In May Californa Passed SB145

[TRUEST]

How’s not the time to be messing around proposing bills like this. Fucck around and make California competitive in November.

 

[paperbag]

did you read the article posted in the OP?

"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."

Yes I read the article, you implied that the law only apllied to teenagers fukking other teens, it does not

 

[Pure Water]

I guess I’ll play devils advocate. I think this law is for people who are 26 and have sex with 16 year olds. Very much wrong, but not a pedophile.

I would imagine a person who has sex with a 10 year old would still be found guilty and registered as a pedophile.

Can anyone chime in on this?

 

[satam55]

I can't make sense of this and I think a lot of folks are over reacting. No way they'll let a 24 mess with a 14 year old and not have him register.

According to this bill, yes they will. Only if the minor is under 11, will a judge make a decision on it. So as long the age difference is no more than 10 years & the minor is at least 11 years old, the Pedo doesn't have to register as a sex offender.

 

[Gold]

According to this bill, yes they will. Only if the minor is under 11, will a judge make a decision on it. So as long the age difference is no more than 10 years & the minor is at least 11 years old, the Pedo doesn't have to register as a sex offender.

Unless it was anal or oral

 

[dj-method-x]

According to this bill, yes they will. Only if the minor is under 11, will a judge make a decision on it. So as long the age difference is no more than 10 years & the minor is at least 11 years old, the Pedo doesn't have to register as a sex offender.

This bill actually doesn't change that at all. Y'all making this about pedos when this bill isn't really changing anything for pedos. It's just applying the current law equally amongst vaginal sex and oral/anal sex. That's the only difference. Ngs don't even read the articles they post.

 

[Savvir]

This bill actually doesn't change that at all. Y'all making this about pedos when this bill isn't really changing anything for pedos. It's just applying the current law equally amongst vaginal sex and oral/anal sex. That's the only difference. Ngs don't even read the articles they post.

nobody really reads the articles...
it's just fake internet outrage with no real due diligence behind it....
this is why misinformation is so easy to spread

 

[Deflatedhoopdreams]

I mean in some case them sex offenders laws crazy

like peeing outside in public can make you a sex offender

What does that have to do with this??

I swear some of y’all are retards

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

So they block the police brutality bill but pass this

This a blatant lie. I bumped the thread during the last California assembly session when the votes were taking place, and they passed 5 police reform bills. You're a slimy lying piece of shyt.

Wrt this bill, this is a blatant fukking lie spread by dumb conservatives and believed by even stupider people.



No, California Democrats Did Not Introduce an “LGBTQ Bill” That Would “Protect Pedophiles who Rape Children”


Did California Democrats Introduce an LGBTQ Bill to 'Protect Pedophiles Who Rape Children'?

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

According to this bill, yes they will. Only if the minor is under 11, will a judge make a decision on it. So as long the age difference is no more than 10 years & the minor is at least 11 years old, the Pedo doesn't have to register as a sex offender.

You lying piece of shyt. It specifically says "within certain age parameters." 24 and 14 would be defined as inequitable and would not be covered by the law. Shove that alarmist bullshyt up your ass.

 

[Stone Cold]

This a blatant lie. I bumped the thread during the last California assembly session when the votes were taking place, and they passed 5 police reform bills. You're a slimy lying piece of shyt.

Wrt this bill, this is a blatant fukking lie spread by dumb conservatives and believed by even stupider people.



No, California Democrats Did Not Introduce an “LGBTQ Bill” That Would “Protect Pedophiles who Rape Children”


Did California Democrats Introduce an LGBTQ Bill to 'Protect Pedophiles Who Rape Children'?

https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/editorials/article245286690.html

Shut your bytch ass up

you stay with a goofy ass snopes “fact check” on deck

you always caping for weirdos then quick to point the finger when it’s convenient

 

[YouMadd?]

Did anybody actually read the article?

21 year old fukks an 11 year old..... Thats not okay..... That 21 year old would be protected...

This bill aligning with Cali releases TONS of violent sex offenders this year is literally a retarded mix

Early Prison Releases

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/editorials/article245286690.html

Shut your bytch ass up

you stay with a goofy ass snopes “fact check” on deck

you always caping for weirdos then quick to point the finger when it’s convenient

You stupid fukking idiot. The vote hadn't even happened when that dumbass article went up (27th). The votes took place on the last day of the California assembly session which was the 31st. You stupid, disingenuous motherfukker. Stick to for Jeff Sessions. Like, I don't get you people. You should be relieved that this isn't true. Instead, you're mad because it kills your dumb "pedophiles are being normalized" narrative. What the hell is wrong with some of you?

Spoiler

 

[Elim Garak]

This is insane you can't leave this up to a judge every young white person and rich one would never have to register.

 

[5thbornpowerseed]

https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/editorials/article245286690.html

Shut your bytch ass up

you stay with a goofy ass snopes “fact check” on deck

you always caping for weirdos then quick to point the finger when it’s convenient

SB 145, as amended, Wiener. Sex offenders: registration.
Existing law, the Sex Offender Registration Act, requires a person convicted of one of certain crimes, as specified, to register with law enforcement as a sex offender while residing in California or while attending school or working in California, as specified. A willful failure to register, as required by the act, is a misdemeanor or felony, depending on the underlying offense.
This bill would exempt from mandatory registration under the act a person convicted of certain offenses involving minors if the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor and if that offense is the only one requiring the person to register.