The state Legislature this week passed a bill authored by Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, that protects sex workers from arrest when they report serious and violent crimes, such as rape.
Senate Bill 233 also ensures that the possession of condoms may not be used as probable cause to arrest someone for sex work or introduced as evidence to prosecute someone for sex work.
The bill had passed out of the Senate with a 28-10 vote on May 2 and passed the Assembly this week in a 30-9 vote. It is now headed to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office for signing.
SB 233 prioritizes public safety by allowing witnesses and victims to safely report crimes and identify criminals without hesitation.
Sixty percent of sex workers experience some form of violence while working, according to a 2014 study by the University of California at San Francisco.
“If sex workers risk arrest for reporting a crime, they simply won’t come forward, and violent criminals will go free,” Wiener said.
Wiener pointed out that by encouraging safer sex and not discouraging sex workers from carrying condoms, public health will also be improved.
The latest sexually transmitted diseases data released by the California Department of Public Health shows that rates of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis in 2017 were at their highest since mandated reporting
began in 1990.
The bill is supported by St. James Infirmary, US Prostitutes Collective, Erotic Service Providers Legal, Education and Research Project, Sex Worker Outreach Project and a number of other LGBTQ, public health and social justice organizations.
Newsom has 30 days to sign or veto the legislation.
45 comments
Just what we need. We’ve legalized and encouraged most crime at this point. Might as well complete our state’s descent into a modern Sodom and Gomorrah.
We also need a law to protect muggers if they turn in bank robbers as long as the mugger doesn’t have a club on him when questioned. How long do they hold hookers if they a caught maybe six hours total.
Does anyone else find it humorous that this bill was authored by a man named Wiener?
I noticed that too. Reminded me of Anthony Wiener, the disgraced congressman.
There is definitely a theme to all of Wiener’s legislation! Nothing ever earth shattering. And, nothing that benefits California as a whole. Just a bunch of nonsense garbage legislation that fits primarily to the San Francisco population. As I’ve said before, his is a wasted seat.
Just legalize the world’s oldest profession. In April I visited Pompeii. There were a few houses of ill repute in 79AD that still stand. Their signs were intact.
Get the Health Department involved. issue licenses and eliminate the violence and trafficking.
The World’s oldest profession is gardening, it’s always been legal and lawful.
Thank you, Anon! I’ve heard it said that, if you want to be happy for a year, get married. If you want to be happy for ten years, get a dog. But if you want to be happy for the rest of your life, plant a garden.
Another step towards legalization of prostitution and (next) reducing the age of consent.
The demo-pervs in Sacramento are at it again.
Prostitutes are people too, they deserve the same protections we get. Just because you don’t agree with their job does not mean they should be in fear of being assaulted at any time. It’s legal in Nevada and there seem to be little problems with it over there, and they can go to the police if they are assaulted.
Where is this reducing the age of consent?
It’s not like Trump or his buddy Epstein are writing this law.
“Wiener pointed out that by encouraging safer sex and not discouraging sex workers from carrying condoms, public health will also be improved.”
This is the guy who reduced intentionally infecting someone with HIV AIDS to a misdemeanor. I repeat reduced intentionally infecting someone with HIV AIDS to a misdemeanor. Because “public health will be improved?” How does he rationalize his twisted take on what is acceptable sexual practice and what is not … for “public health?” Does anybody call him out on these ridiculously contradictory bills and how its ok for one thing but not the orher? Guy seems to have a fetish for protecting those engaged in high risk behavior rather than your normal run of the mill victim of those engaged in high risk behavior.
Weiner is a far left liberal. His agenda is to destroy as much of California as he can, just like Newsome.
Couldn’t agree more, well said
This is right up Newsom’s alley, so to speak. He will rubber stamp it, so to speak.
Only JWB would have a problem with Claycordians who have had enough of Wiener’s bs legislation.
This ought to shake you haters up!
Here we go ….. anyone who expresses a different opinion is immediately labeled a “hater”. And, I’m sure, it will soon be
followed up with “ … shake up all you racists” The programmed, autobot response is so predictable and childish. And ILP’s comment wasn’t even a Reply to previous commenter – just a blanket statement. If you don’t agree you’re a “ ______”. Fill in the blank with the usual buzz words.
Popcorn consistently labels as “haters” all those who disagree with her/him .
Since popcorn disagrees with me, he/she is now a “hater.”
Interesting that the liberals who espouse tolerance, peace, freedom of speech and diversity are the first to throw insults at those who disagree with them…..and follow it up with violence.
Never believe a liberal.
Aside from maybe not being paid…. how would they know the difference?
Next they’ll be demanding the minimum wage be raised…
This goes hand-in-hand with Newsom’s “Welcome to California Abortion.” Why? Because “hos need abortions!”
https://youtu.be/xe7iATxZO8U
… looks like somebody is worried the prices may go up?
Soon the police wont even use their cars anymore it will be drones that
film you breaking the law and they will mail you a court date.Most police work is done at a computer as they invade your privacy and try to destroy you from within,and anyone that commits a violent crime will get counseling,because incarseration is racist…..
Ilovepoopcom what does that mean?
Joke: (ok, maybe a bad joke)… When a john doesn’t pay up = Defrauding an Inkeeper.
Don’t care anymore, moving out of California at the end of the month. I hope California enjoys it’s decent into the 3rd world.
@ JWB. No. We don’t have a problem protecting EVERYONE from this type of thing. But why does his legislation have to target a specific group of people? Legislation should benefit most of the population, not a small subset.
I’m not sure what your point here might be? Of course this law would protect ALL the people in the same situation and not just a small subset.
Do you think for example the Americans with Disability is a legislation that targets a specific group of people and only benefits a small subset?
If you read the legislation, you will see that it’s there to give “sex workers” immunity from prosecution. “Sex workers” are a very small subset of the population. Why does it need to specify “sex workers”? Shouldn’t everyone be safe to report a rape or other type of sexual assault? My point is, it isolates down to a specific subset, one that fits right into Wiener’s wheelhouse!
“SB 233, Wiener. Immunity from arrest.
Existing law criminalizes various aspects of sex work, including soliciting anyone to engage in, or engaging in, lewd or dissolute conduct in a public place, loitering in a public place with the intent to commit prostitution, or maintaining a public nuisance. Existing law, the California Uniform Controlled Substances Act (CUCSA), also criminalizes various offenses relating to the possession, transportation, and sale of specified controlled substances.
This bill would prohibit the arrest of a person for a misdemeanor violation of the CUCSA or specified sex work crimes, if that person is reporting that they are a victim of, or a witness to, specified crimes. The bill would also state that possession of condoms in any amount does not provide a basis for probable cause for arrest for specified sex work crimes.”
… so you want to give ‘non-sex workers” immunity from being prosecuted as sex workers? That makes no sense.
Whaaaaat? Now I realize where the initial comment came from. No wonder it was deleted!
@Sign from Above “Why does it need to specify ‘sex workers’?”
Because if a woman is beaten or raped, the police will ask questions, like, “did you know the guy? How did you meet? Where did this take place? What were you doing right before this happened?”
If a woman answers, “I didn’t know him, he found my number on a website and came to my motel room,” the police will interrogate her further.
Cops aren’t naive. She would likely incriminate herself, admit to prostitution, and be charged. Women should not be afraid of arrest for reporting violent crimes committed against them.
No payment = Rape
I wonder if an arrested sex worker could ‘invent’ a violent crime to escape prosecution for being a sex worker.
So nice to see realization and sensitivity of the state senator an his colleges and their profound commitment to “fixing” what is wrong with CA.
Eagerly awaiting “cure” for public defecation, discarded needles
littering streets and open IV drug usage in SF. (sarcasm)
“In 10 years, …. the worst of San Francisco’s homeless problem would be gone.” June 30, 2004
https://www.sfchronicle.com/archive/item/A-decade-of-homelessness-Thousands-in-S-F-30431.php
Too bad CA they seem unable to stop or correct metastization this state has sufered as result of two decades of almost uninterrupted governance at the hands of a single political party.
Interesting, but at the same time they shut down any websites for that sort of thing and force the workers back out on the streets, making them more likely to be robbed and assaulted, talk about speaking out of both sides of your mouth.
Sounds like a back-door attempt to legalize prostitution, no pun intended.
I would like to see all men caught with under-age girls/boys forced to register as sex offenders, without exception. That would deflate the market considerably.
Only thing missing in Wiener’s cockamamie statement is “that it’s for the children”.
So the bill is to protect workers in an industry run by felons.
As I see this, it is a step toward legitimizing felonious businesses.
Legitimizing prostitution will in no way make it any less a haven for human traffickers, drug dealers and users, and all other sorts of other “people harmful” activities.
Weiner must be getting huge campaign contributions from some of the most horrific organizations in the world.
Maybe Marky Mark should join Weiner. Oops forgot, Marky Mark has no b###s
Soon too come local 69 hookers, trannys and “money managers”
We already have that. Crips LLC. Bloods LLC
Speaking of wieners, let’s not forget that high level government officials, including an ex-president flew on a private plane called the “Lolita Express” to a private island to allegedly rape children, almost.
https://www.thecut.com/2019/07/jeffrey-epstein-lolita-express.html
Bill has only been to Pedophile Island 26 times.
Comments are closed.