Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei must go gaolang > your fav is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
Yeah, I just don't trust random posters on twitter as a source.
homophobia......
Post automatically merged:
homophobia......
This bill only applies to young people aged 14, 15, 16 or 17 and anyone within a 10 year age range.
Basically, a 24 years old can sleep with a willing 14 year old, without breaking any law.
Did you even read the link you posted? The law doesn’t do that. The link you posted even debunks that rumor.
All the law does is make it to where sex crimes aren’t considered more severe simply because they involve gay sex.
As of current California law, heterosexual sex crimes under the parameters this bill is targeting don’t require mandatory sex offender registration. However if the crime involves anal or oral sex, sex offender registration is mandatory. This treats gay sex worse than straight sex, and the bill just amends changes so LGBT offenders aren’t treated worst simply for their crimes being gay.
The Sex offender registry, legally speaking, isn’t a punishment for a crime. Rather, they are public safety laws that apply to former criminals. Whether or not an offender has to register is completely different from their punishment.
So no, that would still be a crime and that person would still go to prison. However under the bill, sex offender registry wouldn’t be mandatory but would rather be up to a judge’s discretion.
This makes it to where judges can ensure that the people forced to register are actually dangerous criminals.
Anyways, stop believing every stupid thing you see on social media. Use your brains.
All the law does is make it to where sex crimes aren’t considered more severe simply because they involve gay sex.
As of current California law, heterosexual sex crimes under the parameters this bill is targeting don’t require mandatory sex offender registration. However if the crime involves anal or oral sex, sex offender registration is mandatory. This treats gay sex worse than straight sex, and the bill just amends changes so LGBT offenders aren’t treated worst simply for their crimes being gay.
The Sex offender registry, legally speaking, isn’t a punishment for a crime. Rather, they are public safety laws that apply to former criminals. Whether or not an offender has to register is completely different from their punishment.
So no, that would still be a crime and that person would still go to prison. However under the bill, sex offender registry wouldn’t be mandatory but would rather be up to a judge’s discretion.
This makes it to where judges can ensure that the people forced to register are actually dangerous criminals.
Anyways, stop believing every stupid thing you see on social media. Use your brains.
If a judge looks at a case, analyzes all the facts, and determines that an offender is not dangerous enough to require sex offender registry, I don’t see what is the problem.
The way that the justice system works is that we have faith in judges to do their jobs. Judges are the ones who actually have to deal with the facts of a case, not lawmakers.
Limiting a judge’s freedom on such issues will just hurt the wrong people.
Imagine the offender has Down syndrome and their crime was a case applicable bill. Do you really think a person like that is so dangerous that they need to be put on the government’s radar for the rest of their life? Even after they do their time?
mind you, this bill is only supposed to effect crimes that weren’t violent in nature.
This is why Judicial discretion is a thing.
The bill doesn’t legalize anything. It just effects post-prison restrictions put on offenders.
no, what you said is BS
The way that the justice system works is that we have faith in judges to do their jobs. Judges are the ones who actually have to deal with the facts of a case, not lawmakers.
Limiting a judge’s freedom on such issues will just hurt the wrong people.
Imagine the offender has Down syndrome and their crime was a case applicable bill. Do you really think a person like that is so dangerous that they need to be put on the government’s radar for the rest of their life? Even after they do their time?
mind you, this bill is only supposed to effect crimes that weren’t violent in nature.
This is why Judicial discretion is a thing.
Post automatically merged:
The bill doesn’t legalize anything. It just effects post-prison restrictions put on offenders.
no, what you said is BS
I just can't with this shit. Some of the best people I know are trans and gay and many of you incel virgins are out here putting them in a box like they are all publicly promiscuous and groomers. If you really cared about children's well being you'd be criticizing the politicians who refuse to regulate guns and take tax benefits away from parents who need it.