KC City Council looks to ban registrants from working any place where alcohol is served because of victim cult logic

Someone at the KC city council must be inebriated to even consider such an asinine proposal. I'm no fan of alcohol, but serving a drink in a bar while on the job is NOT how sexual assaults in bars begin. As usual, the logic coming from the victim cult mouthpiece is nonsensical.

https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/proposed-ordinance-would-keep-sex-offenders-from-serving-liquor-in-kansas-city

Proposed ordinance would keep sex offenders from serving liquor in Kansas City
Dia Wall
9:12 PM, Sep 26, 2018

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — To serve alcohol in Kansas City, you need a liquor card. The public safety committee is considering a new proposed ordinance that would change that, but some agencies are concerned.

The Metropolitan Organization to Counter Sexual Assault, or MOCSA, is speaking out. Victoria Pickering, Director of Advocacy for MOCSA, said, "The goal is to prevent individuals who have a history of committing sexual offenses from being able to work with alcohol which is the number one drug that's used to facilitate sexual assault."

Kansas City Councilman Quinton Lucas acknowledged, "The fear is that a rapist is going to serve your daughter a drink. That's not the case."

Lucas went on to say that, "I get the concern. We're going to make sure that we hear them out, but we're also going to make sure that we're allowing opportunities for ex-offenders, those who have not been in these sorts of things, those who are looking for a second chance."

Kevin Timmons, owner of Nick & Jake's and the head of the Greater Kansas City Restaurant Association, told 41 Action News when it comes to violent offenders, "Those people are all managed by the parole system and they're not allowed to get liquor. They're not allowed to work in restaurants that have alcohol."

Thousands of people apply for liquor cards in Kansas City each year. Timmons said over 99 percent of them are approved without any issues. He called the system, "archaic," sharing that Kansas does not require liquor cards.

The public safety committee did not have enough votes to take action on the proposed ordinance Wednesday. If it ultimately passes the ordinance, it will move to the full council for a vote.

Minnesota pushes for a mandatory half-century supervision period (HF 2944)

Pretty straightforward, and pretty stupid. Ten years, the current law, is a stretch, but 50 years is a complete waste. Do you know what happened 50 years ago? MLK was assassinated. Today, MN is looking to assassinate human rights.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/text.php?number=HF2944&session=ls90&version=list&session_number=0&session_year=2018

Description
Sex offenders required to serve 50-year conditional release or probation terms, and intensive probation for sex offenders established.

Authors
Grossell ; Lohmer ; Poston ; Dettmer
Actions
Separated Chronological
House
02/22/2018 Introduction and first reading, referred to Public Safety and Security Policy and Finance pg. 7088 Intro
03/05/2018 Authors added Lohmer and Poston. pg. 7223
04/09/2018 Author added Dettmer. pg. 8075

Jerkoffs in the Illinois State Senate wants to make jerking off in prison a sex crime

It is a sticky subject, but self-pleasuring is a pretty common thing behind bars.

It took a while but I finally found the bill. READ BY CLICKING HERE.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/state-senate-targets-masturbating-jail-inmates-making-sex-offender-tag-easier/

04/26/2018, 06:24am
State Senate targets masturbating jail inmates, making ‘sex offender’ tag easier

Tina Sfondeles @TinaSfon | email

It’s a daily sight being called “a pretty extreme brand of workplace sexual harassment.”

Citing a rise of lewd behavior in the Cook County Jail, the Illinois Senate on Wednesday passed a measure that would place inmates on the sex offender registry upon release if they expose themselves or masturbate in front of female staffers more than two times.

The measure cleared 56-0 with a brief debate, and must still pass the Illinois House.

Inmates would be charged with public indecency after one offense. Upon the second they’d be required to register as a sex offender. Currently, inmates aren’t required to register as a sex offender until their third offense.

“It is aimed at combating what I would say is a pretty extreme brand of workplace sexual harassment that is occurring right now, particularly at Cook County Jail. It’s a growing phenomenon of male inmates exposing themselves to female staffers and engaging in various forms of lewd behavior,” bill sponsor State Sen. Bill Cunningham, D-Chicago, said on the Senate floor.

Cunningham said there have been almost 700 cases at Cook County Jail within the last 16 months.

If an inmate is found guilty of the lewd behavior twice, they would be eligible to be placed on the sex offender registry when released from custody.

State Sen. Dale Fowler, R-Harrisburg, noted the behavior is happening not only in Cook County, and urged the Senate to consider punishment for offenders in juvenile justice centers, as well. But Cunningham, who acknowledged it’s also a problem, said juveniles wouldn’t be eligible to be put on the sex offender list.

“It’s being called acceptable and unprecedented and we have to make measures to include juvenile justice centers within this,” Fowler said.

In 2017 there were 222 detainees charged with indecent exposure, including 144 cases where the victims were jail personnel and 29 with complaints filed by public defenders at the Cook County Jail, officials said.

Cara Smith, spokeswoman for Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart’s office, said nearly 800 jail staff members signed petitions in support of the measure within hours of learning it might clear the Senate earlier this week.

She called the lewd behavior a daily occurrence at the jail.

“We are desperate for an effective tool to respond to this behavior, and the conduct is overwhelmingly engaged in by offenders facing long prison terms,” Smith said. “A class A misdemeanor, they don’t care. … It’s totally ineffective. We have tried every possible management strategy.”

Smith said the sheriff’s office isn’t taking the bill or the penalties offenders must endure lightly.

“But our staff deserve to work in an environment free of harassment,” Smith said.

Despite being accustomed to seeing lewd behavior, public defenders opposed the measure — in an effort to protect the rights of inmates.

The Sun-Times last year reported that masturbating inmates had become a common sight on the walk to and from holding cells where defense attorneys meet clients and at the jail and courthouse lockups. A letter sent to Chief Judge Timothy Evans from Public Defender Amy Campanelli outlined the problem.

In a letter Campanelli sent to Dart last year, she called it a “crisis” and called for guards to be assigned to every lockup in the criminal courthouse.

“Of late, it has become a daily occurrence,” she wrote. “Male detainees constantly expose themselves and masturbate while in the lockup behind the courtrooms.”

No other jail seems to have the same problem with public indecency on a similar scale to Cook County, according to the state Public Defenders Association and the Illinois Sheriffs’ Association.

Grabby Garcia might want to avoid Minnesota if HF 2800 passes

Sorry, I can't stop laughing over that MeToo shill Grabby Garcia, but this bill is no laughing matter, and it actually has a chance of passing.

If you want to follow the progress of HF 2800, CLICK HERE.

Description
Fifth degree criminal sexual conduct exclusion for nonconsensual, intentional touching of another person's clothed buttock eliminated.

http://www.kare11.com/article/news/bill-would-make-backside-groping-a-sex-crime/89-528698971

Bill would make backside groping a sex crime

A bill moving through the Minnesota Legislature would make it a sex crime to grab someone's clothed buttocks without permission.

Author: John Croman

Published: 10:57 PM CDT March 14, 2018
Updated: 10:57 PM CDT March 14, 2018

ST. PAUL, Minn. -- A bill moving through the Minnesota Legislature would make it a sex crime to grab someone's clothed buttocks without permission.

The fact it's not already a sex crime is surprising to some, but it's a loophole intentionally crafted by legislators in 1988 when they created the offense of 5th Degree Sexual Conduct.

"I am closing the loop on an exemption that I don’t believe belongs in the law," Rep. Regina Barr, an Inver Grove Heights Republican and chief author of the bill, told KARE.

"My bill specifically it makes criminal to touch somebody on the buttocks or derriere, without permission, in other words, it has to be nonconsensual and intentional touch."

Current law lists several descriptions of sexual contact that would constitute a violation, but carves out a clear exception -- "but does not include the intentional touching of the clothing covering the immediate area of the buttocks."

Ramsey County Attorney John Choi said, if the bill becomes law, prosecutors would use their discretion and consider the context. For example, the slapping that happens in athletics wouldn't land people in jail.

"I don’t know that any prosecutor would prosecute a situation like a baseball coach slapping somebody on the butt and saying get out on the field right now, right?" Choi remarked. "You still have to prove sexual intent."

He said the original exception was probably an attempt to protect coaches and athletes from overzealous prosecution.

Rep. Barr said she was already working on the proposal before then-Sen. Al Franken was accused by women of grabbing them, through their clothing, during photo ops. Barr, herself, says she has experienced harassment during her professional career.

"We have a different generation that’s not gonna tolerate some things that may have been tolerated before," she said.

Her bill cleared it's first hurdle Wednesday, winning approval of the House Public Safety Committee.

Choi is currently president of the Minnesota County Attorneys Association, which supports the legislation.

"If someone was doing this to my daughter without her permission, I'd be very concerned. I would want that person to face consequences."

He said it's difficult to prove an accused person's frame of mind, but circumstances surrounding the groping incident would come into evidence, including statements and texts made before and afterwards would shed light on intent.

This offense is a gross misdemeanor, which carries a maximum sentence of up to one year in jail. Choi said first-time violators would not have to register as sex offenders.

Coalinga CA incorporated civil commitment center, lost a tax bill because the patients can vote, now wants a bill to exclude them from voting

 “[I]f the constitutional conception of 'equal protection of the laws' means anything, it must at the very least mean that a bare . . . desire to harm a politically unpopular group cannot constitute a legitimate governmental interest.” Department of Agriculture v. Moreno, 413 U.S. 528, 534 (1973), cited in Romer v Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996)

It is obvious this bill is retaliation for the voting preferences of those at the indefinite detention center at Coalinga.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB2839

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

AB 2839, as introduced, Arambula. Voter qualifications: domicile: sexually violent predators.
Existing law requires the Legislature to define residence and provide for registration and free elections for the purposes of voting in the state. Existing law defines a “residence” for voting purposes to mean a person’s domicile, and provides that the domicile of a person is that place in which his or her habitation is fixed, wherein the person has the intention of remaining, and to which, whenever he or she is absent, the person has the intention of returning. Existing law provides that at a given time, a person may have only one domicile. Existing law provides that a person does not gain or lose a domicile solely by reason of his or her presence or absence from a place while kept in an asylum or prison.

Existing law defines sexually violent predator, for the purposes of, among other things, classifying persons for commitment to the custody of the State Department of State Hospitals for mental health treatment, as a person who has been convicted of a sexually violent offense against one or more victims and who has a diagnosed mental disorder that makes the person a danger to the health and safety of others in that it is likely that he or she will engage in sexually violent criminal behavior.
This bill would provide that the domicile of a person who has been adjudicated a sexually violent predator and who is committed for an indeterminate term to the custody of the department shall be the last known address of the person before his or her commitment.

BILL TEXT
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Section 2036 is added to the Elections Code, to read:
2036. The domicile of a person who has been adjudicated a sexually violent predator, as defined in Section 6600 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, and who is committed for an indeterminate term to the custody of the State Department of State Hospitals, shall be the last known address of the person before his or her commitment.

http://www.fresnobee.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/political-notebook/article202682219.html

After sexual predators swung an election, new law would change California voting rules

BY RORY APPLETON

rappleton@fresnobee.com

March 01, 2018 11:04 AM

Updated March 01, 2018 01:11 PM

Four months after the patients of Coalinga State Hospital doomed a 1-cent sales tax needed to maintain police and fire staffing in the city, the state Assembly is weighing a change to state voting law that would limit sexually violent predators’ voting rights.

Assemblyman Joaquin Arambula – the Fresno Democrat whose district encompasses much of Fresno County, including Coalinga – proposed the change on Feb. 16. In an interview this week, Arambula said he became aware of the issue after The Bee’s initial reporting on the failed ballot measure in November.

“I was shocked to find out that sexually violent predators were able to affect an outcome on something as important as public safety,” Arambula said. “This impacted the jobs of 23 police officers and firefighters who are desperately needed in Coalinga.”

Arambula’s one-page bill would set the residence status of any sexually violent predator committed to an indeterminate term in a California state hospital to his or her last known address.

Current law allows some patients at Coalinga State Hospital to vote in Coalinga, as the city annexed the hospital years ago to increase its population – a common tactic for small cities hoping to appear larger to attract potential businesses. A larger population count by the U.S. census also can bring more federal and tax revenues to a city for law enforcement, housing, transportation and other needs.

The proposed change must pass the Assembly and Senate before the governor can decide whether to sign it into law.

In November, a group of patients and former patients – organized as a group called Detainee-Americans for Civic Equality (DACE) – opted to oppose Coalinga’s Measure C, which would have raised the sales tax to pay for existing public services. Voting records show most of the hospital’s 304 registered voters voted against the tax, which failed by just 37 votes.

Robert Ferguson, a former patient and registered sex offender living in Fresno, is the community liaison for DACE. On Tuesday, he sent out a letter to activists and the news media blasting Arambula’s proposed legislation and threatening to do everything he can to keep the assemblyman from winning re-election this year.

In his letter, Ferguson said that patients at Coalinga are civil detainees, not prisoners. Many have been in custody for decades and will likely spend the rest of their lives in the hospital, he added.

Patients have no ties to their former addresses, Ferguson said, whereas measures in Coalinga do have a limited impact on them . The proposed sales tax hike would have increased prices at the hospital’s cafeteria, for example.

Arambula said he did not speak to any patients about voting in last November’s election this specific issue prior to proposing the law.

“The sexually violent predators don’t even use” community services in Coalinga, he said. “It’s much more appropriate for them to vote in the communities they will be returned to.”

The fallout from the defeated tax measure continues to reverberate through both Coalinga and the state hospital system.

In January, the hospital was locked down after patients began acting out due to a ban on certain personal electronic devices. The patients contend the hospital crackdown was in retaliation for the election, while the Department of State Hospitals says it was due to the spread of child pornography using the now-outlawed devices.

The patients have filed a lawsuit against the state.

The city of Coalinga has also filed an unrelated lawsuit against Fresno County, claiming the patients should never have been allowed to vote and demanding the election results be voided.

Coalinga proposed the sales tax after tough economic times led to a $557,000 deficit in its annual budget. The city’s Kmart, a major income producer, closed down, and income from its embrace of cannabis cultivation has been slow to materialize.

Donna Zink's Law: Washington State looks to allow all Level 1 registry info to be accessed by the public

We can just call this bill what it really is, the Donna Zink law. This bill MUST be opposed.

https://legiscan.com/WA/text/HB2487/id/1678933

(a) For all registered offenders ((classified as risk level I)),
15 the agency shall share information with other appropriate law
16 enforcement agencies and, if the offender is a student, the public or
17 private school regulated under Title 28A RCW or chapter 72.40 RCW
18 which the offender is attending, or planning to attend. The agency
19 may disclose, upon request, relevant, necessary, and accurate
20 information to any victim or witness to the offense, any individual
21 community member who lives near the residence where the offender
22 resides, expects to reside, or is regularly found, and any individual
23 who requests information regarding a specific offender((; (b) for
24 offenders classified as risk level II,)). The agency may also
25 disclose relevant, necessary, and accurate information to public and
26 private schools, child day care centers, family day care providers,
27 public libraries, businesses and organizations that serve primarily
28 children, women, or vulnerable adults, and neighbors and community
29 groups near the residence where the offender resides, expects to
30 reside, or is regularly found;

Miami-Dade County Ordinance 18-01 allows the arrest of homeless registrants made homeless by previous county ordinances

It is official, FAC has reported the gutless wonders at the Miami-Dade County Board of Commissioners unanimously passed the local ordinance designed to arrest the homeless registrants for being forced into homelessness by the very laws they passed. Since this revelation hasn't hit the news, I decided all I can do is share my letter to the commissioners, as if they were going to listen.

[Note, at the time I wrote the letter, the ordinance had a different number.]

From: Derek W. Logue of OnceFallen.com
To: Members of the Miami-Dade Council
Subject: Ordinance 172445

To the Miami City Council,

My name is Derek Logue, and I represent OnceFallen, an activist and support site for Registered Citizens. I have been trying to assist those who are forced to live at the Hialeah homeless registrant camp. In Christmas 2016, I spend Christmas at the camp. I have also documented the effects of the Lauren Book law on my website.(1)  I have also endured homelessness and the difficulty of finding housing as a registered citizen.

I’d like to share that personal experience as a registrant. I have lived in a couple of states since my release. My conviction took place in Alabama, and they have a 2000 feet restriction. I could not find any housing in the state because those newly released from prison have no resources to find housing. I ultimately found a program in Ohio willing to take me. Now, in Ohio, we had a 1000 foot residency restriction in place. Still, it took me seven months and 131 individual phone calls to find a place to live. In 2011, residency restriction laws were deemed to be punitive and could not be applied retroactively. I had to move a few years after this decision came out, and it only took me 4 weeks and 31 calls to find a place to live.

The point of all this is to address the dubious claim this Lauren Book 2500 foot restriction ordinance has no impact on housing availability. I think the difficulty of all these county agencies, especially the Homeless Trust, cannot find sufficient housing with their vast amount of resources condemns this denial of the Book ordinance as the root of the problem as absurd. It was found in 2012 that 22.7% of the total number of homeless registrants in the state of Florida live right here in Miami-Dade County.(2)  The only other county coming close to this number is Broward County, which, not-so-coincidentally, also has 2500 foot living restrictions.

The people who have been missing from this narrative are the camp residents. I have heard a number of absurd statements, such as the one where someone suggesting homeless registrants roll up in a Mercedes demanding benefits. It is entirely possible that statement could be true but it is because some of those living at the camp in Hialeah aren’t there because they cannot afford a place; many the camp are there because they are trying to obey a draconian law and it is the only known option to them. If a nationally recognized activist for the rights of registered persons struggled for months just to find a single residence in a location of 1000 foot residency restriction laws that apply to only schools and day care centers, then what hope is there for those who have to navigate a nearly half-mile restriction from even more places?

If you were placed in a situation where 99.9% of available housing, you have two choices: One, you obey the law and establish residence in the 0.1% of remaining real estate, or two, you take your chances and break the law in order to live like the rest of the human beings. It is quite amazing that so many choose option 1, but it really isn’t, since many want to obey the law, no matter how barbaric it may be. This Ron Book ordinance (and be honest, it was Ron, not Lauren, who spearheaded this law and thus should be named for him) is the root cause of this dilemma.

The Book family claims they have tried to help the camp residents. That is a complete fabrication. It was well documented by the media those who did receive assistance after the city shut down the JTC received far less assistance than Ron Book has claimed. Ron Book received $1 million to provide temporary housing to the displaced registrants, but less than three months later, the displaced registrants were facing eviction from their temporary housing. About 20 faced eviction within a single month of displacement. Despite efforts to prevent clustering, two clusters of displaced registrants formed, one at a trailer park in Allapattah, the other in a secluded area in the Shorecrest community. Some were displaced from temporary shelter within mere hours.(3)  A number of former JTC camp registrants were even temporarily housed in the parking lot of the Florida Department of Corrections.(4)  As far as the claim JTC residents aren’t at this current camp, I know that to be false.

Why is this council continuing to rely on these same failed agencies with the same tasks and continue to accept their same debunked claims as Gospel? The popular definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result each time. This council gave the task to cleaning up the mess created by the Ron Book ordinance to Ron Book and his daughter once before. This poses a very important question—if the Book family, with their millions of dollars and the backing of the Miami-Dade council and a decade of time to resolve this issue could not find housing for the homeless camp residents, what hope do those at the camp have of resolving the issue themselves?

The Book family had not been to the Hialeah camp in years. Many residents never even heard of Ron and Lauren Book. But they know that they could not trust the Homeless Trust. I visited the camp twice in 2016—once to see the camp for myself and talk to residents, and once during Christmas to bring some supplies to the neediest residents at the camp. That is two more times than the Book family or the Miami-Dade Homeless Trust visited the camp in 2016. Many residents never met the Book family until the Books engaged in a public spectacle only after the local media brought this issue to the surface again. The Books are taking action to prevent critics from speaking out, including filing bogus litigation to silence critics.

The Books had no desire then, and have no desire today to help those at the camp have stable homes. They have repeated referred to everyone on the public registry as “creeping crud,” “monsters,” “incurable,” and “ticking time bombs.” It should be no surprise that camp residents would not trust the Books or the Homeless Trust. Who would trust anyone to help when the people charged to help them call them vile names and spew so much venom against them? Would a member of the NAACP come to the Aryan Brotherhood for advice on race relations? Would a Christian ask a Satanist for advice on Scripture? Why would a camp resident ask the very people responsible for keeping them in a state of homelessness to help them out of homelessness? I wouldn’t. Quite frankly, if I had been unfortunate enough to live at that camp, I would have honestly considered absconding.

Passing a law to allow police to arrest camp residents for being forced to live at a homeless camp by virtue of law is simply sweeping the problem your council under the rug. Maybe this will be the action that finally sends these residency restriction laws crashing down to reality. You’ve paraded this naked Emperor around for over a decade now, and people are getting tired of pretending this Emperor you have is wearing a luxurious robe. We can see every imperfection, every fold, and every wrinkle in your Emperor. The so-called Lauren Book Child Safety Ordinance is the festering, cancerous pustule protruding prominently on the face of this city and it needs to be surgically removed. All the L’Oreal makeup in existence could not cover this tumor.

Repealing the Book law isn’t that hard. Iowa scaled back 2000 foot residency restrictions in 2009.(5)  Wilwaukee WI scaled their restrictions back just last year, three years after passing 2000 foot restrictions.(6)  Like Miami, they thought they could just banish their way out of a homeless, but the media studied the homeless registrant issue and found the following:

“Rather than reducing the number of sex offenders, the ordinance has put more than 200 of them in the street and failed to keep new offenders from moving into the city, a Journal Sentinel analysis has found... The ordinance bans many sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of areas where children are commonly found, such as schools, parks and day care centers. In Milwaukee, that means hundreds of sex offenders are limited to 117 possible housing units. And even those 117 units might not be available to rent or buy.”(7)  Does it sound familiar? It should. This is the same thing the media has stated numerous times about Miami!

How much more evidence do you need to see we need a repeal of the Book law rather than a law to arrest people fore obeying a draconian and completely unnecessary law? The Book family has been allowed to use the law as a tool of vengeance for far too long, and it is beyond time this council grows some gumption and rejects this completely asinine proposal. Repeal the Lauren Book “Child Safety” Ordinance instead!

 1. http://www.oncefallen.com/juliatuttlecauseway.html

 2. Jill Levenson et al. “Transient Sex Offenders and Residence Restrictions in Florida.” 2013

 3.  Robert Samuels. “For Miami-Dade sex offenders, wandering awaits.” Miami Herald, July 27, 2010; Adam H. Beasley, Jennifer Lebovich. “Sex offenders who lived under Miami causeway evicted from hotel.” Miami Herald. April 20, 2017. 

 4.  See http://www.oncefallen.com/sitebuilder/images/former-jtc-resident-doc-lot-2010-a-512x381.jpg

 5.  Logue, Derek. “Banishment By Attrition: The Truth About Residency Restrictions.” OnceFallen.com. 28 Aug. 2015. Web.  <http://www.oncefallen.com/residencylaws.html>

 6.  Spicuzza, Mary. “Milwaukee Common Council votes to lift sex offender residency restrictions.” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. 6 Sept. 2017. Web. <https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/local/milwaukee/2017/09/06/milwaukee-common-council-votes-lift-sex-offender-residency-restrictions/638400001/>

 7.  Carpenter, Jacob. “Sex offender ordinance hasn’t worked as planned, putting public at greater risk.” Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. 20 Aug. 2016. Web. < https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/local/2016/08/20/sex-offender-ordinance-worked-planned-putting-public-greater-risk/88948028/>

MeToo, MeToo: NebrASSka looks to pass Affirmative Consent law

The much derided "Yes Means Yes" or "Affirmative Consent" law is spreading to Nebraska, of all places.

If you want to neck among the cornfields and cow pies, don't forget to print this CONSENT FORM, cross out California, write in Nebraska, get it notarized, and you're good to go.

Go Huskers!

(On a related note, does this mean Nebraska pols will have to get consent of of the people before passing legislation that screws the public?)

http://journalstar.com/legislature/bill-would-convert-consent-standard-for-sex-to-yes-means/article_0e748170-04c7-5fb5-9394-524b6937b59f.html

Bill would convert consent standard for sex to 'yes means yes'
JoANNE YOUNG Lincoln Journal Star  Jan 11, 2018 Updated 10 hrs ago

A Lincoln senator wants to flip the script on giving consent for sex.

Instead of the common rule of "no means no," which implies that unless a person says no, the other person in a sexual encounter assumes there's permission, an affirmative consent would be required. 

Silence would not mean it's OK. 

Sen. Patty Pansing Brooks introduced a bill (LB988) Thursday that would adopt affirmative consent as the standard for criminal sexual assault cases. 

As it is now, state law says a person must express a lack of consent through words or conduct. 

With the bill, consent means words or overt actions that indicate a knowing and voluntary agreement, freely given, to engage in sexual contact or intercourse. A person could also still withdraw consent with words or conduct.

According to the bill, these things would not imply or give consent: current or previous dating, social or sexual relationship by itself; how the person is dressed; the victim's use of drugs or alcohol. 

The University of Nebraska already uses the affirmative standard in its sexual misconduct policy. 

Pansing Brooks said a college student led the way on the bill. 

Brodey Weber, a sophomore at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, has been interested in the topic since high school, when he went to a national Young Democrats convention. He heard a speaker there, the president of the California state senate, Kevin de Leon, the first in the nation to introduce a "Yes Means Yes" bill. 

Writing in The Washington Post, de Leon and Hannah-Beth Jackson said that while “no means no” has become a well-known slogan, it places the burden on victims, making it their responsibility to show resistance.

No means no "has also been mocked and twisted into offensive slogans by some college fraternities. Others, like conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, have contorted it further, promulgating the notion that no really means yes 'if you know how to spot it,'" they said. 

Weber came back to Lincoln, and for a class project researched laws on affirmative standards in other states, such as California, Montana, New York and Illinois, to see how Nebraska could follow their lead. In other states, the bills have had bipartisan support, he said.  

"The way I looked at it is, I can't keep waiting for someone else in Nebraska to finally do something about it," he said. "I've always been a very big believer in activism. If I want something changed, I have to do what I can to change it." 

When he interned in Pansing Brooks' office, he offered her office his research. The senator then crafted a bill and brought it forward. 

If the bill would be passed, Weber acknowledged, it would take time to convert to an affirmative-consent culture. 

But it didn't take him long to understand the idea that in sexual encounters a person needs to get a yes. 

"I don't think it should be the hardest thing for individuals to understand that to engage in sexual activity they just need a clear, enthusiastic and simple yes to do so," he said. 

And when drugs or alcohol are involved, "it is very important to be even more careful just because of how slippery and messy it can get," he said. 

It really takes a creepy pol to come up with a dumb acronym like the CREEPER Act

Okay, I need to ask a perfectly legitimate question here-- who sits around all day thinking of things that people on the registry might potentially do so a proactive law like this one could be passed? Politicians are some of the creepiest people.

It took a real sick mind to come up with an offensive acronym too. Interestingly enough, the term "creeper" has nothing to do with actual registered persons, so these out-of-touch politicians just pulled something off the internet and misused it.

First off, the term "creeper" is a stupid term Millenials (mainly campus Feminist types) made up to annoy old people or bully and humiliate socially inept, lonely people. You generally see this term among people not old enough to drink but old enough to have a social media/ online dating account. But the person who decided this was a great acronym should get his own nod for coming up with such an asinine acronym.

The acronym Curbing Realistic Exploitative Electronic Pedophilic Robots (CREEPER) does not make sense when you think about it. The silicone dolls one can currently legally buy for sexual purposes are not even robots. Even if they were robots, can robots be "pedophilic"? Whatever the case, this is just plain stupid.

The bill, not the idiots who wrote it, is the nominee here, though.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr4655/details

https://govtrackinsider.com/creeper-act-would-ban-sex-dolls-portraying-children-21d2af0ba073

CREEPER Act would ban sex dolls portraying children

Sex dolls exist and nobody is trying to ban them — but what about sex dolls portraying children?

What the bill does
The CREEPER Act would prevent the distribution or importing of such child sex dolls in the U.S. The products are primarily manufactured in Asia and feature portrayals of girls as young as age five.

The full name is the Curbing Realistic Exploitative Electronic Pedophilic Robots (CREEPER) Act.

The bill was introduced in December 2017 by Rep. Daniel Donovan, Jr. (R-NY11). It’s labelled H.R. 4655 in the House.

What supporters say
Supporters argue the bill would prevent a new and growing problem among pedophiles.

“It’s a uniquely vile person who preys on children to fulfill horrific pedophilic urges. During my 20 years as a prosecutor, I put away animals who played out their disgusting fantasies on innocent children. What I saw and heard was enough to make anybody sick,” Donovan said in a press release.

“Now, as a legislator in Congress, I’m introducing a bill to ban the newest outlet for pedophiles: child sex dolls. They don’t belong in our communities.”

What opponents say
GovTrack Insider was unable to locate any statements of opposition to the bill from a sitting member of Congress, unsurprisingly. However, some could argue that no actual human children are directly harmed by sex dolls portraying children, however uncomfortable it may make some people feel.

One of the dolls’ primary manufacturers, Japan’s Shin Takagi, argues that the dolls help prevent pedophilia towards actual children. “We should accept that there is no way to change someone’s fetishes,” Takagi told The Atlantic. “I am helping people express their desires, legally and ethically. It’s not worth living if you have to live with repressed desire.”

Even though Takagi suggests that using the dolls would prevent people from engaging in real-life crimes involving children, the evidence may seem to suggest otherwise. After the U.K. passed a law banning the importation of such dolls, The Guardian quoted Deputy Director for Intelligence Operations at the Border Force Dan Scully as saying, “These items were going to individuals, in many cases, who were committing other offences in relation to [the] harm of children.”

Odds of passage
The bill has attracted a bipartisan mix of 12 cosponsors: nine Republicans and three Democrats.

It awaits a possible vote in the House Judiciary Committee.

This article was written by GovTrack Insider staff writer Jesse Rifkin.

115th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 4655

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

December 14, 2017

Mr. Donovan (for himself, Mr. Johnson of Ohio, Mr. Marino, Mr. Rutherford, Ms. Barragán, Ms. Tenney, Mr. Bacon, Mr. King of New York, Mr. Stewart, Ms. Kuster of New Hampshire, Miss Rice of New York, Mr. Gowdy, and Mr. Bishop of Utah) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit the importation or transportation of child sex dolls, and for other purposes.

1.Short title
This Act may be cited as the Curbing Realistic Exploitative Electronic Pedophilic Robots Act of 2017 or as the CREEPER Act of 2017.

2.Findings
The Congress finds as follows:

(1)There is a correlation between possession of the obscene dolls, and robots, and possession of and participation in child pornography.
(2)The physical features, and potentially the personalities of the robots are customizable or morphable and can resemble actual children.
(3)Some owners and makers of the robots have made their children interact with the robots as if the robots are members of the family.
(4)The robots can have settings that simulate rape.
(5)The dolls and robots not only lead to rape, but they make rape easier by teaching the rapist about how to overcome resistance and subdue the victim.
(6)For users and children exposed to their use, the dolls and robots normalize submissiveness and normalize sex between adults and minors.
(7)As the Supreme Court has recognized, obscene material is often used as part of a method of seducing child victims.
(8)The dolls and robots are intrinsically related to abuse of minors, and they cause the exploitation, objectification, abuse, and rape of minors.
3.Prohibition of importation or transportation of child sex dolls
Section 1462 of title 18, United States Code, is amended—

(1)in paragraph (a), by striking or at the end;
(2)in paragraph (b), by striking or at the end;
(3)by inserting after paragraph (c) the following:
(d)any child sex doll; or
; and

(4)by adding at the end the following:
In this section, the term child sex doll means an anatomically-correct doll, mannequin, or robot, with the features of, or with features that resemble those of, a minor, intended for use in sexual acts.