New Mexico Pedo Bill Revealed

[shon46]

This may not concern people not living in New Mexico, but I think it should. It is likely going to come up in other states also.

REPUBLICAN PARTY OF NEW MEXICO CONDEMNS HORRIFYING DEMOCRAT-LED BILL THAT REMOVES PUNISHMENT FOR CHILD PREDATORS.

DECEITFUL SEX CRIMES LEGISLATION IS HIDDEN INSIDE FISH & WILDLIFE PENALTIES BILL!

newmexico.gop

Republican Party of New Mexico


REPUBLICAN PARTY OF NEW MEXICO CONDEMNS HORRIFYING DEMOCRAT-LED BILL THAT REMOVES PUNISHMENT FOR CHILD PREDATORS.

DECEITFUL SEX CRIMES LEGISLATION IS HIDDEN INSIDE FISH & WILDLIFE PENALTIES BILL!

 

[URedskin54]

All the Q people really did a disservice to issues like this by making every dumb thing a pedophile conspiracy. I was ready to dismiss this out of hand because of that, but yeah this actually does seem to be a pretty jacked up piece of legislation.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

I'd want to hear arguments for and against before actually making a decision on it, but it doesn't seem to be appropriate in eliminating mandatory minimums. There are probably cases outside of the norm, that this bill is targeting, in which the minimum sentence was not exactly appropriate but couldn't be gotten around by the judge or the jury. I'd like to hear arguments for and against the cases within norms, and without norms before making a definitive statement.

I find it amusing when people make claims like it is hidden in a fish and wildlife bill. If a congressman can't do his job and read every bill that he/she votes from page 1 to the end, then it is the failure of the congressman not the bill. They should operate like this, but if the congress person really wanted to be lazy about their job, then that's what congress person's aid's are for. They read it and summarize. Then the congress person can pay special attention to subjects he might have missed.

It is also about prison rape penalties, and a few other things. What could be complained about is putting in several legislative changes on different subjects to be voted on as a unit, as opposed to keeping them separate. That is the real issue. This should be separated into bills on each issue to vote separately for each item. Instead it is an aggregate vote of yes or no on all issues. I don't see it as being hidden though. If it were being hidden then it wouldn't have paragraph after paragraph on each subject. Hidden is a very brief paragraph in the middle of legislation making the change. It is not that.

 

[shon46]

I'd want to hear arguments for and against before actually making a decision on it, but it doesn't seem to be appropriate in eliminating mandatory minimums. There are probably cases outside of the norm, that this bill is targeting, in which the minimum sentence was not exactly appropriate but couldn't be gotten around by the judge or the jury. I'd like to hear arguments for and against the cases within norms, and without norms before making a definitive statement.

I find it amusing when people make claims like it is hidden in a fish and wildlife bill. If a congressman can't do his job and read every bill that he/she votes from page 1 to the end, then it is the failure of the congressman not the bill. They should operate like this, but if the congress person really wanted to be lazy about their job, then that's what congress person's aid's are for. They read it and summarize. Then the congress person can pay special attention to subjects he might have missed.

It is also about prison rape penalties, and a few other things. What could be complained about is putting in several legislative changes on different subjects to be voted on as a unit, as opposed to keeping them separate. That is the real issue. This should be separated into bills on each issue to vote separately for each item. Instead it is an aggregate vote of yes or no on all issues. I don't see it as being hidden though. If it were being hidden then it wouldn't have paragraph after paragraph on each subject. Hidden is a very brief paragraph in the middle of legislation making the change. It is not that.

Damn, 🤦🏽‍♂️ Can’t believe I actually agree with you!