biggish data

You are making a common mistake, assuming that SORNA & AWA are really about protecting children. The fact is that they are not. Neither is the Center for Missing & Exploited Children. It's really just politicians who have found an easy way to get voters behind them.

AWA & SORNA are both reactionary after the child has already been abused. Find one part of either that works towards prevention.

The Registries tell parents to be on the look-out for the stranger pervert hiding down the block but it's a fact that more than 90% of sex offenses against children are committed by "insiders" who are either family members, considered to be close trusted friends of the family or in some other position of trust within the child's life such as teacher or babysitter.

The Registry gives parents a false sense of security so they are more likely to let their guard down. While keeping an eye on the guy down the street who has never had any contact with their child they are overlooking the all of the adults in their child's life on a daily basis.

Bob,

Sorry for a Jackaroo here don't know how to edit the post. I agree with you said "It's really just politicians who have found an easy way to get voters behind them."

http://constitutiona...hes-white-house

Sorry to say,many of the registries were convicted dated back to decades ago, who poses no risk to society and no thread to re-offend but get stigma attached to him all his life long.

purpleorchid

Female

China

2010-03-09 22:02:00

Obviously, the AWA is going so far!
The real criminal, they will violate the law by any way regardless whatever enforcement on them. The SORNA derived from AWA is a great waste of fund, which should used for cracking down on those real criminal but focuse on the routine. It is a shame!

purpleorchid

Female

China

2010-03-09 01:32:00

To those who has the hatred for sex offenders,

I agree with you that the recidivists should be punished, I believe such kind of recidivists will be locked in prison for ever. That is the society issue. In fact, 85% of sex offenders are rehabilitabable. Everyone may make mistake in ones life. Are you sure you have not done anything wrong in your life? Please speak according to objective appraisal, don't influenced by emotions or personal prejudices.

purpleorchid

Female

China

2010-03-05 15:24:00

if you are a sex-offender and you are convicted and you apply for a K1 visa the USCIS will deny you! the Adam Walsh Act is clear that you are excluded unless you can prove that you are NOt a threat to your fiancee'! i hope that you can satisfy them if you apply...

any ideas?

is anyone interested in bringing a lawsuit against USCIS for this issue?

s.o.

Male

Equatorial Guinea

2010-02-02 22:11:00

you know the best thing for you is just live with ur fiance wherever she at try to migrate there if you really loves your fiance. Im just saying!

KillerMachineUSMC

Male

Philippines

2010-02-03 19:44:00

'In every LAW, there is FLAW' my professor in college used to say in our class.

I heard the story about a 19-yr old man who's having consensual sex with his 17-yr old girlfriend, charged and labeled as sex offender after his mom's girlfriend reported him to the authority.
She just got pissed of with her daughter one day and want to scare her, that's why she did it. She wanted to withdraw the case but failed.
Now, the two are married w/ kids, but the past always haunts the unfortunate man. his name will be 'publicly urinated' (as 1 VJ'ers here said), his kids will be subject to mockery for having a SO father, he's being turned down for a job for being labeled one, and more repercussion shadows him.
The question is, who is the real victim here???

Certainly, there are loopholes that needs to be fixed.
And sometimes you wouldn't understand until you deal with one.
Let's condemn and incarcerate the real offenders and liberate the innocent.

patience-virtue

Not Telling

Philippines

2010-02-12 19:15:00

In 68 responses to the OP's original thread, I believe one person expressed interest in the OP's recommendation of a class action against the USCIS. Regardless of the OP's intent, the USCIS did not enact this law - the US Congress did. The USCIS merely enforces the laws provided to them.

It's been an interesting debate on this thread.

Alan

As the agency responsible for enforcing the act of Congress, the USCIS, along with the U.S. AG's office would be involved in the suit, not Congress. It's over-simplified to say that "the USCIS merely enforces the laws provided to them." Government agencies often lobby Congress in various ways, whether making recommendations directly through Congress' various committees, proposing legislation through the agencies' unions, or through "grass roots" organizations sponsored by the agencies' unions.

Let's call it a joint project between FSK and the dude at the Anacreontic Society what wrote the tune.

truly appalling spelling, grammar, punctuation and general typographical hygiene, prime examples of which may be noted in this post

Fixed.

I haven't followed this from the beginning,

You haven't missed much.

but I will suit the person who suits the government over this issue! I want my family to be protected!!!!!

Who's with me???

Wow... the moral courage of the mob is indeed awe inspiring! I think your humorous impersonation of a hysterical idiot is on point, so I'll run with it. I'm at a loss as to how your family might be threatened by a sex offender sponsoring a his wife or fiancee for a K-1 visa? I wonder, are you so gung-ho about protecting your family against the prurient influences of the media, Hollywood and even the government? Because if you're like most people here in California when it comes to protecting their families from corruptive and perverse influences emanating from the power centers, you'll probably just whine a little and put your tail back between your legs. You'll turn a blind eye to the powerful entities that are actively corrupting your children, because you're scared and intimidated by them; but just to show that you've still got a pair, you'll take out your furor on the first weak looking target of opportunity that can be identified. You sir, are a pathetic coward and a hypocrite (but just for our make-believe scenario).

It is now a matter of law in California that elementary school children be indoctrinated into familiarity with the homosexual "lifestyle." Gender identity is to be abolished: a boy can be a girl and a girl can be a boy. Obviously, this is abhorrent to many parents' religious, moral, and natural sensibilities. For years, many parents have chosen to home school their children to protect them from the corruptive influences of the public school system. As of recently, however, that's largely been done away with: to home school their own children, a parent in California must now have teaching credentials. Never mind that as a group, home-schooled children are far better educated than public school children. Yet the State is so concerned with protecting their children from sex offenders? The situation is farcical. I'm sure it's not yet that bad in Georgia, but it's coming.

mahal kita

Not Telling

Philippines

2010-02-08 23:42:00

You still there, OP, or have you abandoned this thread to the spammers?

mahal kita

Not Telling

Philippines

2010-02-08 14:11:00

if you are a sex-offender and you are convicted and you apply for a K1 visa the USCIS will deny you! the Adam Walsh Act is clear that you are excluded unless you can prove that you are NOt a threat to your fiancee'! i hope that you can satisfy them if you apply...

any ideas?

is anyone interested in bringing a lawsuit against USCIS for this issue?

I would be interested in challenging the AWA if it comes to it. I think it is on shaky constitutional ground in more ways than one. Don't let people discourage you--many of them are just drinking the Kool-Aid. They don't know any better.

I'm new here, and have only posted one other time, but I'd like to thank those that contributed their sincere thoughts to this thread, even the "haters" (not that I speak for the OP). Most people really have no idea what is going on with this sex offender thing. Most of them won't know or care until it hits them very personally. Some of those who expressed their disgust and resentment of sex offenders may someday find that they or someone they love very much has been branded with this label. I know, because I was one who used to judge such people very harshly. While there are some real creeps out there, I had no idea of the media and political spin game that has been going on. I never imagined I would find myself in the circumstances I did, and even if I had, I would have believed that I would handle it better. Well, I believe God set me straight on that self-righteousness of mine. I'm glad I was humbled. I hold myself completely responsible, but I know the circumstances--I won't let other people judge me. Likewise I try not to judge others. Despite myself, I have been guilty of being self-righteous and judgmental, and of sexual sin and crime. If I have any more perspective or wisdom than anyone else, it is only because I have paid dearly for it; learned the hard way.

For those of you who naively buy into whatever they read or see on television, allow me to humbly suggest a little perspective. There are political and social agendas at foot, and in the end, they're really not about sex offenders, and definitely not about protecting children. Hitler's crusade against the Jews was really not about the Jews. While he did hate them, they were just his first target, because they were merely a conveniently vulnerable subclass he could exploit to get his terrible machinery in place. Christians, for instance, were equal on Hitler's hate list, but they were less vulnerable as an identifiable group--he couldn't make enemies with everyone at once. Because of Hitler and other ugly experiences, our society and laws make ethnic discrimination and genocide an unlikely vehicle for would-be tyrants and political opportunists. Enter the sex offender.

Anyway, here's a creedo for you true believers:
"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation."

--Adolf Hitler

mahal kita

Not Telling

Philippines

2010-02-08 00:27:00

Obtener recibo de pago para la visa

Hola a todos, aqui estoy de nuevo para solicitar urgente su ayuda. Mi cita es el 21 de Octubre y hasta el momento no he podido obtener mi recibo de pago para la visa, pues ahora con el cambio hecho recientemente en Septiembre lo debo obtener electronicamente para luego ir a pagar al banco,lo he intentado varias veces y no he logrado. Alguien me podria decir como hacerlo. Agradezco infinitamente su pronto respuesta, estoy desesperada de verdad.

Aida Nelly

Fifita

Not Telling

2011-10-13 14:40:00

The "discrimination" part I spoke of eariler, is because I was informed that some USCIS workers were posting on VJ, and if they are making biased or negative comments, while also in a job position that requires them to be "un biased" a lawsuit would cause VJ to hand over the information/ip addresses

meaning if you work for USCIS and you posted negative things here, its going to come back you .

Hi guys,

Does the USCIS sent you notice already about the denial or you just see it in their website? . Please share.. thank you and God bless!

blessings

Not Telling

Philippines

2010-02-04 19:30:00

Dan, the AWA threads belong in the IMBRA forum. The OP had it correct.

I apologize for the thread moves, Brucelene. Moving back.

Krikit

Not Telling

2011-02-21 13:21:00

Outrageous of USCIS to make you wait almost 4 years before telling you they wanted more evidence. What really needs to be done is a class action lawsuit, if 2 adults make a decision to marry they should have the right to be together.

If a sex offender marries someone in his /her own country, its not like it has to be pre-approved by any government organization or anyone for that matter.

Tell that to your senator, it was the US government that passed this law, it has good intentions to protect unsuspecting immigrants from US citizen sexual preditors. Do the crime then suffer the consequences. I have no sympathy for sexual predators

Example of what could happen before the law.

http://candleforlove...showtopic=18398 (Did the visa so that can continue their sex habit on the step child.)

YuAndDan

Male

China

2011-02-21 14:15:00

What is AWA? What did the first denial letter say?

What did the 2nd denial letter say?

Adam Walsh Act.

http://en.wikipedia...._and_Safety_Act

Has to do with protecting spouse or step child from potential abuse by US citizen petitioner if the US Citizen has a record of abuse, or sex offenses.

Edited by YuAndDan, 21 February 2011 - 01:01 PM.

YuAndDan

Male

China

2011-02-21 12:57:00

Moving to the I-601 AP forum... This is not a K-1 IMBRA topic...

YuAndDan

Male

China

2011-02-21 12:01:00

Do keep in mind not everyone on AWA is a sexual predator. I can understand if a Man or Women molested a child, and they try to petition a spouse that has a small child over , I could understand having to show extra proof etc.

But when 2 adults near the same age with no children get married and file , I don't see any reason to discriminate against them.

Really? You don't think that your sister, or neighbour has the right to have THEIR children protected from a sex offender?

In the usa , no laws or rules discriminate against any Sex Offender marrying a usa citizen, no checks , or anything.

You are correct but they already live in the US. They are already (likely) registered sex offenders in the US. You are asking for the special privilege of the immigration of a criminal... stop thinking about it as just "marriage". It's immigration. You want to marry them and move to their country, the US doesn't care. It isn't about the marriage, it's immigration.

So this rule only hurts the spouses and families of AWA filers.

Wrong. This rule HELPS many millions of people and protects them from the stupid narrow minded decisions of someone who thinks they know someone better than they do. The person might be changed, but if they're not, you are wanting to import a criminal and subject them to your family/friends and that person you walked past down the street.

I dont think many other countries of the world would treat its citizens this way

The US isn't stopping you from MARRYING this person, it's stopping you from immigrating them.. and yes, MANY other countries all over the world WOULD care and stop the immigration of a criminal.

The problem is you're only thinking about YOU and YOUR family. How about the kids in your neighbourhood? Or the girl down at the country store who closes late at night? Sure there are evil people in the US but you're asking for permission to allow said evil person immigrate to another country. Fresh new "victims" for them.

As someone else said it could be peeing outside (exposure) and so the waiver would be pretty easy, but I sure hope sex offenders are given a hard time and not allowed to immigrate and on the off-chance they ARE permitted to immigrate they should be registered in the US as well as sex offenders. It doesn't matter that the immigrant and their spouse don't have kids, other people in the US do, and you're asking for permission to expose THOSE families to a sex offender.

And just out of interest, there ARE rules about someone marrying a sex offender when they have children. Nothing stops them from marrying but the spouse can be sued/charged for endangerment of a child. There are also rules for the sex offenders to stay a certain distance from children and if they breach it they can go back to jail.

I understand how you feel upset at US immigration for not permitting your loved one to immigrate, but really, you should be angry at your loved one for breaking the law and stop blaming the US for protecting itself and its people. I'm not trying to be mean to you, but your post is very all about you and your needs. There are many posts where people thought they knew the person they were importing and it turns out they didn't. One hopes that it's not them and their relationship that will turn out the same but especially when a KNOWN criminal is trying to immigrate it only makes sense that the government requires more proof than just your word, and your love to let that happen.

VanessaTony

Female

Australia

2011-02-21 21:11:00

if you are a sex-offender and you are convicted and you apply for a K1 visa the USCIS will deny you! the Adam Walsh Act is clear that you are excluded unless you can prove that you are NOt a threat to your fiancee'! i hope that you can satisfy them if you apply...

any ideas?

is anyone interested in bringing a lawsuit against USCIS for this issue?

Does that apply to CR and IRs?
Sucks if it doesn't.

Dakine

Male

Philippines

2010-04-10 19:18:00

There have been people that have AWA issues that have been approved. So it isn't an automatic denial. As a woman that is a child molestation survivor I think that having to totally prove that you will no long harm anyone is a small thing to ask of the animals that fall under this act. I am sure any of the tree/dumpster peeing people could get the wavier ( if they are truly on the sex offender list and not some urban legend ) If having every person go through this would save one child from having the same happen to them then I think every person should have to go through the same process, however the US government has chosen to only apply this process to those with an abusive history.

NigeriaorBust

Not Telling

Nigeria

2011-02-21 20:27:00

QUOTE (Angie Y Shane @ Jul 29 2009, 02:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You always have a right to file with ACLU. ACLU did take a interest in my case and took my information. I even notified USCIS on this. My case was approved. You can always try. "Yes" immigration is a right also, not just a privledge. Do not let other's discourage you. APPEAL the case, keep fighting and it will go threw. I would Highly encourage "Humen rights commision envolvment" first before ACLU.

My thoughts are you need to see what they say in the denial first... Then base of what feedback you get.

Please point out in the US code of laws/constitution that make this a right, or is this just your opinion?

Bobby+Umit

Male

Turkey

2009-07-29 13:34:00

QUOTE (Angie Y Shane @ Jul 29 2009, 01:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You always have a right to file with ACLU. ACLU did take a interest in my case and took my information. I even notified USCIS on this. My case was approved. You can always try. "Yes" immigration is a right also, not just a privledge. Do not let other's discourage you. APPEAL the case, keep fighting and it will go threw. I would Highly encourage "Humen rights commision envolvment" first before ACLU.

My thoughts are you need to see what they say in the denial first... Then base of what feedback you get.

I note your petition was approved via your timeline. You have not had your interview yet, so your visa may not be granted...you don't know. Regardless, I would suspect that each case would be looked at individually. Since you obviously did some work on your case, and had the assistance of ACLU, are you aware of anyone who's fiance has been granted a visa? I'm assuming there are WAY more people going through this than are here on VJ.

Any answers you can provide can only help those that have these same questions. Thanks.

Carlawarla

Female

Canada

2009-07-30 08:09:00

QUOTE (beautilfullady @ Jul 28 2009, 10:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Does anyone have a Adam Walsh Act denial based on their constitutional rights having been violated?
Our attorney is attempting to take this to the ACLU. The more cases that involve civil rights issues the more likely that the ACLU will become involved.

There is nothing in the Bill of Rights concerning immigration. Immigration is a priviledge, not a right. Big difference.

Good luck though.

baron555

Male

Russia

2009-07-29 08:26:00

Eagerly you are psoting all over the place hun, take a moment. Which type of Visa are you applying for? Answer to us here what was the offense as there are many different ways to go depending on the charges.

Yes a convicted felony has rights and can have those rights restored , however paperwork needs to be filled out and sent to the appropiate authorities.

NArocks

Female

Colombia

2009-09-25 16:48:00

My question is the same what and who's civil rights?

NArocks

Female

Colombia

2009-07-29 08:25:00

Tell that to your senator, it was the US government that passed this law, it has good intentions to protect unsuspecting immigrants from US citizen sexual preditors. Do the crime then suffer the consequences. I have no sympathy for sexual predators

And you think that AWA and the Registries only affect Sexual Predators?

If only it were that simple.

Did you realize that the following have got people on the Registry:

Peeing in your own backyard at 1 in the morning
Mooning another adult
Grabbing the arm of a kid who ran in front of your car (as you were moving in traffic).
Skinny Dipping
Walking from your bathroom to your bedroom naked after a shower (neighbor kid looking in your window)
18 year old boy having sex with 16 or 17 year old girlfriend
Drunk, peeing behind a dumpster in an alley

Further, some states are putting kids as young as 10 on the list!

Don't equate AWA with punishing Sexual Predators because it casts a wide net that ensnares more who shouldn't be that who should. Why aren't sex crime rates dropping if the List and other such bogus laws are working?

The one part they got right was the Disclosure of petitioner's past criminal record and that's not even part of AWA, it's part of IMBRA! If you want to get around that just marry her and IMBRA doesn't apply!

Bob 4 Anna

Male

Philippines

2011-02-21 15:03:00

I am specificially talking about those that have sexual contact with others against their will. Good luck finding one that does not eventually fall back into their old ways. Once blood's been tasted.... Did their time? As in what jail? What about the victim, most will be able to live with it eventually. but theyre signed for life, so should the felon.
I speak from experiences....
You can have your opinions, sure I will never try to change your mind, but I will never give a rapist a second chance for that is like giving my exbf a second chance, and I rather die than to forgive him.

Anyway, that is how I feel and think and will not reply anymore.

Wow, hold on to that hate because it's so healthy for you.

As a victim of any abuse or crime you have the choice as to when you stop being a victim. I was a victim for many years and in my victim mentality I wasn't a very nice person. I didn't care if my actions hurt others because there was always justification for it.

When I finally found it within my self to forgive my abuser (though I will never forget it) I found that a change occurred within myself.

I've seen the issues of Sex Abuse from all sides within my own family and I can tell you from years and years of personal experience working with both victims & offenders that the common stereotypes are wrong.

There will always be those offenders who are beyond redemption but they are in the minority. If the stereotypes were correct then the SOR should have curtailed sex crimes (especially against children) but instead the list just grows and grows. Do you know why? Because about 90% of Sex Crime arrests are previously unknown offenders.

In my life I have:

Known men who have gone over 20 years offense free and are still counting.

I have seen victims forgive their offender and find happiness after recovery.

Been involved in conversations with offenders who simply don't understand how they got to the point where they would do such things.

Seen recovery groups where members have called-out other members in denial of negative patterns and helped support each others' recovery.

I even know a man who after being convicted of molesting his female cousin who was 8 (he was 16 at the time) went on to raise two happy daughters as a single father. They were never abused for the record.

People can heal, victims & offenders, if they want to and most offenders want to heal if given the chance. Part of the problem is that if someone admits to having "offender thoughts" even if they've never offended then Law Enforcement is called in and they are subjugated to interrogation and not left alone until they admit to committing a crime (even if they never did). You tell me where is the support for prevention?

Bob 4 Anna

Male

Philippines

2011-10-13 13:04:00

And you think that AWA and the Registries only affect Sexual Predators?

If only it were that simple.

Did you realize that the following have got people on the Registry:
Peeing in your own backyard at 1 in the morning
Mooning another adult
Grabbing the arm of a kid who ran in front of your car (as you were moving in traffic).
Skinny Dipping
Walking from your bathroom to your bedroom naked after a shower (neighbor kid looking in your window)
18 year old boy having sex with 16 or 17 year old girlfriend
Drunk, peeing behind a dumpster in an alley

Further, some states are putting kids as young as 10 on the list!

Don't equate AWA with punishing Sexual Predators because it casts a wide net that ensnares more who shouldn't be that who should. Why aren't sex crime rates dropping if the List and other such bogus laws are working?

The one part they got right was the Disclosure of petitioner's past criminal record and that's not even part of AWA, it's part of IMBRA! If you want to get around that just marry her and IMBRA doesn't apply!

The intent of the law is good but it obviously needs to be refined! I am glad our government seeks to avoid subjecting anyone to the brutalities potentially inflicted by sexual predators!

james&olya

Male

Russia

2011-02-21 19:53:00

v333k

Male

2010-04-10 17:30:00

Each state or locality will have a different way of responding to a request for some certification that a person is no further threat to society. So two of those questions need to be answered locally. I assume the various Sex Offenders laws encourage everyone who was ever convicted to do what is necessary to register, voluntarily, and just be done with it. Convicted offenders like that wing-nut who kidnapped an 11-year-old girl 18 years ago, and forced her to have his children, need to be tracked.

As yet, USCIS has not developed any clear guidance on how it decides if a person is a continuing risk to society. I suppose it depends to an extent on the nature of the crime, how long ago it was, etc. A predatory crime won't be forgiven. As a matter of public policy, I am sure that USCIS would rather make a mistake out of caution, and turn everyone down who applies--with occasional exceptions.

Edited by Old Dominion, 23 September 2009 - 04:22 PM.

Old Dominion

Male

Zambia

2009-09-23 16:21:00

Because you refer to dept of correction, I assume you served a jail sentence and thus were guilty of some sex crime. After you served your time, did you need to report to a parole officer? Or any other court appointed authority? This would be a source of some useful evidence. If you are a convicted felon, then you lost many of your constitutional rights maybe forever.

Yet you are indeed free to marry anyone who is legally in the U.S. No American is free to bring a foreign national into the country without following the process. It is the process that has tripped you up. RSO's who were involved with minors are at the bottom of anyone's list with regard to forgiveness and the latest news of the young lady who was kidnapped at age 11, forced to have children at age 14, is evidence of this fact.

Old Dominion

Male

Zambia

2009-08-29 13:58:00

If a formal written appeal has been filed with USCIS, and you have a letter of receipt for that, then your work permit is OK until they decide. It's not clear why USCIS denied your case.

Old Dominion

Male

Zambia

2009-07-31 09:00:00

Anyone who believes they have been mistreated by the government or any publicly regulated organization -- discriminated against -- has a right to contact the ACLU.

The U. S. provides no right, however, for a citizen to bring someone from overseas into the country, except by following the procedures and the rules...and meeting the requirements for admission into the country. If the U.S. determines that the requirements are not met, it has the responsibility under law to deny admission (or a petition requesting the admission of someone).

Any citizen is free to marry so long as the individuals are single and eligible according to the different state laws. The U.S. does not have laws pertaining to marriage--only the 50 states.

Again, what civil rights are at issue here?

Old Dominion

Male

Zambia

2009-07-29 18:58:00

Which civil rights???

Old Dominion

Male

Zambia

2009-07-29 08:19:00

Tell that to your senator, it was the US government that passed this law, it has good intentions to protect unsuspecting immigrants from US citizen sexual preditors. Do the crime then suffer the consequences. I have no sympathy for sexual predators

Example of what could happen before the law.

http://candleforlove...showtopic=18398 (Did the visa so that can continue their sex habit on the step child.)

That is some story!

Messybrownhair

Female

Philippines

2011-02-21 17:24:00

Tell that to your senator, it was the US government that passed this law, it has good intentions to protect unsuspecting immigrants from US citizen sexual preditors. Do the crime then suffer the consequences. I have no sympathy for sexual predators

Example of what could happen before the law.

http://candleforlove...showtopic=18398 (Did the visa so that can continue their sex habit on the step child.)

A horrible situation and story, but a very brave woman who escaped the situation! I have to say that I have NO sympathy for petitioners with a criminal past, particularly those classified as sex offenders. I am glad the AWA was passed and I know that it has protected many potential victims and will continue to protect them in the future.

Aztec&Taino

Female

Dominican Republic

2011-02-21 22:02:00

Good day guys. We are under AWA. and after 3 yrs and 8 months of waiting, both i129f and i130 denied.
Guys, they send as denial letter and we have till March 10 to appeal. Hubby will going to take the polygraph test and will gather the paperwork. Guys, please we need your opinions and advise.
The main question we would like to ask is ,
Do we need to appeal both i130 and i129f or just one petition? Please guys need your help badly.

Brucelene

So sorry to hear that. I am assuming you went for the K-3 visa. What was the reason you were denied? You should get your congresspersons involved right away.

Tero

Male

Nigeria

2011-02-21 11:35:00

Wow, hold on to that hate because it's so healthy for you.

As a victim of any abuse or crime you have the choice as to when you stop being a victim. I was a victim for many years and in my victim mentality I wasn't a very nice person. I didn't care if my actions hurt others because there was always justification for it.

When I finally found it within my self to forgive my abuser (though I will never forget it) I found that a change occurred within myself.

I've seen the issues of Sex Abuse from all sides within my own family and I can tell you from years and years of personal experience working with both victims & offenders that the common stereotypes are wrong.

There will always be those offenders who are beyond redemption but they are in the minority. If the stereotypes were correct then the SOR should have curtailed sex crimes (especially against children) but instead the list just grows and grows. Do you know why? Because about 90% of Sex Crime arrests are previously unknown offenders.

In my life I have:

Known men who have gone over 20 years offense free and are still counting.

I have seen victims forgive their offender and find happiness after recovery.

Been involved in conversations with offenders who simply don't understand how they got to the point where they would do such things.

Seen recovery groups where members have called-out other members in denial of negative patterns and helped support each others' recovery.

I even know a man who after being convicted of molesting his female cousin who was 8 (he was 16 at the time) went on to raise two happy daughters as a single father. They were never abused for the record.

People can heal, victims & offenders, if they want to and most offenders want to heal if given the chance. Part of the problem is that if someone admits to having "offender thoughts" even if they've never offended then Law Enforcement is called in and they are subjugated to interrogation and not left alone until they admit to committing a crime (even if they never did). You tell me where is the support for prevention?

HOLY

Double AMEN!

evli1966

Male

Philippines

2011-10-13 20:41:00

QUOTE (miricco @ Aug 30 2009, 05:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Is the Adam Walsh Act about sex-offender notification unconstitutional?
I have read this law over and over and it is Sad that part's of it made it into law along with SORNA. Most people are not educated on this topic or even how the events of this law being signed into effect tailed in under a different law's

The bill was sponsored by Congressman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) in the US House of Representatives and moved to final passage over a two-year period. It had been sent to the Senate in 2005 as H.R. 3132 and had 88 co-sponsors, including Mark Foley (R-FL), who had originally introduced the House bill (and later resigned over a sex scandal involving teenagers), and co-sponsor Rep. Bud Cramer (D-AL). The Senate bill passed on July 20, 2006 with an amendment and amendment to the title. Senate co-sponsors John Kerry (D-MA)

I find it so sad that one who originally introduced the House bill resigned over a sex scandel with teens... Hmmm wonder if he is on the State of Fla sex offender register ........ Bet NOT

http://www.helium.co...tification-unco

Part of SORNA was declared unconstitutional this week:
http://www.ca9.uscou...10/07-30290.pdf

toma1

Male

Thailand

2009-09-17 19:44:00

Really? You don't think that your sister, or neighbour has the right to have THEIR children protected from a sex offender?

You are correct but they already live in the US. They are already (likely) registered sex offenders in the US. You are asking for the special privilege of the immigration of a criminal... stop thinking about it as just "marriage". It's immigration. You want to marry them and move to their country, the US doesn't care. It isn't about the marriage, it's immigration.

Wrong. This rule HELPS many millions of people and protects them from the stupid narrow minded decisions of someone who thinks they know someone better than they do. The person might be changed, but if they're not, you are wanting to import a criminal and subject them to your family/friends and that person you walked past down the street.

The US isn't stopping you from MARRYING this person, it's stopping you from immigrating them.. and yes, MANY other countries all over the world WOULD care and stop the immigration of a criminal.

The problem is you're only thinking about YOU and YOUR family. How about the kids in your neighbourhood? Or the girl down at the country store who closes late at night? Sure there are evil people in the US but you're asking for permission to allow said evil person immigrate to another country. Fresh new "victims" for them.

As someone else said it could be peeing outside (exposure) and so the waiver would be pretty easy, but I sure hope sex offenders are given a hard time and not allowed to immigrate and on the off-chance they ARE permitted to immigrate they should be registered in the US as well as sex offenders. It doesn't matter that the immigrant and their spouse don't have kids, other people in the US do, and you're asking for permission to expose THOSE families to a sex offender.

And just out of interest, there ARE rules about someone marrying a sex offender when they have children. Nothing stops them from marrying but the spouse can be sued/charged for endangerment of a child. There are also rules for the sex offenders to stay a certain distance from children and if they breach it they can go back to jail.

I understand how you feel upset at US immigration for not permitting your loved one to immigrate, but really, you should be angry at your loved one for breaking the law and stop blaming the US for protecting itself and its people. I'm not trying to be mean to you, but your post is very all about you and your needs. There are many posts where people thought they knew the person they were importing and it turns out they didn't. One hopes that it's not them and their relationship that will turn out the same but especially when a KNOWN criminal is trying to immigrate it only makes sense that the government requires more proof than just your word, and your love to let that happen.

I think you are confused, we are not talking about bringing a sex offender into the usa, we are talking about the wives and families of sex offenders. You do realize that lots of people are labeled as sex offenders that are not pedophiles, right? These people are not out at night looking for children and stalking your kids, thats fear mongering on your part.

No spouse would be charged with endangering a child by marrying someone that was a sex offender, did you pull that out of a hat as well?

If a sex offender lives in the usa, and gets married and petitions his wife to live in the usa with him, than how is the usa " protecting its people" ? protecting them from who? From their own husbands and families?

I think you fail to realize the scope of people that are labeled sex offenders in the united states. There is no difference in a sex offender in the usa marrying another us citizen vs an immigrant, its just discrimination against immigrants

A and T

Male

Philippines

2011-02-21 22:31:00

Tell that to your senator, it was the US government that passed this law, it has good intentions to protect unsuspecting immigrants from US citizen sexual preditors. Do the crime then suffer the consequences. I have no sympathy for sexual predators

Example of what could happen before the law.

http://candleforlove...showtopic=18398 (Did the visa so that can continue their sex habit on the step child.)

Do keep in mind not everyone on AWA is a sexual predator. I can understand if a Man or Women molested a child, and they try to petition a spouse that has a small child over , I could understand having to show extra proof etc.

But when 2 adults near the same age with no children get married and file , I don't see any reason to discriminate against them.

In the usa , no laws or rules discriminate against any Sex Offender marrying a usa citizen, no checks , or anything.

So this rule only hurts the spouses and families of AWA filers.

I dont think many other countries of the world would treat its citizens this way

A and T

Male

Philippines

2011-02-21 16:52:00