╌>

California Democrats BLOCK bill that would make child trafficking a serious felony because they say a 'three strikes' rule that could see offenders jailed for life is 'ineffective in preventing crime'

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  1stwarrior  •  last year  •  28 comments

California Democrats BLOCK bill that would make child trafficking a serious felony because they say a 'three strikes' rule that could see offenders jailed for life is 'ineffective in preventing crime'

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


California   Democrats   have blocked a bill that would have made child sex trafficking a serious felony in the state.

The Democrat-led Assembly Public Safety Committee voted on Tuesday not to advance   Republican   State Sen. Shannon Grove's bill to make child sex trafficking subject to the state's 'three strikes rule.'

Under that rule, a person convicted of at least three serious felonies is punished with a prison sentence between 25 years to life.

Democrats on the Public Safety Committee, though, had expressed concerns about the effectiveness of the 'three strikes rule' and longer sentences, which they said is 'ineffective in preventing   crime .'

In the end, the committee voted down the proposal even though two Republican members voted in favor of it and six Democrats abstained. 

In a statement following the vote, Assemblyman Reggie Jones-Sawyer, a Democrat from Los Angeles who heads the committee, explained its reasoning for blocking the bill.

'The Three Strikes model of sentencing is ineffective in preventing crime and protecting the public's safety. We will not build on a deeply flawed sentencing system that unfairly punishes disadvantaged communities,' he said.

'SB-14 makes no new corrective actions or enhancements to laws already in place,' Jones-Sawyer continued.

'Ultimately, members of the Assembly's Public Safety Committee understood the author's intent but recognized this bill needs considerable work and great reconsideration.'

Assembly Majority Leader Isaac Bryan, another Democratic member of the committee, also said at Tuesday's hearing: 'Longer sentences don't actually stop things from happening.

'All they do is increase our investment in systems of harm and subjugation at the expense of the investments that the communities need to not have this be a problem to begin with,' he claimed.

But even California Gov. Gavin Newsom said he was surprised by the decision to block the bill.

'I want to understand exactly what happened yesterday,' he told reporters Wednesday. 'I take it very seriously.'

Grove also slammed the decision.

She said in a statement: 'After passing the Senate with unanimous, bipartisan vote, I had hoped Democrats on the Assembly Public Safety Committee, led by Reggie Jones-Sawyer (D-LA), would agree to make sex trafficking of a minor a serious felony.

'I am profoundly disappointed that committee Democrats couldn't bring themselves to support the bill, with their stubborn and misguided objection to any penalty increase regardless of how heinous the crime.'

Jones-Sawyer and Grove then decided to meet on Wednesday, in what Grove called a 'productive meeting' without any agreement.

She said she wants the bill to be voted on without any changes.

'The bill needs to be brought to the Assembly floor,' Grove said. 'And it needs to be voted on as is.' 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
1  Sparty On    last year

Unbelievable!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1  Texan1211  replied to  Sparty On @1    last year
Unbelievable!

California.

Totally believable.

No wonder Cali is known as The Land of Fruits and Nuts.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Professor Silent
1.2  SteevieGee  replied to  Sparty On @1    last year

The bill has passed.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.1  Texan1211  replied to  SteevieGee @1.2    last year

Damn pity that some Democrats had to be shamed or coerced into voting for something so common-sense.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
1.2.2  Sparty On  replied to  SteevieGee @1.2    last year

Not a shock considering the source.

One more reason to stay away from Cali.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Professor Silent
1.2.3  SteevieGee  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.1    last year

Child trafficking is already a felony that carries long prison sentences in Cali.  Some lawmakers believe the 3 strikes law is discriminatory and ineffective and they abstained.  Governor Newsome convinced them that many people would use this as political fodder against them and they changed their minds.

Some people on here will still use it as political fodder as is evidenced by the mere act of posting this inaccurate story and also the continued comments after my comment stating that THE BILL HAS BEEN PASSED.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.4  Texan1211  replied to  SteevieGee @1.2.3    last year

Trying to say a 3 strikes law is discrimination is just making excuses for a segment of the population.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Professor Silent
1.2.5  SteevieGee  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.4    last year

Yeah, I'm just saying what happened.  I, personally, don't believe that 3 strikes is particularly discriminatory.  I'm more concerned with what actually happened, not how they got there.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.6  Texan1211  replied to  SteevieGee @1.2.5    last year

I like 3 strike laws.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.7  Texan1211  replied to  SteevieGee @1.2.3    last year

look at 3 strikes as just enhanced penalties for crimes there already are stiff sentences for, kind of like we do with hate crimes.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
1.3  cjcold  replied to  Sparty On @1    last year

A poorly written bill with a poison pill that does nothing to strengthen child protection laws and punishments that are already on the books.

Why would anybody want to give child traffickers "three strikes"?

But hey, anything to try and make dems look bad right?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.1  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @1.3    last year

the Democrats made themselves look bad by being coerced into voting for it after rejecting it.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.2  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @1.3    last year

do you understand what 3 strikes means?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
1.3.3  Sparty On  replied to  cjcold @1.3    last year
Why would anybody want to give child traffickers "three strikes"?

Agreed, it should be no strikes.

One wonders why concerned Dems didn’t suggest that change to the bill. /S

Did you bother to actually read the article?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.4  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @1.3    last year

so what you are saying here is that the Dems who initially voted against were coerced into voting for something they don't want.

No backbone Dems!

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
1.3.5  cjcold  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.4    last year

Good thing I'm not a dem or a politician.

I wouldn't last long in DC.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
3  Sean Treacy    last year

I don't understand how this can be defended. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1  Sparty On  replied to  Sean Treacy @3    last year

Only if you support pedophilia …. Which evidently a lot of Cali Democrats do.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
3.1.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Sparty On @3.1    last year

Maybe they thought there was a way to tax the activity.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.1.1    last year
Maybe they thought there was a way to tax the activity.

Naw------those convicted don;t have enough money to tax. Besides, they probably come from disadvantaged backgrounds so that excuses them from personal responsibility.

 
 
 
GregTx
Professor Guide
4  GregTx    last year
California Democrats have blocked a bill that would have made child sex trafficking a serious felony in the state.

Obviously, child sex trafficking isn't serious to them...

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1  Texan1211  replied to  GregTx @4    last year
Obviously, child sex trafficking isn't serious to them...

Not nearly as important as freeing criminals.

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
4.2  George  replied to  GregTx @4    last year

The Obama administration gave kids to child traffickers, maybe they are trying to shield them from prosecution?

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
6  Ronin2    last year

Are they trying for the NAMBLA vote even though it is largely considered to be extinct?

The Democrats can start a new pedophile organization so they can receive donations.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7  Vic Eldred    last year

Hasn't Newsom already intervened?

If he intends to get in the presidential race he can't be forced to defend this.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
8  cjcold    last year

Seems many here on NT don't realize how they are manipulated by articles like this.

Next thing you know right wingers will believe that democrats drink baby blood and run a child porn ring out of the basement of a pizza parlor that has no basement.

Get a grip folks and do a little research into fringe propaganda pieces.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.1  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @8    last year

manipulated into telling the truth about Democrats? 

too bad!

 
 

Who is online

Kavika


516 visitors