Thinking themselves wise they reject Gods Laws and call it freedom, then replace those laws without millions of mans laws and end up as perverted slaves to foolshness.
Posted on 03/07/2020 6:34:08 AM PST by USA Conservative
Equal justice under the law is apparently out the window too.
Thanks grey_whiskers.
Thanks grey_whiskers, again, and *whoops*.
Remember these old songs? Should be the California state song.
https://genius.com/Peter-paul-and-mary-talkin-candy-bar-blues-lyrics
https://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/d/dr_demento/kinko_the_clown.html
No doubt we will see a migration to California of these types.
John Wayne Gacy
https://allthatsinteresting.com/john-wayne-gacy
The Candy Man Killer.
https://didyouknowfacts.com/candy-man-dean-corll-houston-murders/
Thinking themselves wise they reject Gods Laws and call it freedom, then replace those laws without millions of mans laws and end up as perverted slaves to foolshness.
Every day or even twice, the CA government does something even more evil, disgusting and treasonous. This isn’t treason but it is descriminalizing crime and pushing perversion on children. This is so insane.
While I do not trust Snopes to be unbiased, they list several things about the proposed law which the article mischaracterizes.
Moreover, it is not the case that the new law would, per the article’s claim, “allow a sex offender who lures a minor with the intent to commit a felony (i.e., a sex act) the ability to escape registering as a sex offender as long as the offender is within 10 years of age of the minor.” The proposed law doesn’t allow anyone to “escape” registering. Rather, it allows people found guilty of unforced oral or anal intercourse with a minor 14 or older, if there is no more than 10 years’ age difference between them, to apply to the court for the same discretionary relief from mandated sex-offender registration that is already afforded to those found guilty of vaginal intercourse with a minor. That is to say, a court would decide whether the offender must register, based on the facts of the case. Also, according to Ruiz-Cornejo, “luring a minor” for purposes of sex is not one of the crimes covered in the bill. “Senate Bill 145 does not protect anyone from luring children (under 14 years old) or teenagers (above 15 years old) with the intent to commit sexual assault,” he told us. “Luring a minor is treated differently and does not fall under the consensual relationships this bill is addressing.” We asked Ruiz-Cornejo for further clarification on this, given that the text of the bill does state that it applies to Section 288.3 of the Penal Code, which addresses contacting a minor with intent to commit a felony (including certain sex offenses), but he didn’r elaborate.
How much Snopes is mischaracterizing things is unclear.
It seems clear the bill does not apply to any children under the age of 14.
It seems clear a judge has to deal with applications to be removed from the sexual predator list.
This is far from automatic.
Senate Bill No. 145 (see bill text at https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB145 ) was introduced by Senator Wiener. You can’t make this “redacted expletive” up.
The ten year window strikes me as excessive, but we should note that many states have accommodations for smaller age differentials. This arises, for example, in statutory rape cases involving, say, a 17 year old and a 15 year old. The high school senior should not be sleeping with the high school sophomore, but it's not the same thing as a 25 year old and a 15 year old. That's the distinction this bill's sponsors seek to erase.
The Judge must be a member of NAMBLA.
“Why would bankrupt California spend time and resources doing this?”
So they can create a tax to pay for the enforcement of it. This is how they generate workable income. They then raise the taxes saying cost overrides and then add inflation and you have a multi-program earner. This is how liberals grow government.
rwood
“”Also, according to this bill, the last word is left to the judge, who will decide whether to remain a homosexual child molester””
I hope the minute that article was published the writer lost his job and was shown the door!!! OR perhaps we need/want child molesters on the bench!
“”Although the bill has not yet been passed,””
It’s a BILL - a judge had nothing to do with it....
You’re correct,Thanks, however a Judge would still be the tipping weight that would knock the scales of justice off kilter permanently in this state, already full of judicial activists in black robes... give it time.
Is it legal for those not more than 10 years his senior to tar and feather Senator Wiener? The perpetrators could claim that’s what gives them a thrill so it’s protected conduct.
this is beyond EVIL AND PERVERTED
San Franciso has been trying for decades to justify their love for the paedophile Harvey Milk. Wonder how gov Gruesome Newsome will feel when one of these freaks rapes one of his young children.
Wait. If a 23 year old man molests a 14 year old girl, it’s wrong. But if he instead molests a boy, it’s ok? Also, if the adult is transgender or simply choosing to identify as a man, can they still molest their boy?
I just can’t with this political correctness. Child molestation and teen molestation is wrong. Period. It doesn’t matter the genitals of the victim or abuser.
There are some real gray areas. A nineteen year old with a seventeen year old, both in love with each other, is always the type of case no one really wants to throw the book at. I’m ok with judges making some determination when the age difference is 2 years or less.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.