I guess this is one way to interpret it. In reality, the bill removes a discriminatory factor against LGBT.
The current law, says that if the age difference is WITHIN 10 years, and IF the person is 14-17 years of age, AND if it's VAGINAL intercourse, AND if it's consensual, then the offender is not required to register as as sex offender. If it's anything other than vaginal intercourse, then the offender would have to register as a sex offender.
This bill would make it apply to people who do not have vaginas.
Ok.. so now you have the thin edge of the wedge.. you think that’s it.. they won’t keep pushing for further laws of lower ages and lesser punishments.. ?
Justifying this saying it’s all about 17 years olds is pathetic.. you just enabled a 19 year old to rape a 9 year old and get off as long as he’s got a. California leftist judge..
PLEASE DO NOT ENGAGE IN CONVERSATION WITH THE RUSSIAN BOT. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING FOR TO USE FAKE INFORMATION TO CREATE A PLATFORM TO SPREAD DISINFORMATION TO HELP ELECT TRUMP.
@QuixoticSoul If so, then there has been an explosion in new American trolls overtaking SW. I doubt it very much. The number of bot posts over the past week has increased significantly.
And this is why the libs are so bent on getting rid of Trump. While they are trying to make pedo's legal Trump is rescuing children. The ones in Georgia are just the beginning. Many more are being saved.
@curiosi I just saw them frothing at the mouth about this ridiculous accusation of Trump calling WW2 veterans "suckers"/ They are literally frothing at the mouth over a ridiculous lie.
State Sen. Scott Wiener [Not Kidding], D-San Francisco, [No relation to Anthony David Weiner is an American former politician and convicted sex offender.] who authored SB 145, says current law discriminates against the LGBTQ community.
“Senate Bill 145 is an anti-discrimination law," Wiener said. "It ends discrimination against LGBTQ people on the sex offender registry,”
Wiener says the bill has been the "subject of a massive misinformation campaign," and social media posts that claim it legalizes pedophillia are not true.
“A 19-year-old has a 17-year-old girlfriend and they have sex, that is statutory rape. But the law right now says that the judge does not have to put that 19-year-old boy on the sex offender registry because of the kind of sex that they were having,” Wiener said. “But if it's a 19-year-old boy having sex with a 17-year-old boyfriend, the judge must put that 19-year-old onto the sex offender registry, even if it was completely consensual, even if they were boyfriends, even if there was nothing coercive or predatory about it.”
So, the whole kerfuffle is that LGBTQ pedophiles can potentially be treated harshly.
This way, the judge can decide whether pedophiles of any sexual persuasion get put onto sex offenders lists.
And, there's certainly no reason to assume that in a state going out of their way to make life comfy for criminals of all sorts, that the judges would be anything but fair, and straightforward in their decisions.
It seems you havent actually read it. But just read a biased article. But I doubt you are interested in what it actually says🤷♀️
SW-User
@canusernamebemyusername The OP just loves his interwebz memes! If it's on the interwebz, it must be true. 🤣
SW-User
[b][/b]Of course that's false, as they well know. It does not legalise paedophilia; it gives judges greater discretion to determine whether an adult must register as a sex offender.
Under current law, judges can make that decision in cases of [b]voluntary, but illegal, vaginal sex with a minor age 14 to 17 and an adult within 10 years of the minor's age. [/b]
This amendment, called SB 145, would expand that law to [b]include consenting oral and anal sex within the same age parameters. [/b] That's all it does.
@Mandalorian [quote]You've been called out and exposed by a good number of people here for the lying, twisting, manipulative piece of shit that you are! [/quote] Quite the opposite is true. This is just another leftist step towards all out evil and you know it.
Sloppy. Wrong again... only in Baby-trump's America.
Before SB-145, an 18-year-old male convicted of having oral or anal sex with a 17-year-old male would be required to register as a sex offender, while a 24-year-old male convicted of having penile-vaginal sex with a 15-year-old female would not be automatically required to register — it would be left up to the judge.
SB-145 creates the act as a sex offense [u]regardless[/u] of sexual orientation.
The bill brings anal and oral acts into line with penis/vagina penetration law when within ten years of age and the minor is at least 14 years old and the act was "consensual".
1) this bill isn't making the acts legal, it's standardizing the code. 2) I am in favor of standardizing the code such that all sex acts are treated equally, otherwise they are used to provide harsher penalties to homosexuals than straights which is not right. 3) I believe 14 is too young. But the fault of that lies with the old law not the new bill.
There is plenty to take issue with, but you sound like idiots taking leaps and making connections where none exist.
@ViciDraco [quote]liberal hate boner[/quote] Thank you that's a good one! Now excuse me while I go create another account and call it [i]LeftyHateBoner[/i]. I'll be sure to apply maximum marshmallow oppression on weirdos passing through my neighborhood.
@kodiac Yes, pointing out that having sex with 12 year olds in California means mandatory registration and jailtime is totally defending sex with kids.
[big]AAAAAAAAAAAnd ....That's about it....[/big]
