campus
Please forward it to us. We are taking up this fight.
i sent it to info
i also sent that alert that was on phone highlighted just like amber alert about food and water being distributed at a school thus RSO can’t receive food and water after a disaster
Great work! I will be surprised if we get a response from these two recipients.
We already have from the ACLU
You’ll be posting their response soon?
if we receive a written response we will certainly post it.
Brilliant. And sensitively done as always.
To me, the core of this pair of letters is the request “to ascertain the County’s position on whether a person required to register would be lawfully permitted to attend this meeting, or whether he or she would be prohibited from attending.”
Either she replies yes, which removes a burden on freely joining such meetings, or no, which at least puts them on record as depriving them of that right specifically (not just parks). It may be a challenging one for her to answer.
I am sorry if I am “out of line” on this. But it seems that in this instance (and Im sorry, but many more to follow in my opinion)
RON BOOK and DESMOND MEADE have bought, influenced, manipulated, lobbied, lied to, coerced the ACLU and the Miami-Dade politicians into setting up these “meeting places” where the entire RSO communities voices cant/wont be heard.
I have seen on this site where the ACLU has fought for and provided support for the sex offender community, aiding in decisions regarding sex offenders.
To be completely “locked out” of public meetings where it is obvious now that political wrangling is afoot; especially concerning Desmond Meade, who has a political interest in this and who is in ka-hoots with Ron Book.
Is Desmond & Ronnie so afraid that this bill might be squished that they have to result to this “low ball politics”?????
And if this IS “Miami-Dade politics” (as usual) WHY would the ACLU, of all organizations, be bought and paid for, for this obliviously discriminatory act??