Why, chat? What could possibly motivate a single person to vote against this? Because they included 17 year olds this time? Cmon.
There's really only one plausible explanation as to why this doesn't pass, isn't there?Why, chat? What could possibly motivate a single person to vote against this? Because they included 17 year olds this time? Cmon.
You know, it sure feels like that. IDK man.There's really only one plausible explanation as to why this doesn't pass, isn't there?
There's really only one plausible explanation as to why this doesn't pass, isn't there?
Personally, I am 100% fine with "targeting victims," which is another word for "arresting prostitutes". It's a longer way around, but the whole industry needs to go. Don't be out on the street hooking, and you won't get arrested. When those folks are arrested, they can flip on their handler.Seems like this bill re-criminalizes "loitering for prostitution", IE most of the policing goes back to impacting victims disproportionately over traffickers. That's the main criticism I can find with a quick search.
It is dumb as shit that the original version that passed last year specifically went with 15 year olds as the cut-off instead of everyone under 18.
...we must make history, to protect the children
...here we are "For The Children"
...everything we do is "For The Children"
...all Americans — their eyes are on us in the Congress to see whether we have the courage, the commitment and the conviction, to protect the children
*Nancy Pelosi, Kalifornya Congressperson, circa 2022
Yuuuup.9 times out of 10 (I'm no statistician), "for the children" is an emotional cover for increased government control or some other nefarious bullshit.
"For the children" is a valid reason, we just need to pump the brakes on anything using that language.
Wait--sex trafficking of ANYONE isn't *already* a felony?Why, chat? What could possibly motivate a single person to vote against this? Because they included 17 year olds this time? Cmon.
It's California, so no, it is not.Wait--sex trafficking of ANYONE isn't *already* a felony?
If she can hold onto an (R) seat in a contested NY district, that's where she needs to stay. Forget UN Ambassador. And definitely don't run for NY State governor, an (R) isn't going to win here anytime soon and probably not in my lifetime. There are too many (D)s in the big cities for an (R) to win a statewide election for .gov.Don't worry, the folks not getting enough legislation done during this very fleeting period where they have the levers of power took some valuable time to bicker via Fox. Great job, everyone.
Stefanik undercuts Speaker Johnson in stunning public House GOP spat
Update- we figured out why the bill in Cali was blocked. It didn't "make sense" and "isn't equitable".Wait--sex trafficking of ANYONE isn't *already* a felony?
I'm one who's willing to judge based solely on appearances and that fucker is a pedophile. He even has the prison pussy facial hair.Check that man's basement.
So, uh, these are some numbers I guess? There is no defending the media at this point. I would love some neutral coverage, doesn't need to be positive, especially if there are scandals.
How much negative press did Joe Biden get during the AFG retreat? Bet it wasn't 90%.