0
0

[–] commonsenseisded ago 

0
0

[–] commonsenseisded ago  (edited ago)

“California’s sex offender registry is broken, which undermines public safety,” said Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), who introduced the bill."....... Says it all right there.

0
0

[–] con77 ago 

what the actual fuck?

0
0

[–] Markb63 ago 

Jews will have their land of obamanation and it will be called California.

0
0

[–] Gothamgirl ago  (edited ago)

Terrible, I can't even get public speeding ticket records, from 2004 to go away.

0
1

[–] KillAllPedos [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

"“California’s sex offender registry is broken, which undermines public safety,” said Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), who introduced the bill. “SB 384 refocuses the sex offender registry on high-risk offenders and treats low-level offenders more fairly.”'

"....more fairly" ....WTF?!?!?!

0
0

[–] turitelle ago 

I heard a story quite awhile ago about a 17 year old boy with a long time 15 year old girlfriend (not sure of their exact ages...) who was charged with sex with a minor, he had to be registered and it screwed up his life. Neither the girl nor her parents agreed with the designation but they had no say in the matter. I could see him being considered a low level offender. Hopefully this is the kind of person they will remove and not the disgusting child pornographers.

0
0

[–] commonsenseisded ago 

0
3

[–] Jason218 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Are low level offenders like guys pissing on the side of a building? Or are we talking actual sex crimes being treated as low level? If the second... WTF

0
0

[–] commonsenseisded ago 

Yes, that is a perfect example of a low level offender.

1
3

[–] KillAllPedos [S] 1 point 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

/pol/ News Infinity‏ @polNewsInfinity on Twitter says : "California is now wanting to move people off the sex-offender list if they possessed child pornography.

California isn’t safe for children."

Tweet: https://twitter.com/polNewsInfinity/status/917480003637477376

0
4

[–] kidavenger 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

"the registry, which has grown to more than 105,000 names, is less useful to detectives investigating new sex crimes because it is so bulky." Less useful because 105,000 names are making it so bulky? What are they using? A frigging abacus? That is the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard. Ridiculous, yes, but not surprising coming from Moonbeam.

0
0

[–] KillAllPedos [S] ago 

it's a FUCKING excuse to help PEODS! Old Legacy database systems an now be updated with much better 'real-time' analytical ones. California is home to Silicon Valley, there is no excuse!!!

load more comments ▼ (2 remaining)