Current Events > Whats up with that new California law? Being able to have sex with minors?

(+) Yeah! (+)

wackyteen posted...

That's why you give judges tools and leeways instead of forcing the judges hand.

Yes I understand it's to give discretion. I disagree that there should be discretion allowed for
1) a ten year gap
2) a fourteen year old having sex with a non minor

Glob posted...

I grew up in the UK and there were a few girls in my year group of 200 kids who got pregnant at 14. A few more at 15 and 16. There was a big moral panic thing about it at the time.

Sheesh. Our school was more worried about rivalry with other schools and fights in the earlier years. Towards the end there wasn't that many problems.

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Conservatives are about to virtue signal over this, while allowing actual pedos in their own party to get away with it

Yep. Going to see a whole lot of dipshits saying shit like "14 year olds aren't mature enough to be having sex!" while pushing for those same "immature" 14 year olds to be forced to give birth to children.

Suddenly, so many people now have nuanced opinions on the AOC laws lol

A 19 year old with a 14 year old? If reality worked a little bit differently then VM could have lived in Cali and wouldn't have to automatically need to register as a sex offender, depending on the discretion of a judge.

This bill doesn't legalize anything. At all.

They would still be charged and convicted.
It simply gives the judge control over whether or not that person is a registered sex offender for life.

Dat_Cracka_Jax posted...

Suddenly, so many people now have nuanced opinions on the AOC laws lol

Not wanting 19 year olds to be automatically labeled as sex offenders for having sex with a 17 year old is a lot different from thinking sex between 30 year olds and 16 year olds is okay because the 16 year old "consented".

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Not wanting 19 year olds to be automatically labeled as sex offenders for having sex with a 17 year old is a lot different from thinking sex between 30 year olds and 16 year olds is okay because the 16 year old "consented".

Lol, that's a two year gap. Not ten

Dat_Cracka_Jax posted...

Lol, that's a two year gap. Not ten

Pretty much everyone in this topic agrees 10 years is too much, so who's the one with the nuanced opinions?

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Sheesh. Our school was more worried about rivalry with other schools and fights in the earlier years. Towards the end there wasn't that many problems.

Yeah, we had big fights with the school down the road pretty regularly. It was weird, as many of them had friends at both schools. Just an odd tribal behaviour that persisted long after people had any idea why it had started.

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Pretty much everyone in this topic agrees 10 years is too much, so who's the one with the nuanced opinions?

Glob and doom implied that people upset were intentionally misunderstanding the law. I feel I read and understand the intent of the law and still think ten years is too big for there to be discretion. I also think a 14 year old with a 19 is not okay and should have no discretion for if they register.

If someone thinks there should be discretion for those cases then they believe there could exist a situation in which that is not terrible and disgusting enough to have someone register as a sex offender

Dat_Cracka_Jax posted...

Glob and doom implied that people upset were intentionally misunderstanding the law. I feel I read and understand the intent of the law and still think ten years is too big for there to be discretion. I also think a 14 year old with a 19 is not okay and should have no discretion for if they register.

If someone thinks there should be discretion for those cases then they believe there could exist a situation in which that is not terrible and disgusting enough to have someone register as a sex offender

To be fair, I wasnt taking issue with you.

Just the people who clearly hadnt understood at all. I dont have a horse in this race. I dont care what the age of consent is in California. I dont live in the US.

Glob posted...

To be fair, I wasnt taking issue with you.

Just the people who clearly hadnt understood at all. I dont have a horse in this race. I dont care what the age of consent is in California. I dont live in the US.

Okay, your post was just vague enough to where it could be applied widely.

Dat_Cracka_Jax posted...

Glob and doom implied that people upset were intentionally misunderstanding the law. I feel I read and understand the intent of the law and still think ten years is too big for there to be discretion. I also think a 14 year old with a 19 is not okay and should have no discretion for if they register.

If someone thinks there should be discretion for those cases then they believe there could exist a situation in which that is not terrible and disgusting enough to have someone register as a sex offender

I was gonna say I thought those posts were more targeted towards people misinterpreting the law, not simply those who disagreed with it.

For what it's worth, I think a 3 year age gap would be appropriate (4 would be pushing it). The worst case scenario you'd get is a 15 year old with an 18 year old.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

But still seems pretty f***ing weird. Some judges let the s***tiest things pass, so those "extreme examples" could get through in some cases.

Letting guilty people get off light is a better outcome than overly punishing those less guilty.

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

For what it's worth, I think a 3 year age gap would be appropriate (4 would be pushing it). The worst case scenario you'd get is a 15 year old with an 18 year old.

Yeah I was going to compromise at 5 year, but even that grossed me out

Jesus this topic again. Was it not already pointed out two years ago or whenever it was that people who think it makes pedophilia legal are stupid?

Dat_Cracka_Jax posted...

Yes I understand it's to give discretion. I disagree that there should be discretion allowed for
1) a ten year gap
2) a fourteen year old having sex with a non minor

Yeah, I'm not (fully) on board with the 10 year gap but I wonder if there's some unspoken intentions about it being able to be used in the cases of minors having fake IDs so when a 20 y/o homes think he's dicking down an 18 y/o but it turns they're actually like 14/15, he isn't immediately slammed onto the sex offender list.

Thousands of Libertarians are opening the Calculator app on their phone as we speak.

A law for old rich pedos young rich pedo kids, eh?

EmbraceOfDeath posted...

Jesus this topic again. Was it not already pointed out two years ago or whenever it was that people who think it makes pedophilia legal are stupid?

It's just a right wing talking point. They decided to make their platform about how LGBT are grooming their children. So of course they need to attack CA for doing something reasonable.

Kami_no_Kami posted...

A law for old rich pedos young rich pedo kids, eh?

This law literally wouldn't have any effect on that.

LotsOfHorror posted...

This law literally wouldn't have any effect on that.

People are ignoring the very simple fact that this doesn't exempt anyone from criminal charges.
It doesn't make anything legal.

All it does is make it so it doesn't automatically put someone on the sex offender registry, the judge decides.

I do however agree that 10 years is kuch too much.

wackyteen posted...

Idk where they got the 10 years from, though. Too much.

It's intended for cases like 40 year olds picking up high school seniors.

If a 20 year old adult rapes a 13 year old girl they will not go "less than 10 years it's ok!"

SpiritSephiroth posted...

That never happened at my school at all. Are you in the US? I'm in London.

Northeast US. There were a lot of people calling themselves catholic (religious enough to not have abortions, but fucking at 14 is cool), Ill just put it that way.