Knowingly exposing others to HIV will no longer be a felony in California

@don grahamleone rejoices

 

There's no reason for that.

 

This is terrible. Hiv Doesnt just attack the immune system but nearly every system. They are only leaning that it infects a wide variety of tissues because people are living longer. But even if infected and not developing aids they are still developing other illnesses as the virus invades other tissue all over the body. Liver brain heart. The fact that it infects so many cells is why it is incurable.

This is a mistake.

 

This should be a felony. No question about it.

Like companies and businesses knowingly contaminating the public's drinking water, the repeal of the Clean Water Act by Trump and Republicans. Both sound like irresponsible things to do.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...eek-to-rescind-clean-water-rule-idUSKBN19I2L0

Some laws are there to protect the public. Too much discretion on people and businesses to act on "good faith". People and businesses act on self interest. In this case, having sex or making a profit.

 

Of course it should be a felony.
Should this man be allowed to walk free with a fine and a slap on the wrist?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...o-infect-partners-he-met-on-grindr-court-told

 

Meh, sounds like something California would do, of course it's stupid.

Reading stories about the government of California is similar to reading stories about "Florida man", you don't know what happened, but you know it's going to be embarrassing.

 

So, knowingly harming other people is not a felony? Gotcha.

 

Stupid decision by California.

 

Seems like a good way to get a good HIV epidemic going again.

 

Charlie Sheen law?

 

so ****ing stupid

 

i think the key point is : this will save taxpayers tons of money of court's/legal fees but as always , cost will comes from other area , the health policy in place is not much worse than that .Globally , If someone tested positive for HIV/HBV-HCV,-HPV the hospital/clinic advise that person to disclose his/her condition to partner(s) while protecting the patient privacy , but there's no other alternative effective policy in protecting others . It is similar to how flu spreads from a person to many others without penalty for not taking precautionary measures

 

Clear example of Hollywood morals and hypocrisy. Also the Weinstein silence. Bunch of fake ass punk ass hypocrit losers.

 

LOL! Something done on the state level is because of Hollywood? Ha! Stop trying to label something you are bitter about because of two things that kind of happened in the same state. Neither of those is representative of Hollywood in the slightest.

I don't agree with the ruling, but I don't think there is a large number of people were disclosing they were HIV positive only because the fear of criminal charges waiting to go out and be as promiscuous as possible without telling others.

I don't like the law but I don't think it will be a huge issue for most people.

 

clear eg of ur ignorance !

the most anti-Hollywood crowd, not from outside Calif, hails from SF/No Calif

think of the rivalry/competition/acrimony between Houston and Dallas, multiply that by 1,000

Gov Moon Child, Jerry Brown, is from No Calif, the arch rival of Hollywood values​

 

"LOL wot?"

Me killing people shouldn't be a felony because I dont think it will be a huge issue for most people. I could use this logic with nearly every argument out there.

How can pirating movies be more of a severe crime than intentionally infecting someone with a lifetime curse.

Its California so I am not surprise.

 

Liberal logic.

 

This **** is attempted murder in my book
wtf????

Rocket River

 

Like I said I'm opposed to changing the law. Intentionally infecting someone should be a felony, that's what I've said. It sounds like we agree on that. However, the number of people that have been wanting to use their HIV as a weapon against others but were held back because it was a felony is an incredibly small amount.