‘Absolutely Bonkers’: Evil California Democrats Refuse To Make Buying Kids For Sex A Felony
Lawmakers in California, stunningly, have refused to make buying kids for sex a felony.
There’s a new report in the Federalist that explains the antics of Democrats who insisted on having their way with a new law, and what it means.
The report, written as a commentary, explained, “Should it be a felony to purchase an underage minor for illegal sex? For most of us, the answer is a very easy yes. This is not a hard one.”
But Democrats in the state, “feel differently.”
“The state assembly there this past week considered a bill — AB-379 — that would have amended state law to make it a felony to solicit paid sex from ‘any person under 18 years of age.’ In other words, if you seek out and pay a minor for sex — if you engage in child sex trafficking — you would be guilty of a felony.”
Democrats there, the report said, “mounted a major opposition to the bill. By the time they were done with it, the bill’s protections for 16-year-old sex crime victims had been stripped from the measure.”
They added their claim that it was “the intent of the Legislature to adopt the strongest laws to protect 16- and 17-year old victims,” but then they refused to do just that, the report said.
The opposition, the report said, stemmed from concern “that the measure could disproportionately affect … LGBT Californians.”
There’s a new report in the Federalist that explains the antics of Democrats who insisted on having their way with a new law, and what it means.
The report, written as a commentary, explained, “Should it be a felony to purchase an underage minor for illegal sex? For most of us, the answer is a very easy yes. This is not a hard one.”
But Democrats in the state, “feel differently.”
“The state assembly there this past week considered a bill — AB-379 — that would have amended state law to make it a felony to solicit paid sex from ‘any person under 18 years of age.’ In other words, if you seek out and pay a minor for sex — if you engage in child sex trafficking — you would be guilty of a felony.”
Democrats there, the report said, “mounted a major opposition to the bill. By the time they were done with it, the bill’s protections for 16-year-old sex crime victims had been stripped from the measure.”
They added their claim that it was “the intent of the Legislature to adopt the strongest laws to protect 16- and 17-year old victims,” but then they refused to do just that, the report said.
The opposition, the report said, stemmed from concern “that the measure could disproportionately affect … LGBT Californians.”
70-79, M
