California goes off the fucking rails. No longer a felony to knowingly infect someone with AIDS.

Discussion in 'The Red Room' started by Zombie, Oct 9, 2017.

  1. Federal Farmer

    Federal Farmer Member of Species 5618

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    15,182
    Location:
    South Park, Colorado
    Ratings:
    +11,403
    It's no different than poisoning someone.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. Kilometres O'Brien

    Kilometres O'Brien Keiko makes me wear it

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    20,540
    Location:
    Transporter Room 3
    Ratings:
    +13,642
    Based on what?
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
  3. Ten Lubak

    Ten Lubak Flashlight Can't Handle Wordforge

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2006
    Messages:
    6,698
    Ratings:
    +11,782
    if you don't disclose that you're HIV positive before you have sex, that's a serious, serious crime.

    Some cunt in this thread tried to diminish this sort of crime by saying HIV is "manageable" with medication these days. Fuck that, it's a huge, life changing thing taking meds for this, that no one should wish on anyone else.

    Conversely, the people bringing up bugchasing are also cunts because that's a group of people that is so in the minority, it's minuscule - they just latch on to it because it feeds into the anti gay narrative. It's also presumably a mutual decision, not like fucking someone when you have hiv and not telling them.

    California is out of its mind here though. It should definitely be a felony.
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Love Love x 1
  4. Tererun

    Tererun Magical Girl

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2014
    Messages:
    7,719
    Location:
    South Florida watching the meandering dead
    Ratings:
    +5,629
    Well, thanks for all of that. It seems that just like straight people gays have some people who do stuff like this. So it is really not a gay thing as much as it is a human thing and that is not what is implied or suggested by others who were posting here. This is why I asked for some real data because I knew it would show that unfortunately being gay does not make you immune to being a sick asshole. So these bug chasers are not actually a gay thing and the wiki articles are wrong. It is just the way they go about it in the gay community and the attempt of others to demonize homosexuality by associating it with this sort of sadistic cruelty. Perhaps if @Federal Farmer was not such a child he could have noticed something like this. Thank you for showing me you are capable of thought @Zombie .
    • Dumb Dumb x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • GFY GFY x 1
  5. Tererun

    Tererun Magical Girl

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2014
    Messages:
    7,719
    Location:
    South Florida watching the meandering dead
    Ratings:
    +5,629
    Holy fucking shit, thank you. Well said.
    • Dumb Dumb x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. Quest

    Quest labour in the very fire Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    15,664
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Ratings:
    +11,889
    How exactly does it make that more likely? HIV (or any infection, really) doesn’t spread randomly, but along specific vectors. What would increase one’s likelihood of infection is engaging in risky behaviors. Trusting the strangers with whom one engages in said behaviors is foolish, whether or not failure to disclose status is a felony or misdemeanor. Do you really think the kind of person who would do that can be trusted to follow the law?
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Dumb Dumb x 2
  7. K.

    K. Sober

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    22,558
    Ratings:
    +20,091
    I think you misunderstood the point there. The argument is not that being infected is no big deal because the disease is manageable, but that the risk of infection can be eradicated because the disease is manageable.

    @Order2Chaos has it exactly right: reckless endangerment of others remains a crime, and by updating the law to the current state of medical science, it affords better protection than before.
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Dumb Dumb x 3
  8. Zombie

    Zombie dead and loving it

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    38,069
    Ratings:
    +23,185
    It really shows how morally bankrupt the left on this board is.

    Knowingly infecting someone with HIV is an act of evil. It should be a felony and should warrant serious jail time.

    Manageable? Sure if you're able to afford the medicine. But even if you can afford the medicine it doesn't mean you won't die from it.

    California has just fucked over poor people because it's the poor people who will have the most trouble dealing with being infected by HIV.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  9. The Flashlight

    The Flashlight Contributes nothing worthwhile

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    16,508
    Ratings:
    +5,513
    As I said upthread, it's a symptom of the lack of moral compass that defines Leftism. When you abandon notions of God, when you reject the notion that there's any external rubric to determine right vs. wrong, when you abandon your own ability to exercise common sense in making value judgments (because value judgments are bad as someone's feelings may get hurt), when you embrace situational ethics and worship at the alter of muticultural equivalency, then this is the result.

    Pathetic individuals who don't think that knowingly and intentionally infecting an unwitting sex partner with a deadly, incurable disease should be a serious crime. Because they've bought into the activist propaganda of GLAAD.

    The dirty little secret of the homosexual propaganda industry is that AIDS drugs don't work for everyone. And even if they do slow the progression of the disease, the debilitating effects of the drugs leave many wishing they were dead.

    Exactly. Magic Johnson is still alive because he was rich enough to afford the very best medical care and the most current drugs available at the time.

    Charlie Sheen - same story.

    But Joe Blow down the street, who's living paycheck to paycheck? Not so lucky......
    • Dumb Dumb x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • TL;DR TL;DR x 1
  10. K.

    K. Sober

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    22,558
    Ratings:
    +20,091
    Is this a deliberate troll or do you really not understand that deliberately infecting someone with HIV is not what the change in this law is about at all?
    • Winner Winner x 5
    • Dumb Dumb x 2
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  11. steve2^4

    steve2^4 Aged Meat

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    8,012
    Ratings:
    +4,008
    30 some states have laws about HIV. Most pertain to reporting and counseling saying nothing about felonies or misdemeanors. The remainder have no laws calling out HIV including (the horror) Texas. Why do you think this is?

    Deliberately infecting someone with HIV is battery. This is covered by existing laws without calling it out in statutes.
    • Dumb Dumb x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • popcorn popcorn x 1
  12. Quest

    Quest labour in the very fire Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    15,664
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Ratings:
    +11,889
    Again, how will this change result in an increase in HIV infections? People engaged in recklessly unsafe behavior don’t generally consider the legal conaequences of their actions, especially if they’re not even considering the long term consequences to their own health.

    No, this is not about preventing infection. This is about punishing people after the fact. And for what? Not for “deliberate infection,” as people have received long prison sentences even when no infection occurs, sometimes even when no sexual contact occurs. This is about punishing people who have contracted the icky gay plague, without regard to whether or not any harm has been caused. 100% based on prejudice and superstition, not medical science.
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Dumb Dumb x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Fantasy World Fantasy World x 1
  13. Quest

    Quest labour in the very fire Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    15,664
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Ratings:
    +11,889
    Gotta love right wing “morality.”

    Do we educate kids about sex and how to protect themselves from diseases? Hell no! Do we make condoms available and provide free testing? Heaven forbid! No, let’s just make it a felony to catch a virus. That’ll show ‘em. :unuts:
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Dumb Dumb x 4
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. TheBurgerKing

    TheBurgerKing The Monarch of Flavor

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Messages:
    2,624
    Location:
    In a Baneblade
    Ratings:
    +1,315
    The last I checked, the monthly cost for HIV meds was around $3,000. That's ~$36,000 in income a year that a person would have to sacrifice just to maintain some semblance of normalcy, and that's without any added Shkrellis.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  15. Stallion

    Stallion Team Euro!

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    8,864
    Ratings:
    +5,792
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  16. The Flashlight

    The Flashlight Contributes nothing worthwhile

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    16,508
    Ratings:
    +5,513
    You are the dumbest cunt on the planet.

    Nobody is talking about criminalizing contracting the disease.

    But you know that. You're just intentionally obfuscating.

    And for the record, kids do receive sex education, and are told about condoms. Condoms are easier to get than Doritos.
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Fantasy World Fantasy World x 2
  17. Captain X

    Captain X Bully!

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Messages:
    13,959
    Location:
    The Land of Snow and Cold
    Ratings:
    +8,662
    Which is an entirely different issue.

    Why should it not be a felony to intentionally give someone HIV? :bailey:

    Considering I'm the one arguing in favor of consent here and you're the one trying to say giving someone HIV is no big deal, it's pretty obvious who has the backwards views here. :diacanu:

    That isn't the point. The point is that intentionally giving someone ebola should be a felony, and perhaps even be considered murder or attempted murder given the deadly nature of ebola.

    There are people who go around intentionally spreading HIV. There was a pretty recent case I saw posted about on Facebook, and a while back there was a case that was used as the basis for a Law & Order episode.

    This isn't about there being boogymen lining up trying to give people HIV or not, it's that if there is ever a case where this happens, the punishment for it should be more severe than what the law allows for a misdemeanor.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  18. Captain X

    Captain X Bully!

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Messages:
    13,959
    Location:
    The Land of Snow and Cold
    Ratings:
    +8,662
    Yeah, I'm sure that's no big deal. :rolleyes:

    The part where someone can die from it and that it was an intentional act.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. Kilometres O'Brien

    Kilometres O'Brien Keiko makes me wear it

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    20,540
    Location:
    Transporter Room 3
    Ratings:
    +13,642
    As has already been pointed out, attempted murder is a crime. If there is sufficient evidence of someone spreading HIV or ebola with intent to murder, that felony sufficiently covers such scenarios. Intent to murder is a high standard, though (i.e. it requires actually intending to kill someone). You're thinking of criminal negligence, which triggers involuntary manslaughter, not murder. Reckless indifference may apply, but as has been pointed out, transmission is not certain and death is even less likely.

    The reasons for making the existing HIV law a misdemeanor have already been explained: it aligns with existing treatment of diseases in criminal law both in CA and in the majority of states, it removes the disincentive to forego HIV testing, it fixes the loophole in existing law that leads to convictions without evidence of even physical contact, it fixes the loophole further by preventing conduct that is otherwise already a misdemeanor from escalating to felony just because of the suspect's medical condition, it's a recognition that the felony law was essentially a fear-based response against HIV victims and/or homosexuality, and it is a crime which does not occur very often.

    But I understand you struggle with reading, so it's no surprise you missed those.
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017 at 1:17 AM
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Dumb Dumb x 2
  20. Quest

    Quest labour in the very fire Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    15,664
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Ratings:
    +11,889
    They might as well be. They want it to be a felony to have the virus and be in a situation where another person might get the idea a sexual encounter is in the offing. Whether or not any sex occurs. Whether or not the virus is transmitted.

    We could just make everybody with HIV go around ringing a bell and calling, “Unclean! Unclean!”
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Dumb Dumb x 2
    • Fantasy World Fantasy World x 1
  21. Captain X

    Captain X Bully!

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Messages:
    13,959
    Location:
    The Land of Snow and Cold
    Ratings:
    +8,662
    I just love the way you guys keep obfuscating, downplaying, and making excuses because you think this is some kind of anti-gay thing. :jayzus: Do I really have to be the one to point out that the disease doesn't discriminate? Okay, so tell me then, if this is just about gay-bashing, why are you for keeping the law at all? Shouldn't you be advocating for getting rid of it altogether rather than just making it comically toothless? No, this isn't something we should rely on existing murder or manslaughter law to address. This is a specific act, and it should be addressed by a specific law, with distinctions made for the type of deadly disease involved.

    Now, straight up, if you knew someone intentionally infected you with HIV, whether through sexual contact or some other means, do you think that person should only face up to a year in jail?
    • Facepalm Facepalm x 1
  22. Quest

    Quest labour in the very fire Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    15,664
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Ratings:
    +11,889
    The only obsfucating is being done by those of you who keep pretending this is about “deliberate infection.” Deliberate infection with malicious intent is still a felony in California, as it should be.

    And no, it doesn’t need to have be an anti-gay thing. Let’s say you’re a woman living with HIV, and you don’t want any of your co-workers to know your status. Workplaces being what they are, a lot of mildly flirtatious banter occurs, in which you sometimes participate, but have no intention of following up with any more intimate relations. Then a new guy at work gets the wrong idea and develops a serious crush on you. You try to rebuff but he is undeterred. He has a few too many at the holiday party and puts the moves on you. At what point should you be required to divulge your HIV status or face felony charges?
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Dumb Dumb x 2
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  23. T.R

    T.R Don't Care

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Messages:
    5,067
    Ratings:
    +4,363
    Then you're an idiot.

    Like I said, you're an idiot.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  24. T.R

    T.R Don't Care

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Messages:
    5,067
    Ratings:
    +4,363
    Do like every other woman with half a brain does and tell him no. It's not that complicated
    • Facepalm Facepalm x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
  25. Quest

    Quest labour in the very fire Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    15,664
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Ratings:
    +11,889
    You’ve told him no at least half a dozen times already, he doesn’t get it. Now he’s demanding to know why you “led him on.” Have you committed a felony?
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
  26. Anna

    Anna Here for the Lulz Formerly Important

    Joined:
    May 17, 2005
    Messages:
    33,766
    Location:
    San Diego
    Ratings:
    +34,247
    Because men always respect that, even if you're not dating anyone else.

    :brood:
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
    • TL;DR TL;DR x 1
  27. TheBurgerKing

    TheBurgerKing The Monarch of Flavor

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Messages:
    2,624
    Location:
    In a Baneblade
    Ratings:
    +1,315
    You say this as if it's how regular men act, it's not. And should some hypothetical shithead co-worker who doesn't understand the word no keep pestering our hypothetical HIV woman, all she need do is file a complaint to either her boss or HR and the guy is fired, that's how the real world works.

    And to answer your earlier question on when she should disclose her status, the time is when there is a scenario where there is possible risk of exposure.
    • Fantasy World Fantasy World x 2
    • Dumb Dumb x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  28. Anna

    Anna Here for the Lulz Formerly Important

    Joined:
    May 17, 2005
    Messages:
    33,766
    Location:
    San Diego
    Ratings:
    +34,247
    That's the biggest load of fiction I've ever sat through, and I managed to sit through the entire Twilight series.
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • TL;DR TL;DR x 1
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
  29. TheBurgerKing

    TheBurgerKing The Monarch of Flavor

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Messages:
    2,624
    Location:
    In a Baneblade
    Ratings:
    +1,315
    So you're saying what exactly? That men's default is sexual harassment and jus can't control themselves, or that companies don't have HR departments and never fire men for sexual harassment?
    • popcorn popcorn x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
  30. Captain X

    Captain X Bully!

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Messages:
    13,959
    Location:
    The Land of Snow and Cold
    Ratings:
    +8,662
    Patriarchy, fuck-face! :diacanu: It's not that it's actually incredibly easy for a woman to get a guy fired by just an accusation, it's that it's still the 1960s and women are just seen as sex objects in the workplace. :garamet:
    • Fantasy World Fantasy World x 3