I’m not sure how this is defensible. The Hollywood pedo lobby must be strong or I’m just old fashioned.
Not surprisingly, you don't actually know what the bill does. This is the problem with getting your news from dumb twitter sources - you get to be as ignorant as the people you follow. SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Today, Senator Scott Wiener’s (D-San Francisco) Senate Bill 145, which ends blatant discrimination against LGBTQ youth regarding California’s sex offender registry, passed the Senate on a 24-2 vote. It now heads to the Assembly for committee hearings in the coming weeks. SB 145 is co-sponsored by the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office and Equality California, and is supported by both law enforcement and civil rights advocates including the California Public Defenders Association, the California Police Chiefs Association, the California Coalition Against Sexual Assault and Lambda Legal. Currently, for consensual yet illegal sexual relations between a teenager age 14 to 17 and a partner within 10 years of age, “sexual intercourse” (i.e., vaginal intercourse) does not mandate that the offender to go onto the sex offender registry; rather, the judge has discretion to decide, based on the facts of the case, whether sex offender registration is warranted or unwarranted. By contrast, for all other forms of intercourse — specifically, oral and anal intercourse — sex offender registration is mandated under all situations, with no judicial discretion. This distinction in the law — which is irrational, at best, as it treats oral and anal sex as somehow worse than penile-vaginal sex — disproportionately targets LGBTQ young people by mandating sex offender registration for forms of intercourse in which they engage. For example, if an 18-year-old straight man has penile-vaginal intercourse with his 17-year-old girlfriend, he is guilty of a crime, but he is not automatically required to register as a sex offender; instead, the judge will decide based on the facts of the case whether registration is warranted. By contrast, if an 18 year old gay man has sex with his 17 year old boyfriend, then the judge *must* place him on the sex offender registry, no matter what the circumstances. ... SB 145 does not legalize any kind of sex with a minor and does not change the potential sentence for having sex with an underage person. Rather, the bill simply gives judges the ability to evaluate whether or not to require registration as a sex offender. To be clear, this judicial discretion for sex offender registration is *already* the law for penile-vaginal intercourse when the minor is aged between 14 to 17 years old and the offender is within 10 years of age of the minor. SB 145 simply extends that same discretion to other forms of intercourse.
That's not at all what SB 145 does. Existing law allows two minors or a minor and someone less than 10 year older that commits consensual vaginal intercourse to be not required to register as a sex offender. The judge decides on whether the individual should be registered as a sex offender based on the facts of the case. However, if there is consensual anal or oral sex. The law requires that the individual to be registered to be a sex offender. SB145 amends the law to remove the distinction between anal, oral, and vaginal sex in punishment. I can see how some may disagree that a judge would have the power to decide and that everyone should be registered as a sex offender. However, I don't see how anyone would disagree to treat anal, oral, and vaginal intercourse the same under the law unless one thinks that anal and oral is 'more sinful' than vaginal? https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ca-democrats-lgbtq-bill-pedophiles/
We have so many laws that one day we will require a robot companion to tell us when you are about to commit a crime. Then you will realize "Screw it" stay home, only to realize you have laws from your husband/wife too..
Starting it at 14 clears up a lot of the issues that came to mind when I first read the title. Just off the top of my head, If I were magically making laws here, there is a conservative, and then a liberal way I would personally prefer the law to set as. 13-19 are the ages of nearly all high school students, encompassing kids who start early/late, or get held back / skip one grade. I don't think automatically classifying a kid who could be having consensual sex while going to high school with the partner as a sex offender would be ideal. If I was being conservative on the issue, I'd prefer a flat 6-year leniency for 13+ If I were being liberal, I would prefer a progressive increase, starting at 13 with a 6-year leniency, and then progressively adding an additional leniency year for every year up to 17. Either way, not a big fan of a 14-24 bracket, but its close enough, and it's just the ability for a judge to make a decision, not an automatic legality.
Why do people share things without researching them? pro tip: if a headline about a new law from a sketchy source shocks the conscience, it’s probably not true. Ironically, conservatives seem to have a harder time discerning fake news from actual news
Patiently waiting for the OP to post to tell me how you people are all dumb dumbs and are going to hell. Progressive policies bringing that hell fire.
This is the problem when you use twitter as your source. Try using the actual law and not some right-wing homophobic twitter feed
Thanks @Major So if I’m understanding things correctly, the existing law does not mandate a sex registry when there is an age difference less than 10yrs if it’s vaginal intercourse. The new law expands that to include oral and anal. This is left up to a judges discretion. Do I at least have that part correct? If that is correct then the problem I would have with the old or new law is that it’s left up to a judge to force some one to register in a case, for example, where you have a 10 & 20 yr old even if consenting. Ideally the judge does the right thing with the 20 yr old. But it’s open for abuse, IMO. I feel like I have to be missing a KEY point. I’ll re-read the explanation again (I’m on my phone, riding shotgun). If I’m missing it, don’t be shy...let me have it. @peleincubus you’re all going to hell. The wait is over.
actually, ur uninformed do u even know who Aubrey Huff is? Huff was a member of the 2012 SF Giants baseball team who won the World Series. ~ 5 days ago, Huff had tweeted his praise for the 17-yr Wisconcin shooter, calling him a "national treasure" https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/08/27/aubrey-huff-calls-kenosha-shooter-a-national-treasure/
He was even uninvited from their 10 year reunion for their 2010 WS win. https://slate.com/culture/2020/02/a...010-world-series-reunion-invitation-jerk.html
FWIW I don’t follow him. It was a retweet . So, I’ve posted a question about a judge having discretion to order someone to register as sex offender and gave an example. I’m looking for clarification or confirmation for the example given. I could give two poops about Huff.
Funny that 4 of the biggest, possibly the 4 biggest, jackasses in my lifetime of watching baseball - Huff, Schilling, Nevin, Meluskey - were all Astros.
