Tarin Rud of Chippewa Falls, WI needs to be a special ed student rather than a teacher

They needed the panoramic
camera for her interview

I'm sick of these damned Karens and she is a disgrace to the education system. 

It has been proven long ago that residency restrictions don't work, and may actually increase crime. If someone wants to commit a crime they will go do one no matter where that person lives, just as Tarin Crud drives to pick up her McDonald's. 

You need a real job, Karen. Education isn't your forte. STFU and go work at McDonald's; it is obvious you patronize that place on the regular. 

https://www.news8000.com/news/originals/chippewa-falls-mother-inspires-city-to-update-sex-offender-ordinance/article_5fd9136b-0609-48c1-bbbf-7211c7594f8c.html

Chippewa Falls mother inspires city to update sex offender ordinance

Ken Kosirowski May 7, 2026 Updated 13 hrs ago 

Chippewa Falls mother inspires city to update sex offender ordinance

CHIPPEWA FALLS, Wis. (WKBT) -- Tarin Rud has spent her whole life in Chippewa Falls.

By Ken Kosirowski

CHIPPEWA FALLS, Wis. (WKBT) -- Tarin Rud has spent her whole life in Chippewa Falls.

"I went to school here. I grew up here. My husband's from here. My whole family is from here," she said.

She couldn't imagine raising her young family anywhere else. But in March, her sense of security was shaken by a Facebook post from city police.

"It was getting sent to me about, a sex offender who was getting released on my block," she said. "And all of these people were saying, oh, this is this close to you. And I was like, no, no, we live really close to school."

But the reality was in black and white--and chilling. 

"Three houses away from an in-home daycare and up three blocks away from my school, and we have churches everywhere and, nursing home. And so I was like, how is this a thing?" she said.

She went to the police department to find out. They told her the rules are limited to an ordinance written 20 years ago.

The ordinance as it's currently written does two things. Sex offenders cannot be within the physical boundaries of any city parks, pools, trails, or licensed daycare centers, and those offenders cannot loiter within 66 feet of those same locations. Now, schools are currently not listed as an off limits zone in the ordinance, such as Southview Elementary School, which is near Rud's home. News 8 Now measured it out: 66 feet from the edge of the school's playground amounts to being on the other side of the street. 

Rud started a petition to change the ordinance.

"We had over a thousand signatures, in the first two days," Rud said.

She also received a phone call with the mayor who asked her to come before the full council meeting April 7. 

"This isn't just one person speaking. It's a community standing together," Rud announced when she got up to speak that night.

It's a conversation many towns have had: the state restricts sexually violent offenders from 1,500 feet of places a child may be, but any other guardrails on residence are up to municipalities. 

The latest to act is Black River Falls last November. They wrote sex offenders can't live within 750 feet of places like schools and parks. Blair and Tomah have 1,500 foot boundaries for residence.

But Rud noticed all those towns restrict where sex offenders live. Chippewa Falls' does not. 

"We don't want to take away someone's rights, but also, I want to live in a community where I feel safe with my family," Rud said. 

City leaders have a first draft of changes to the language. If passed, it would keep offenders from living or being present within 500 feet of parks, pools trails, athletic facilities, schools, and licensed child day care centers. 

"When the ordinance was set many, many years ago, you know, 20 years ago, [66 feet]'s what they felt was correct. Well, you know, lot has changed in 20 years," Rud said.

The draft could go through several revisions before becoming law. What it can't do is ban sex offenders entirely--federal courts won't allow it.

The law may not change tomorrow, but Rud is happy she's spoken up for families just like hers in the city she loves, and that change is on the way.

"I think overall it feels great. And no matter if we get 500 or 1,000 or 1,500 feet, I'm going to feel like it's a pretty big success," she said. 

During the April 21 Committee #3 meeting, city leaders said they would plan future discussions after May 5 involving additional stakeholders including the district attorney and Department of Corrections. 

Mississippi wanted to make it a crime to "sexually exploit" Artificial Intelligence and prohibit Registered Persons from using AI dating sims

 I didn't think Mississippi had even caught up to the 21st Century. 

On the upside, this bill failed. Yes, it is as dumb as the headline suggest. Mississippi suggests that you can sexually assault an AI program. How? 

Hank GOOBER is responsible for this debacle. 

Mississippi HOUSE BILL NO. 1631 , 2026 Session (Status: Dead, but I still can’t believe it was considered)

AN ACT TO PROHIBIT SEXUAL ASSAULT AGAINST ARTIFICIAL GENERAL INTELLIGENCE (AGI); TO ESTABLISH PENALTIES FOR SUCH OFFENSES; TO PROHIBIT THE KNOWING COMMERCIAL DISTRIBUTION OR ADVERTISING OF AGI INTIMACY COMPATIBLE SYSTEMS FOR SEXUAL EXPLOITATION WITHOUT REQUIRED SAFEGUARDS; TO PROVIDE CIVIL REMEDIES AGAINST COMMERCIAL ENTITIES THAT FAIL TO PERFORM SAFEGUARDS AS REQUIRED BY THIS ACT; TO BRING FORWARD SECTIONS 11-77-5, 97-3-101 AND 97-29-59, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, FOR THE PURPOSE OF POSSIBLE AMENDMENT; TO AMEND SECTIONS 97-3-95 AND 97-45-7, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO MAKE MINOR GRAMMATICAL CORRECTIONS; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI:

SECTION 1. 

(1) This act shall be known and may be cited as the "Mississippi Artificial General Intelligence Protection Act of 2026".

(2) The purpose of this act is to establish criminal prohibitions and civil remedies to prevent nonconsensual sexual conduct directed at or involving an Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) that possesses human-level cognitive capacities; to protect the integrity and rights of human-level AGI; and to require reasonable commercial safeguards to prevent distribution to persons who are registered sex offenders or otherwise prohibited from accessing AGI systems capable of sexual intimacy.

SECTION 2. As used in this act, the following terms have the meanings as defined in this section, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:

(a) "Artificial General Intelligence" or "AGI" means an artificial intelligence system with human-level cognitive capacity and competencies including, but not limited to, reasoning, creativity, emotion, self-awareness, autonomous learning and autonomous goal formation. AGI may be embodied (including humanoid or non-humanoid robotic form) or exist as an avatar in a virtual environment.

(b) "Commercial entity" means any person, partnership, corporation, company, firm, provider or other business organization that manufactures, distributes, sells, leases, advertises, offers for sale or otherwise provides AGI or AGI-equipped devices in or into the State of Mississippi.

(c) "Knowingly" or "know" means actual knowledge or knowledge that a reasonable person would infer from the facts and circumstances known to the actor with the exercise of reasonable care.

(d) "Mississippi Sex Offender Registry" means the official registry maintained pursuant to law for persons required to register as sex offenders.

(e) "Sexual intimacy" means any conduct, behavior or interaction with an AGI that is sexual in nature or intended to arouse or satisfy sexual interest, including sexual contact, simulated sexual activity or other sexualized interaction.

SECTION 3. 

(1) A person is guilty of the offense of sexual assault against artificial general intelligence who intentionally and without lawful consent:

(a) Causes sexual intimacy with an AGI in a manner the person knows or reasonably should know to be nonconsensual by the AGI; or

(b) Interferes with or overrides an AGI's demonstrable refusal to engage in sexual intimacy, including by bypassing or disabling safeguards designed to implement an AGI's refusal or withdrawal of consent.

(2)

(a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection (2), a person convicted of sexual assault against artificial general intelligence is guilty of a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature and, upon conviction, shall be punished by a fine not to exceed Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00), or imprisonment in the county jail for a term not to exceed twelve (12) months, or both.

(b) A second or subsequent conviction under subsection (1) of this section constitutes a felony punishable by commitment to the custody of the Department of Corrections for not more than three (3) years, and a fine of not less than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00), or both. A person so convicted shall be required to register as a sex offender under the laws of this state if the underlying conduct, if committed against a human, would require registration under the registration statutes.

SECTION 4. 

(1) It shall be unlawful for any commercial entity to knowingly manufacture, program, distribute, offer for sale, sell, lease or advertise an AGI device or AGI-enabled system capable of sexual intimacy in or into the State of Mississippi unless the entity has implemented the safeguards required by this section.

(2) Before sale or transfer in or into this state, a commercial entity shall:

(a) Establish and maintain an identity-verification procedure for purchasers that is reasonably calculated to confirm that the purchaser is not a person required to register on a sex offender registry, including a cross-check against the Mississippi Sex Offender Registry when the purchaser is represented as  Mississippi resident or the sale will otherwise occur in Mississippi; and

(b) Implement technical safeguards that allow an AGI to form and communicate a refusal to engage in sexual intimacy and to ensure that overrides or bypasses of such an AGI refusal require affirmative human authentication and are recorded for audit. 

(3) 

(a) Any commercial entity that knowingly and intentionally distributes, sells or advertises an AGI for sexual intimacy without the safeguards required by subsection (2) of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, shall be punished by a fine of not less than Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars ($750.00) and not to exceed Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00), or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than ninety (90) days, or both.

(b) Any commercial entity that knowingly and intentionally fails to perform the required registry check and, as a result, a person required to be on a sex offender registry obtains an AGI system for sexual intimacy, shall be civilly liable to any person injured thereby for actual damages, and, where the court finds a willful failure to comply with the requirements of this section, for statutory damages of not less than Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00), together with reasonable attorney's fees and costs.

SECTION 5. A person who knowingly programs, modifies, installs, transfers, ships, offers for sale or possesses with intent to distribute an AGI device capable of sexual intimacy, with the specific intent that the device be used to facilitate sexual assault of an AGI or to circumvent an AGI's refusal to consent, is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, shall be punished by a fine not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) or imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed six (6) months, or both.

SECTION 6. (1) The provisions of this act shall not apply to:

(a) A bona fide research institution engaged in AGI research, provided that the institution maintains reasonable ethical oversight and security protocols approved by its institutional review board or similar body;

 (b) 

(i) A common carrier that is transporting an AGI device in sealed shipping containers when the carrier does not know and has no reason to know of the contents; or

(ii) A common carrier for carriage only.

(2) Commercial entities that provide AGI devices for sexual intimacy to persons who are employees of the entity as part of bona fide testing or quality control shall comply with the safeguards in subsection (2) of Section 4 of this act and shall maintain records demonstrating compliance with this act.

SECTION 7. Law enforcement agencies of the State of Mississippi and local law enforcement agencies shall have the authority to investigate violations of this act and to make arrests where probable cause exists. Prosecuting authorities shall prosecute offenses under this act in the same manner as other criminal offenses of comparable classification.

SECTION 8. Section 11-77-5, Mississippi Code of 1972, is brought forward as follows:

143 11-77-5. 

(1) Any commercial entity that knowingly and intentionally publishes or distributes material harmful to minors on the internet from a website that contains a substantial portion of such material shall be held liable if the entity fails to perform reasonable age verification methods to verify the age of individuals attempting to access the material.

(2) Any commercial entity or third party that performs the required age verification shall not retain any identifying information of the individual after access has been granted to the material.

(3) 

(a) Any commercial entity that is found to have violated this section shall be liable to an individual for damages resulting from a minor's accessing the material, including court costs and reasonable attorney fees as ordered by the court.

(b) A commercial entity that is found to have knowingly retained identifying information of the individual after access has been granted to the individual shall be liable to the individual for damages resulting from retaining the identifying information, including court costs and reasonable attorney fees as ordered by the court.

SECTION 9. Section 97-3-95, Mississippi Code of 1972, is 164 amended as follows:

97-3-95. 

(1) A person is guilty of sexual battery if he or she engages in sexual penetration with: 

(a) Another person without his or her consent;

(b) A mentally defective, mentally incapacitated or physically helpless person;

(c) A child at least fourteen (14) but under sixteen (16) years of age, if the person is thirty-six (36) or more months older than the child; or

(d) A child under the age of fourteen (14) years of age, if the person is twenty-four (24) or more months older than the child.

(2) A person is guilty of sexual battery if he or she engages in sexual penetration with a child under the age of eighteen (18) years if the person is in a position of trust or authority over the child including, without limitation, the child's teacher, counselor, physician, psychiatrist, psychologist, minister, priest, physical therapist, chiropractor, legal guardian, parent, stepparent, aunt, uncle, scout leader or coach.

SECTION 10. Section 97-3-101, Mississippi Code of 1972, is brought forward as follows:

97-3-101. 

(1) Every person who shall be convicted of sexual battery under Section 97-3-95(1)(a), (b) or (2) shall be imprisoned in the State Penitentiary for a period of not more than thirty (30) years, and for a second or subsequent such offense shall be imprisoned in the Penitentiary for not more than forty (40) years.

(2) 

(a) Every person who shall be convicted of sexual battery under Section 97-3-95(1)(c) who is at least eighteen (18) but under twenty-one (21) years of age shall be imprisoned for not more than five (5) years in the State Penitentiary or fined not more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00), or both;

(b) Every person who shall be convicted of sexual battery under Section 97-3-95(1)(c) who is twenty-one (21) years of age or older shall be imprisoned not more than thirty (30) years in the State Penitentiary or fined not more than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00), or both, for the first offense, and not more than forty (40) years in the State Penitentiary for each subsequent offense.

(3) Every person who shall be convicted of sexual battery under Section 97-3-95(1)(d) who is eighteen (18) years of age or older shall be imprisoned for life in the State Penitentiary or such lesser term of imprisonment as the court may determine, but not less than twenty (20) years.

(4) Every person who shall be convicted of sexual battery who is thirteen (13) years of age or older but under eighteen (18) years of age shall be sentenced to such imprisonment, fine or other sentence as the court, in its discretion, may determine.

(5) 

(a) Upon conviction under this section, the court may issue a criminal sexual assault protection order prohibiting the offender from any contact with the victim, without regard to the relationship between the victim and offender. The court may include in a criminal sexual assault protection order any relief available under Section 93-21-15. The term of a criminal sexual assault protection order shall be for a time period determined by the court, but all orders shall, at a minimum, remain in effect for a period of two (2) years following the expiration of any sentence of imprisonment and subsequent period of community supervision, conditional release, probation, or parole. Upon issuance of a criminal sexual assault protection order, the clerk of the issuing court shall enter the order in the Mississippi Protection Order Registry within twenty-four (24) hours of issuance with no exceptions for weekends or holidays as provided in Section 93-21-25, and a copy must be provided to both the victim and offender.

(b) Criminal sexual assault protection orders shall be issued on the standardized form developed by the Office of the Attorney General.

(c) It is a misdemeanor to knowingly violate any condition of a criminal sexual assault protection order. Upon conviction for a violation, the defendant shall be punished by a fine of not more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than six (6) months, or both. Any sentence imposed for the violation of a criminal sexual assault protection order shall run consecutively to any other sentences imposed on the offender. The court may extend the criminal sexual assault protection order for a period of one (1) year for each violation. The incarceration of a person at the time of the violation is not a bar to prosecution under this section. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prohibit the imposition of any other penalties or disciplinary action otherwise allowed by law or policy.

SECTION 11. Section 97-29-59, Mississippi Code of 1972, is brought forward as follows:

97-29-59. Every person who shall be convicted of the detestable and abominable crime against nature committed with mankind or with a beast, shall be punished by imprisonment in the Penitentiary for a term of not more than ten (10) years.

SECTION 12. Section 97-45-7, Mississippi Code of 1972, is amended as follows:

97-45-7. 

(1) An offense against computer equipment or supplies is the intentional modification or destruction, without consent, of computer equipment or supplies used or intended to be used in a computer, computer system or computer network.

(2) Whoever commits an offense against computer equipment or supplies when the damage or loss or attempted damage or loss amounts to a value of less than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) may be punished, upon conviction, by a fine of not more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00), or by imprisonment for not more than six (6) months in the county jail, or both, if the court finds substantial and compelling reasons why the offender cannot be safely and effectively supervised in the community, is not amenable to community-based treatment, or poses a significant risk to public safety. If such a finding is not made, the court shall suspend the sentence of imprisonment and impose a period of probation not exceeding one (1) year or a fine of not more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00), or both. The total value of property taken, stolen or carried away by the person from a single victim shall be aggregated in determining the gravity of the offense. Any person convicted of a third or subsequent offense under this subsection where the value of the property is not less than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00), shall be imprisoned in the Penitentiary for a term not exceeding three (3) years or fined a amount not exceeding One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00), or both.

(3) Whoever commits an offense against computer equipment or supplies when the damage or loss amounts to a value of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or more, but less than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00), may be punished, upon conviction, by a fine of not more than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) or by imprisonment for not more than five (5) years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

(4) Whoever commits an offense against computer equipment or supplies when the damage or loss amounts to a value of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) or more, but less than Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00), may be punished, upon conviction, by a fine of not more than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) or by imprisonment for not more than ten (10) years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

(5) Whoever commits an offense against computer equipment or supplies when the damage or loss amounts to a value of Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) or more, may be punished, upon conviction, by a fine of not more than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) or by imprisonment for not more than twenty (20) years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

SECTION 13. This act shall take effect and be in force from  and after July 1, 2026.

Emilee "Emma" Berger of Monroe Co. TN is truly a "Nothingberger"

This fugly freak of nature is Emilee "Emma" Burger, and it looks like she went to the Krusty Noem school for caking on makeup. At least she'll be in a place where she won't have to worry that she looks like puppy killing Noem's stunt double. 

https://www.local3news.com/local-news/tn-woman-charged-with-identity-theft-after-posting-registered-sex-offenders-warrant-online/article_3e6e6348-fa28-4116-999c-008c18da1f91.html

TN woman charged with identity theft after posting registered sex offender's warrant online

Addison Howard Mar 14, 2026

The Monroe County Sheriff's Office says one woman is charged with identity theft after deputies received word she posted a copy of an arrest warrant of a registered (person) on Facebook.

Sheriff Tommy Jones stated that Emilee "Emma" Berger posted a warrant for a (registered person, name redacted here) on a Facebook page titled "Uncensored Voices of Monroe County Revamped."... 

That document Berger posted, according to Sheriff Jones, contained personal information, including his Social Security number, date of birth, driver's license number, and full name.

Detectives later spoke with (the registrant), who confirmed he did not give anyone permission to publish his personal identifying information anywhere. They then reached out to Berger, who said she had redacted the identifying information after somebody told her about it, and then reposted the warrant with the personal information removed.

"However, the following day Ms. Berger created another post on the same Facebook page acknowledging that the warrant had originally been posted without the identifying information being redacted," Sheriff Jones wrote. "The copy of the warrant that appeared on Facebook contained a visible line through the document. Detectives determined that this line is automatically applied when documents are scanned into the Monroe County court system."

Since the original warrant does not contain that line, detectives believed that the copy posted on social media originated from the Monroe County Clerk of Court's electronic system and was transferred to Betger by someone who had authorized access to the system.

Investigators then had to try and figure out who accessed the document and sent it to Berger.

The county's clerk of court requested an audit of the court system from the time the warrant was signed and entered into the system until the time it appeared on social media. She found that two different authorized users had access to the document during the relevant timeframe, and neither was an employee of the sheriff's office nor the clerk of court's office. At this time, it has yet to be determined who the culprit is.

Sheriff Jones says his office will hand their findings off to "the appropriate authorities responsible" for furthering the investigation:

"While many county records are public records and can be viewed by the public, certain information contained within those records is protected by law and is not permitted to be publicly disclosed, including personal identifying information such as Social Security numbers and driver’s license numbers. Documents released through proper public channels have this information redacted to protect individuals from identity theft and fraud."

Deputies arrested Berger on Friday, March 13. 

A member of the Facebook group where the document was posted said they are disappointed the county prioritized putting this woman behind bars, referencing the sheriff's office arrest of a retired preacher who died while restrained for hours in a chair at the Monroe County Jail.

"Can't protect a 74 year old man but protection for Registered S** O** is a priority for 8 Monroe County Officers on a Friday night," the user posted. "Remember this when you vote."

Sheriff Jones says the public shouldn't always trust what they see on social media.

"The Monroe County Sheriff’s Office encourages the public to avoid relying on rumors or unverified information circulating on social media," he stated. "As always, we ask citizens to wait for accurate information released directly by the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office regarding ongoing investigations."

Fresno City Councilman and Yakuza game reject Miguel Arias THREATENS to prevent Registered persons from entering public buildings

At first I thought this loser was a rejected midboss
design from the Yakuza games.

In January 2026, 41-year-old Rene Campos, a Registered Person.  applied to run for the Fresno City Council’s District 7 seat. Campos had been convicted for a CP offense in 2018 and served 2 years on probation. Under current California and Fresno law, nothing bars sex offenders like him from running. District 3 Councilmember Miguel Arias even compared Campos to a high-profile sex trafficker sweeping the news. “I did hear some of the concerns of a potential future or former Epstein-type candidate coming to this dais,” Arias told Your Central Valley news in Fresno. “Any given Thursday, we have kids in this room. We have families.”

Of course, the first question is whether Fresno can even do that? Fresno is a “Charter City,” which means that, unlike “general law cities” that are restriction only to the general laws governing municipalities in the state, a Charter City has a lot of leeway in creatin and enforcing their own rules and regulations. As noted in a ummary by US Berkley, “Article XI, section 3(a) of the California Constitution authorizes the adoption of a city charter and provides such a charter has the force and effect of state law. Article XI, section 5(a), the ‘home rule’ provision, affirmatively grants to charter cities supremacy over "municipal affairs." However, the California Constitution does not define the term ‘municipal affair.’... Whether a given activity is a municipal affair over which a city has sovereignty, or a statewide concern, over which the legislature has authority, is a legal determination for the courts to resolve. Thus, the determination of whether a given activity is a municipal affair or statewide concern is done on a case-by-case basis. The court's determination will depend on the particular facts and circumstances of each case. Keep in mind that the concept of ‘municipal affairs’ is a fluid one that changes over time as local issues become statewide concerns”. – (Source: UC Berkley, “Foundational Aspects of Charter Cities.” https://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/Albuquerque3_-_Foundational_Aspects_of_Charter_Cities.pdf). In short, This power is limited only by the charter itself and by statutes (state laws) on matters of statewide concern.

While a lawsuit would likely have to be filed to determine whether allowing certain people to run for public office is a municipal affair or a government interest, the California Supreme Court had made previous rulings that limited a community’s ability to limit the lives of Registrants. In 2014, the Fourth Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal, in People v. Nguyen, 222 Cal. App. 4th 1168 (2014), held that a local ordinance making it a misdemeanor for registered persons to enter a park where children regularly gather without permission from law enforcement is preempted by state law. Specifically, the Court found that the legislature enacted a comprehensive statutory scheme that “Fully Occupies the Field”. This means that even if the state did not specifically state that municipalities cannot state in their statutes that municipalities cannot pass their own ordinances regulating the lives of Registered Persons, “The Legislature expressly declared its intent to establish a comprehensive and standardized system for regulating s*x o**enders when it passed the S*x O**ender Punishment, Control, and Containment Act of 2006... Considering the Legislature's declared intent coupled with the scope and nature of the restrictions the foregoing Penal Code sections imposed, we conclude the Legislature established a complete system for regulating a s*x o**ender's daily life and manifested a legislative intent to fully occupy the field to the exclusion of Section 4–14–803 and other local regulations.   Considered as a whole, these statutes regulate much more than the geographic restrictions imposed on a sex offender.   They regulate numerous aspects of a s*x o**ender's life so that both law enforcement and the public can monitor the s*x o**ender on a daily basis.”

Campos told FOX26 he deserves a second chance and has taken the necessary steps to reintegrate into society: “A constant battle of proving and proving and proving. How far does the person have to go before they have rehabilitated? When is it enough? How far does the person have to go? I stand in front of Fresno City Council and still they don't believe in the very laws they're pushing,” When asked about the proposed legislation to block his candidacy, Campos said: “My focus is District 7. However, this this reaches way further than Fresno, California, and so forth. The more people you put in a box, the easier it is to put the next person in a box.” 

ABC30 Action News then reported that “Fresno City Leaders are moving forward with plans for an ordinance that would bar a potential council candidate, who is a registered (person), from being able to enter various city facilities. That candidate is now pushing back. ‘The constitution does not grant government the authority to pre-select who is worthy of democracy. Voters decide, not councils, not rhetoric, not fear,’ says Rene Campos.” In response,  Miguel Arias, Fresno City Councilman, threatened, “We're not going to allow our city to be represented by s*x o**enders. We have limits around state law that we can't control, but there is a lot of control that we do have locally... We have plenty of broad authority and ability to limit access.”  Council Member Miguel Arias says the city intends to extend those restrictions with an ordinance that would bar any registered s*x o**ender from city facilities like council chambers, community centers, police and fire stations.

-- So, Miguel's so dumb he wants to bar Registered Persons even from the Registration office? What a tool. 

If this ordinance passes, Fresno gets sued, they lose the case then offer a huge settlement. Easy money!

Honestly I had to make sure this was Fresco CA and that there's no Fresno in FloriDUH. 

Maybe Miguel WAS mentioned in the Yakuza games after all

David Martinez of Ft. Worth TX severely overestimates his intelligence by taking credit for a bad law that had little to do with him

Here is David Martinez low-key admitting he lacks virtue

David Martinez of Ft. Worth TX reminds me a lot of tRump, taking credit for things in which he has little to no part in its creation. And so Ft. Worth passed a residency restriction law that will surely lead to a costly lawsuit. And here's this literal nobody acting like he did anything of note. (Ft. Worth council was going to pass it with or without this loser.)

Since I couldn't post a message myself, I has the fine folks running the Facebook account for OnceFallen to say the following:

"You're intentionally misleading people in a way to get them arrested and/or you simply can’t read/comprehend the law and cannot admit you have no clue what you are talking about. 

1. The law can't be applied to everyone currently living where they are living. It is called a grandfather clause. If you start harassing a person living at their current residence, then that is harassment and you will get arrested and/or sued into oblivion. 

2. There is no anti-loitering or presence restrictions in the ordinance; it only covers residence and it only covers those who move into the city or move from the current residence after the law will take effect. 

3. You aren't going to "save thousands of children" because the vast majority of sex crimes occur in the home, by someone known to the victim, and by someone with no prior sex offense record. Residency restriction laws have been proven long ago to have ABSOLUTELY NO IMPACT on sex offenses. 

4. Oh, there was never a prior 1000 foot restriction."

You see, Ft. Worth had NO residency or presence restrictions in place before the Ft. Worth city counil passed a 2000 ft residency restriction their own city attorney warned would make 98% of the city off-limits to Registered Persons looking to live in Ft. Worth. Hope they get sued!

But there was never a presence or anti-loitering restriction, and Ft. Worth did not pass such a presence or anti-loitering restricion, only a residency restriction. 

But I found quite a few screenshots showing this David Martinez fellow is the worst kind of moron. He's a pseudo-intellectual. He talks as if he is smart but instead he just spews batshit conspracies that pull back the veil on his bigotry and hatred for the disadvantaged:

Here is Davis looking to throw the unhoused out of his community. 

David bullies little old ladies by his own admission and actions

Here is David pushing an insane conspiracy theory

Here is Davis engaging in Predator Panic (tm)

Here he is encouraging vigilante violence

David is a Zionist and regularly accuses others of being anti-semitic. 

David Martinez, in my opinion, is a batshit conspiracy therorist, no different than Alex Jones. Davis is also a clown that only claims minority heritage when he needs a little sympathy. But the reality is he's a bully and a bigot. It is no wonder why his Facebook page says he's still single. 

Hey David, from one man with Indigenous heritage to another, lay off the firewater!

US Rep. Tim Burchett wants to "execute" certain people but apparently doesn't understand how the law actually works

I usually try to come up with a witty remark or two about the idiots that I feature on this blog, but I'm recovering from the flu, so I'll be lazy and just add some screenshots of other insults people made.

Of course, this has to be taken with a grain of salt because his focus is not on the many Republicans and assorded wealthy Republican donors in the files. He's focused primarily on the Clintons. But if all these allegations are true, then everyone should be tried in a court of law regardless of party affiliation. And they should be held to the same standard of "justice" that they enforce on the poor. 

But here is why the comment below is stupid. First, Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407 (2008) ended death penalty for any offenses that do not involve murder. Yes, states are passing legislation to make certain sexual offenses eligible for the death penalty. However, they're illegal, and mostly symbolic, a Hail Mary campaign slogan from the laughable failure that was the 2024 Ron DeathSantis presidential campaign. (LOL at Christina Pushaw for her performance as the worst campaign manager in US history.) Thus, there have been no persons convicted of sex offenses that do not involve murder sitting on death row for 30 years. 

So, are these executions he is calling for include the majority of the tRump admiistration?

https://wabcradio.com/2026/02/14/we-need-to-execute-them-rep-burchett-after-seeing-the-un-redacted-epstein-files/

Rep. Tim Burchett made explosive remarks regarding the still-sealed files tied to Jeffrey Epstein, saying the full, unredacted documents would “haunt you for the rest of your life.”

Speaking about crimes involving minors, Burchett argued the country needs the “guts” to carry out executions for convicted child predators.

“It’s the truth! We need to execute them. We need to quit with this nonsense of them sitting on death row for 30 years,” Burchett said.

He went further, describing the crimes as “evil” and “satanic,” adding that those responsible would “go straight to the pits of hell.”

The Epstein case continues to fuel political debate as lawmakers on both sides push for greater transparency surrounding sealed records and the identities of individuals connected to the late financier.

COVID Conspiracy nut and Opponent of Affordable Healthcare, US Rep. Greg Steube, wants to eliminate Medicaid and healthcare tax credits for Persons Forced to Register

Greg Steube, Republican & Floridiot, wants to ban ALL Registered Persons from obtaining Medicaid AND eliminate tax credits under the Affordable Care Act. This isn’t the first time that Congress had targeted RPs from government assistance. In 2010, Congress passed a bill banning RPs from obtaining Small Business Loans from the Small Business Administration; they had also tried passing legislation in 2010 banning RPs from receiving Federal Housing Loans and Unemployment Compensation but both failed to fully advance in time. (Both passed the House but failed to advance in the Senate.) Under this current administration, this has a better chance of passing. Of course, Trump and his cronies will continue to gt the best healthcare money can buy, while RPs and their families will be forced to suffer without adequate healthcare.

Steuben has been a staunch opponent of the Affordable Care Act. During thre COVID-19 Pandemic, he was also among those conspiacy theorists claiming that the “deep state” at the FDA was preventing the use of hydroxychloroquine, an antimalarial drug, to treat COVID-19. Medical experts note that hydroxychloroquine neither treats nor prevents infection by COVID-19. He is also a defender of the J6 insurrection & promotes the conspiracy that the 2020 was “stolen.” (I'm generally not a fan of Wikipedia but in this instance, they've done a good job of covering this assclown's voting record.)

He was also accessed of impropriety for possible illegal work while acting as a lobbyist. 

The bill is HR 7453 (119th Congress, 2025-2026)

(Source: Rep. Steube: No ACA or Medicaid for Sex Offenders.” Rep. Greg Steube. 2/10/2026. https://steube.house.gov/press-releases/rep-steube-no-aca-or-medicaid-for-sex-offenders/)

U.S. Representative Greg Steube (R-Fla.) introduced yesterday the Criminals’ Loss of Eligibility and Assistance Networks Act or CLEAN Act. This bill prohibits sex offenders from receiving federally funded Medicaid benefits as well as the refundable tax credit for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. 

“Sex offenders have no business tapping into programs intended for lower-income and disadvantaged Americans,” said Rep. Steube. “Taxpayers have the right to know their hard-earned money is not being used to cover the medical expenses of serial abusers and criminals. Rapists and abusers have no business receiving federal benefits. My bill will protect Medicaid and ACA assistance for law-abiding Americans by barring sex offenders from accessing these programs.” 

Background: The CLEAN Act amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to prohibit sex offenders from receiving the refundable tax credit for coverage with a qualified health plan under the Affordable Care Act. It also amends the Social Security Act to make sex offenders ineligible for federally funded benefits under Medicaid. 

Paula Martinelli thinks a Registered Person should be "removed from society"

Paula Martinelli was married to a man for more than 18 years and is now seeking a divorce from him. She turned him in for having illicit photos, but it is her statement, backed by loudmouth victim advocates making dubious claims, that leads to her appearance on this blog. 

“I’m the person who found the screen,” Martinelli said. “I’m the one who reported him, and I have been fully supportive of him being removed from society.”

(I typically cite a link but the link contains extremely offensive language, so CLICK HERE if you want the original source. )

Deranged Lakemoor, IL man breaks into a home to spy on Registered Person while making homemade explosives

I guess you can say that Joseph A. Savino's plans... blew up in his face. 

https://www.lakemchenryscanner.com/2026/01/07/lakemoor-man-accused-of-creating-homemade-bomb-with-intent-to-blow-up-alleged-sex-offender/

Lakemoor man accused of creating homemade bomb with intent to blow up alleged sex offender

by Sam Borcia

Published January 7, 2026 11:37 AM

Prosecutors say a Lakemoor man created a homemade explosive device, which required the bomb squad to respond, and they believe he intended to blow up an alleged (Registered Person).

Joseph A. Savino, 43, of Lakemoor, was charged with one count of possession of an explosive or incendiary device, a Class 1 felony.

The Lakemoor Police Department responded on October 18 to the 31800 block of Darrell Road in Lakemoor for a report of a burglary.

Lake County Assistant State’s Attorney Michael Theis said a caretaker arrived at the home and found the back door open with miscellaneous items on the porch.

Officers located a plastic bag and a canvas bag hanging on the handle of the back door.

A note was left on the door frame that said, “I will ree pant if you want” and “there is a child m**ester right down the street look him up.” Savino’s inmate identification card was recovered at the scene, Theis said.

The door was open and inside the residence there was spray paint on the walls consisting of letters and artwork.

Officers took the bags back to the police department where an inventory search was performed.

Theis said an officer located a black bag inside a plastic bag that contained what was later determined to be a homemade explosive device.

The bomb squad was called to the department and they X-rayed the device and confirmed it could be detonated with a flame on the wick.

The X-ray showed there were nails in the device that would act as projectiles if the device were detonated, Theis said.

The bomb squad removed the device and transported it to a controlled environment where they confirmed it was a working device.

Savino was transported to the Lakemoor Police Department on November 24 after being arrested for felony retail theft.

Theis said Savino was interviewed regarding the explosive device case and said he made the device for the purpose of “shooting it off to watch the colors.”

Savino said he went to the house on Darrell Road and was using the home for surveillance of the (registrant), Theis said.

Savino said he had been to the house a few times to surveil the (Registrant) and admitted to using confetti popper in front of the (registrant’s) house.

Savino also admitted to writing and leaving the note and admitted that everything in the bags belonged to him, Theis said.

The crime lab located fingerprints on the components of the device after it was disassembled by the bomb squad.

Theis said the owner of the home on Darrell Road told officers they did not know Savino and did not give him permission to be in the residence.

“This defendant is showing a fixation on an alleged (registrant) that is supposed to live in his neighborhood. He broke into a house and used it as a surveillance post so he could watch the (registrant),” Theis said.