Message from @pepperfresh
Discord ID: 751139872659734668
Also, be warned it contains very disturbing images but it’s a must watch for anyone who wants to know more
> You make a good point but we are talking about a 10 year age gap... That's a lot of "grey" area and not something I would support personally
@MikaSetsu
It was _already_ that way though
@Red Jasper I wanted to get ahead of the story because people fly with the misinfo too often, additionally there was a law involving the age of consent in France that was recently passed. Conservatives freaked out because it set the age of consent to 15. The key point of the story though is that _there was no age of consent before._
Yeah. And before SB-145, the bill was not including all persons. I can imagine how all of these assholes that were identifying as "non-binary" or all that other bullshit might have actually been trying to get away with bullshit.
@Jayson should i start with part 1?
@Red Jasper I kinda covered that in my Devil's Advocate. There are definitely arguments, I wish I could just speak legaleze.
Yes. Scott Weiner is THAT asshole.
I can already tell senator weiner passed which bill due to the bills passed.
we seem to have a few weiner problems
Guys please retweet and like this post of a little girl describing how her mom's boyfriend is sexually assaulting her. The judge ruled the mom to get her :C https://twitter.com/SydneyLWatson/status/1300535038631649281?s=20
@pepperfresh The one single thing I’ve heard in defense of SB 145 is that it applies not to people *convicted* of sex crimes, but to people *accused* of sex crimes. People accused, but not convicted, should be protected, it is said.
SB-145 did not change statutory rape laws.
@mathgrant people who are accused do not need to register as sex offenders. That is part of the conviction.
The sex offender registry is different than the rape laws.
No one said they were the same
Here in California, with the way it was before SB-145, if you were accused of a sex crime guilty or not, you were stuck in the sex offender registry for life. Now it's a judge that puts you on it.
If you dont believe me look it up yourself. But I've lived here my entire life and heard this all the time.
The "all women must be believed" theory really ruined lives.
Ok which stature shall I look up?
It's been there for a long time. Not sure what it's called. Probably been around since the 90s.
so a 20 year old can have sex with a 10 year old and not be put on the registry list, is what im gathering from this
because lgbt rights and all that
its degusting that they are allowing pedophiles not to be registered as sex offenders!
There was a recent zoom hearing earlier today
@YeahGirl this stream is from a lawyer that I follow on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mzXIHwA0mc
Sorry for any unintentional shilling or whatnot.
> because lgbt rights and all that
@Meryl.140.15 Weiner is shamelessly pandering to his base by packaging it that way.
The only person that will benefit is weiner, sb145 is nothing new or groundbreaking (as weiner packages it to be), the age band has always been in the current laws there... it's just an update to the old laws. Now with sb145, discresion is also in the hands of the judge to decide --for what we call "unconventional sex with minors"-- to put the perp in the sex offender register. Weiner is just being a politician and pandering.
I don't think that anyone is saying or implying that sexual activity with a minor is okay and should be allowed; no one is arguing for the decriminalization of sexual abuse.
seems like the politicians are
It's sensationalism for wiener (for more clout). The age difference (ten years), in and of itself is a problem and it's being used as a smoke screen to how young these behaviors are tollerated there. Their current law is geared more towards heterosexuals, and also starts at 14-17 y.o too, and the provisions are only for regular sex that can lead to pregnancy (penile vaginal). Sb145 seems to be geared for homosexuals that have "irregular" sex (penile anal, digit anal, oral whatever, who knows what else, etc...). It seems two wrongs (age and definition of consent) do make a right in cali. Go figure 🤷♀️
I think that wiener just repackaged the old laws in effect in cali to pander to his base (the lgbt+ community). He didn't stay up writing this garbage bill.
So glad i left the lgbt community
The left is a fucking cult
Yeah it's easy to throw that out of proportion and Weiner is a terrible guy. He passed a bill a few years ago that decriminalized the intentional spread of HIV virus from people that know they're infected to others. So, people don't have to reveal to their partner that they have HIV.