re: California votes AGAINST making the human trafficking of a minor a serious felony...

quote:

---

PedoHank thinks forcing kids to pick tomatoes is the same as being sold into sex slavery.

---

No, Boure, I do not. The fact that they are quite different is the heart of my last three posts.

quote:

---

California votes AGAINST making the human trafficking of a minor a serious felony...

---

If you are convicted of violating human trafficking laws under California Penal Code 236.1 PC, the penalties will depend on the subsection you were convicted of, but it was a felony. LINK

It looks to me like Assembly Bill 2167 is an Amendment to current law requiring courts to consider alternatives to incarceration in general, including without limitation, collaborative justice court programs, diversion, restorative justice, and probation. LINK

The GOP attempted to amend the amendment, basically restoring existing law for trafficking minors

quote:

---

I did not say that I agreed with that sentiment. I said that one of the legislators on that committee could easily have reached that conclusion.

---

Which is retarded and why you need to be blasted

Thats not a legislator idea, Its yours that you are projecting

You made up something which reflected your view

quote:

---

o you think that forcing a kid to pick vegetables should be treated exactly the same as trafficking a kid for murder or sexual exploitation?

---

Forcing children to hard labor or sex against their will for the benefit of your fellow voting base is pretty much one and the same

quote:

---

Forcing children to hard labor or sex against their will ... is pretty much one and the same

---

I disagree.
I do not think that forced manual labor (while bad) is nearly as serious as sexual abuse or murder

That is the sort of question that legislatures are designed to answer. In this case, one subcommittee of one chamber of the California legislature answered that question differently than you would have done so.

quote:

---

might have

---

To normies, its called projecting, exactly what I said

quote:

---

n this case, assume a 2-time felon who is then convicted of trafficking a kid to pick tomatoes in the Central Valley. This bill would have dictated treatment the same as if that their conviction had been for a capital felony.

---

There is no misunderstanding at all. Yes, The bill would have created the same sentence enhancement as someone that committed a capital felony is correct. But the enhancement is also applied to the same person that in the same situation committed a weapons offense

The comparison is for an offense of trafficking to one that is a serious or violent offense of which capital offenses are but a small subset of violent offenses and even smaller subset of serious offenses

Your improper limiting the comparison to capital offenses is musdirective. There is nothing in any post suggesting that someone doesn’t understand recidivism laws

As for not understanding and not reading. sb14 adds “the human trafficking of a minor in violation of subdivision c of section 236.1”

Section 236.1c reads “ a person who causes, induces or attempts to cause, induce, or persuade a person who is a minor at the time of commission of the offense to engage in a commercial sex act, with the intent to violate…is guilty of human trafficking…”

Now I know you like to post about kink, and that has its own vocabulary, but I don’t think “picking tomatoes” fits that definition. If it does, it definitely sounds like good policy

quote:

---

rafficking the kid to pick avocados? No, not at all. Felonly? Yes. Capital offense? You are out of your mind.

---

Unless “advocados” are some of your draggy sex acts, the bill neither makes trafficking a “capital offense” nor does it add farming to the three strikes law

quote:

---

This type of thing is guaranteed to destroy the country

---

I was thinking about the mental destruction of girls that have been trafficked all the up from Venezuela. Tweens/teens with easily high double digit/hundred sexual partners before they get to become legal age here. And then they will be expected to become positive members of the society once they have their fatherless anchor baby as teens.

Freaking really is amazingly sad. Imagine if people 20 years ago were told that states and Americans would advocate or find ways to justify it all. Sad diabolical future we are facing.