California bill eliminating sex offender list inequity toward LGBTQ passes

[MechAg94]

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/California-bill-eliminating-sex-offender-list-15529263.php

I heard a comment on this in a video.  I had to go look it up.  The claimed purpose of the bill is to eliminate a inequity that allowed a judge to leave someone off the sex offender registry if the sex was vaginal versus other types.  Hence the LGBTQ crowd supporting this. 

This is the part of the bill that I heard about.  I guess it doesn't make sex with a minor legal, but it allows a judge to decide not to add them to the sex offender registry.  I am not sure why that needs to be in the bill. 

Wiener’s bill would treat all sex acts the same: Although minors cannot legally consent, if a teenager ages 14 to 17 voluntarily had sex with an adult who is less than 10 years older, the judge would have discretion over placing the adult on the sex-offender registry.

I don't know if this has passed yet. 

I am not sure what this means as I don't know the sex offender laws in my own state very well.

[dogmush]

I am, depending on exactly what the bill says, OK with that.  One of my issues with the sex offender databases is there is no difference  on them between  a 30 YO that diddles preteens, and an 19YO boy who has consensual sex with his 17 YO girlfriend.

One is a much larger problem for society than the other.

[MechAg94]

I am, depending on exactly what the bill says, OK with that.  One of my issues with the sex offender databases is there is no difference  on them between  a 30 YO that diddles preteens, and an 19YO boy who has consensual sex with his 17 YO girlfriend.

One is a much larger problem for society than the other.

I agree with that 2 year age difference.  And this is just the registry not the sentence for the original crime.  

It is the maximum 10 year difference that bugs me.  I am curious what made them pick that high of a difference.  

[Ron]

I agree with that 2 year age difference.  And this is just the registry not the sentence for the original crime.  

It is the maximum 10 year difference that bugs me.  I am curious what made them pick that high of a difference.  

There is a lot of buggery going on in California. It appears to be a right of passage for young folks if they want to be a star.

You also have a huge illegal Mexican immigrant population that has a different "standard" on age differences and how young is old enough.

Repeat after me ... there is no slippery slope ...

[lupinus]

I agree with that 2 year age difference.  And this is just the registry not the sentence for the original crime.  

It is the maximum 10 year difference that bugs me.  I am curious what made them pick that high of a difference.  

Nice round number I guess? It covers college with a little spare room? Allows for more wiggle room on the upper end. While it may only be a three year difference, I can see circumstances of being more reasonable for a 17/27 pairing than a 14/24 pairing.

[MechAg94]

Nice round number I guess? It covers college with a little spare room? Allows for more wiggle room on the upper end. While it may only be a three year difference, I can see circumstances of being more reasonable for a 17/27 pairing than a 14/24 pairing.

I am not sure I like the idea of college seniors hooking up with high school girls.  27 is older than that actually.  17 is often pretty immature these days.  This would also include older men seeking younger men.

[Ron]

A no more than 4 year spread standard for those in the 13-21 age range makes more sense to me.

Any law that justifies sexual contact by an adult, even a young adult, with a child that's not in or barely starting puberty is just evil.

10 years at the judges discretion is just immoral.