Showing posts with label 2023 Dumbest New Law/Bill. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2023 Dumbest New Law/Bill. Show all posts

Thursday, March 30, 2023

If passed as introduced, Arizona SB 1698 would force parents taking their kids to Drag Shows to register on the public sex offense registry

AZ State Senator Justine Wadsack, she's such a drag

The moment I saw a picture of AZ State Senator Justine Wadsack I assumed she wouldn't support such a bill. I mean, she looks like she participates in drag shows. Maybe she's self-loathing? There are some who are that way. They hate themselves so they bash something that's a part of who they are. 

I must point out that the engrossed version of the bill I saw removed the section I screenshot that included the "drag show" language. 

Bill Text of Introduced bill -- https://legiscan.com/AZ/text/SB1698/id/2670201


Bill Text as of 3/30/23 , where drag shows were removed but still added vague statement to the law-- https://legiscan.com/AZ/text/SB1698/id/2725925/Arizona-2023-SB1698-Engrossed.html

I'd also like to point out this segment is vague and could still be used to arrest those who engage in drag show performances since "prurient interest" is subject to the whims of people based on personal mores. 

Of course, the drag show segments can be reinstalled as the bill progresses, but even if it does not, the idea that AZ SB 1698 even suggested registering people for putting on a drag show is Shiitake-worthy. 

Article -- https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/arizona-senate-committees-pass-two-bills-in-gop-push-to-criminalize-drag-15604228

Arizona Senate Committees Pass Two Bills in GOP Push to Criminalize Drag

ELIAS WEISS FEBRUARY 24, 2023 12:15PM

A group of Republican state lawmakers focused on attacking LGBTQ Arizonans passed two bills that would criminalize drag shows, businesses that host them, and parents who take their children to see them.

SB 1698, sponsored by Senator Justine Wadsack, would make it a felony for parents to take their child to a drag show. The parents would have to register as sex offenders, too. SB 1030, sponsored by state Senator Anthony Kern, would make it a felony for some businesses to host drag shows.

Republicans in the Arizona Senate can’t decide if they want to label drag performers as sex workers or sex offenders. So, why not both?

Out to Lunch

SB 1698 would add drag shows to a state law about "dangerous crimes against children." The bill defines drag shows as adult-oriented performances and compares them to bestiality, child sex trafficking, second-degree murder, and sexual assault.

Under the proposal, adults who allow children to see drag shows could receive prison terms of five years and be required to register as sex offenders.

Wadsack said the idea for the bill came from conversations she had with the Log Cabin Republicans and Gays Against Groomers, two gay yet anti-trans conservative groups.

By a 3-1 vote, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed the bill on February 16. Its next step could be a vote by the full Senate.

Kern, Wadsack, and fellow Republican Senator Wendy Rogers voted to advance the bill. Democratic Senator Anna Hernandez cast the lone vote against it.

Republican Senator John Kavanagh did not vote. Democratic Senators Christine Marsh and Mitzi Epstein also did not vote. Why not? Because Kern, the committee chair, asked lawmakers to leave the hearing in shifts for lunch so members could continue considering legislation on the agenda. Kavanagh, Marsh, and Epstein were the first to leave, along with several people in the audience scheduled to testify.

Then, the bill passed with virtually no testimony or discussion in mere minutes.

‘Your Rhetoric Has Led to Mass Shootings’

SB 1030 would require permits for drag shows and zone businesses that host them as an “adult-oriented business," citing the shows as “sexually explicit.” The bill lumps drag shows in the same category as cabaret, adult entertainment, and even sex work.

Under the proposal, drag queens wouldn’t be allowed within a quarter-mile of any school or playground.

By a 5-3 vote, the Senate Government Committee passed the bill on February 16, and it can now be considered by the full Senate. Wadsack, Rogers, and fellow Republican Senators David Farnsworth, Janae Shamp, and Jake Hoffman voted to advance the bill. Democratic Senators Juan Mendez, Priya Sundareshan, and Eva Diaz voted against it.

The proposal defines a drag show as one in which drag performers “engage in singing, dancing, or a monologue or skit in order to entertain an audience of two or more people.” Critics of the legislation said the broad definition was problematic.

“The definition of drag shows doesn’t actually say anything about sexually explicit content. This bill would include a lot of things that aren’t even drag,” Jeanne Woodbury, interim executive director for Equality Arizona, told Phoenix New Times. “That creates a huge problem that isn’t within the scope of actual adult-oriented businesses.”

Business owners who host drag shows are worried that the bill threatens their livelihoods.

“Bars like mine are only open to people over 21 and are already highly regulated,” said Jeff Parales, owner of Kobalt in Midtown. “This new regulation will put an undue burden on businesses like mine.”

Parales said that labeling all drag queens as sexually explicit is a “red herring.” The bill is similar to “what they’re doing in Communist China and totalitarian regimes like Iran,” he said.

Hoffman, the committee chair, interrupted Parales’ testimony. “In those countries, they throw homosexuals off of roofs and kill them. You are out of order. If you continue speaking, you will be removed,” Hoffman said.

Hoffman then admitted that he has never been to a drag show.

‘I Should Parent With My Values’

Parales pointed out that drag entertainers help raise money for charities and nonprofits in Phoenix and statewide.

“Instead of focusing on real issues like funding education, you’ve insisted on targeting an already marginalized community,” he said. “Your rhetoric has led to mass shootings and attacks at small businesses like mine and the people who go to them.”

Lydia Burton, a gay mother from Phoenix, has been taking her 8-year-old daughter to drag story hour at a public library since the child was in preschool.

“Because of drag, my child has learned to be brave and kind, colorful and creative, and that art has purpose,” Burton testified. “Drag is not defined by adult content. Drag is art. Drag is family. Drag is our church.”

Burton reminded the committee that, last year, Arizona Republicans passed a parental bill of rights that then-Governor Doug Ducey signed into law. The measure states that parenting decisions are “exclusively reserved to a parent of a minor child without obstruction or interference from this state.”

“Whether you understand my family and my culture is not relevant,” Burton said. “We should all agree that I should parent my child in accordance with my values. I have the right to direct the upbringing of my child, and the government shall not infringe on that.”

Elijah Watson, a local Democratic activist with Keep Arizona Blue, called the bill a clear and divisive attack against queer people and drag performers by subjecting drag shows to the same prohibitions as strip clubs.

“It perpetuates the myth that has been pushed this legislative session by Republicans that drag is a form of sexual entertainment and that drag is an art form that promotes pedophilia and the grooming of children,” Watson said. “It does not. To say that this bill is offensive is an understatement because it is very clearly discriminatory.”

Nobody testified in support of the bill.

Monday, February 20, 2023

Oklahoma Senate Joint Resolution 11 will allow voters to decide whether Persons Forced to Register deserves constitutional rights

This is really bad. if this resolution advances, Oklahoma will allow the ignorant masses to decide if Persons Forced to Register are excluded from basic rights afforded to us by the state constitution. 

You already know few people will vote to grant even the most basic of human rights to Persons Forced to Register. 

http://www.oklegislature.gov/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=SJR11&Session=2300

Oklahoma Senate Joint Resolution 11 By State Sen. Bill Coleman (R)

AS INTRODUCED

A Joint Resolution directing the Secretary of State to refer to the people for their approval or rejection a proposed amendment to Section 15 of Article II of the Oklahoma Constitution; authorizing Legislature to enact provisions related to certain offenders; specifying certain allowable requirements; clarifying timing of required compliance; construing provisions; providing ballot title; and directing filing.

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE 1ST SESSION OF THE 59TH OKLAHOMA LEGISLATURE:

SECTION 1. The Secretary of State shall refer to the people for their approval or rejection, as and in the manner provided by law, the following proposed amendment to Section 15 of Article II of the Oklahoma Constitution to read as follows:

Section 15. A. No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, nor any law impairing the obligation of contracts, shall ever be passed. No conviction shall work a corruption of blood or forfeiture of estate: Provided, that this provision shall not prohibit the imposition of pecuniary penalties.

B. The Legislature may enact or amend by statute provisions related to sex offenders if such provisions are rationally related to protecting the public from sex-based crimes. Such provisions include but are not limited to those related to sex offender registration requirements, duration of registration requirements, proximity to areas frequented by vulnerable populations such as children, mentally disabled persons, and the elderly, and disclosures to be made by the offender. Persons required by law to be registered as a sex offender shall comply with any such enactments or amendments after implemented. Subsequent changes regulating residence of a person required by law to be registered as a sex offender shall be applicable when the offender establishes a new residence. A statute enacted by the Legislature in accordance with the requirements of this subsection shall not be deemed a violation of subsection A of this section.

Monday, January 30, 2023

Iowa HF 77 will force those no longer required to register to re-register in the state

Iowa's HF 77 will force Persons NO LONGER Forced to Register to reregister under a new Tier IV designation. The Tier IV will register for as long as they reside in Iowa (up to life, essentially); pay the $25 annual penalty fee; register name, DOB, address, conviction jurisdiction info, and submit photo; and while the info is not listed on the public registry, a member of the public can still access the info from the sheriff's office. Tier IVs may still be subject to employment and residency restrictions, and failure to comply is an aggravated misdemeanor for the first offense and a felony on subsequent offenses. 

Iowa has bad corn AND bad legislation. Their legislative website also sucks, so I can't copy-paste the entire bill below, so you'll have to read this idiotic bill on the I-OW-uh legislative website. 

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislation/BillBook?ga=90&ba=HF77

HouseFile77-Introduced

HOUSE FILE77 BY FISHER 

A BILL FOR An Act modifying SOR requirements by requiring S** O**s whose registration requirements have expired to reregister, and making penalties applicable.

Friday, January 20, 2023

The Arkansas Legislature is droning on and on... about prohibiting Registered Persons from owning and using drones

I'm surprised a backwater state like Arkansas even understands anything about modern technology, but I'd question the intelligence of Rep. Evans and Senator Hill. They probably have as much education as Lauren Boebert, if even that. 

https://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/Bills/FTPDocument?path=%2FBills%2F2023R%2FPublic%2FHB1125.pdf

State of Arkansas, 94th General Assembly, Regular Session2023 

HOUSE BILL 1125 By: Representative Evans & Senator Hill

For An Act To Be Entitled: AN ACT TO PROHIBIT A R** S** O** FROM PURCHASING, OWNING, POSSESSING, USING, OR OPERATING AN UNMANNED AIRCRAFT FOR PRIVATE USE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

TO PROHIBIT A R** S** O** FROM PURCHASING, OWNING, POSSESSING, USING, OR OPERATING AN UNMANNED AIRCRAFT FOR PRIVATE USE.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS:

SECTION 1. Arkansas Code § 5-4-109 is amended to read as follows:

5-4-109. Sentencing for s** offense.

A person who is convicted of an offense for which he or she is required to register as a s** o** under the S** O** R** Act of 28 1997, § 12-12-901 et seq., shall be notified at his or her sentencing by the court that he or she is prohibited from:

(1) Recording a person under fourteen (14) years of age under § 5-14-137 if he or she is assessed as a Level 3 or Level 4 o**; or

(2) Purchasing, owning, possessing, using, or operating an unmanned aircraft under § 5-14-138 if he or she is assessed as a Level 3 or Level 4 o**.

SECTION 2. Arkansas Code Title 5, Chapter 14, Subchapter 1, is amended to add an additional section to read as follows:

5-14-138. Registered o**  prohibited from purchasing, owning, possessing, using, or operating an unmanned aircraft.

(a) As used in this section, "unmanned aircraft" means an aircraft, including an aircraft commonly known as a drone, that is operated without the possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft and has the ability to photographically or electronically record.

(b) It is unlawful for a person who is required to register under the S** O**  R** Act of 1997, § 12-12-901 et seq., and who has been assessed as a Level 3 or Level 4 o**  to knowingly purchase, own, possess, use, or operate an unmanned aircraft.

(c) This section does not apply to a person who: (1) Is required to purchase, own, possess, use, or operate an unmanned aircraft as part of his or her employment; and (2) Purchases, owns, possesses, uses, or operates an unmanned aircraft as part of his or her employment.

(d) A violation of this section is a Class D felony.