What is the direct cause of California having so many STRICT laws compared to most other states? (Los Angeles: sex offender, crime rates)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
California has a jumble of laws that are much stricter than most other states, and also very harsh penalties. What makes California a state with unusually S.T.R.I.C.T. legislation? There's a long list of strict laws in the state, but here are a few major ones:
1) Urinating on the streets can get you put on the sex offender list for the rest of your life. So someone who has to use the bathroom seriously badly, and no bathroom is nearby, must face a tough decision of either having an accident, leading to severe embarrassment, or to go outside in a corner, and be listed as a sex offender for life. It's obviously not very intelligent to urinate on the streets, but most states don't issue penalties of that kind of severity, and would most likely be a misdemeanor at most.
2) The gun laws are far stricter than most other states and some local city ordinances are "no-issue" (such as Los Angeles or San Francisco), meaning that most regular citizens can't apply for a gun permit at all. That violates the second amendment, which allows the right to bear arms. This is actually counterproductive, because stricter gun laws do not always automatically mean crime rates are reduced, like some people think. One example of this is that Illinois has very strict gun laws but Chicago still has a high murder rate. Criminals will always find a way to get a gun illegally, and the problem is then intensified because regular citizens can't even buy a gun for self defense. That allows criminals who are already breaking the law, to take advantage of that even more. Furthermore, open carry isn't even allowed in a county of over 200,000 people. California is a very large state, having nearly 15% of the total US population, with about 35 million people, and most big cities have higher crime rates so the stricter gun laws in those cases are understandable, but conversely, Texas is also a highly populated state but has very lenient gun laws.
3) The cost of living is extremely high. As in, the "average family", meaning, neither rich or poor, can't even afford to buy a decent house in some places, resulting in a high poverty rate and a higher average household size. In short, if you have a nice house and a nice job and for some reason you get fired, you're SCREWED.
4) Recently, the use of water has been seriously regulated, resulting in legal issues in California for excessive use of water. No other state has a law like that. People need water to survive, so why shouldn't people be able to use as much water as they need?
5) The age of consent in California is 18, as is a few other states. But California has it set up in a way that two people who are 17 1/2 years old, that have sex with each other can both be charged with a misdemeanor of raping each other under statutory rape and both can go to prison for a year. Age of consent and statutory rape laws are meant to protect younger children from being pressured into having sex from much older adults. I've never heard of two teenagers the same age both at the same time being charged with a misdemeanor. Usually, when it comes to statutory rape, one person is an offender and the other is a victim. If both are the same age, how is that determined? In short, no minors can have sex in California AT ALL, not even if they are in the same age and grade level, which is absurd considering that most high schools and middle schools offer sex education, and teen pregnancy rates have dropped in recent years. By grade 12, nearly half of females have already had sex. If this was the case, a big chunk of the state's teen population would serve some time in prison each year.
6) Just recently, California is no longer allowing exceptions from immunizations based on religious reasons and other stuff. If that's something that's been allowed for many years, it's likely the law got changed as a result of some form of abuse; has the exceptions from shots became abused in any way recently?
7) Kindergarten age entrance strictness: recently, California has had a December 2 cut-off for kindergarten for many years, but moved it up to September 1. This isn't new; most other states have also followed suit in recent years, but California is requiring people born between the September through December window to participate in a transitional kindergarten program, and then standard kindergarten the next year. Meaning that the kids born between that window can no longer be pushed ahead anymore. Many states make exceptions based on good cause and good reason, but California moved up the cutoff they had for decades, out of strictness. If children are not ready, sure, hold them back a year. But what this does is prohibit children who *are* ready to start, from starting school, without leniency.
8) The state rarely gives anyone mercy or forgiveness or second chances if someone makes a mistake. One example of this is in June 2009, a school district in a Los Angeles suburb made a mistake in having some school days a little too short by a few minutes to the point where it didn't legally count as a school day, in some of its schools. The state, out of anger, took it out on the kids and tried to have them spend 34 more days of class in summer school for the mistakes of adults, and threatened to take away a large amount of funding. Most places, if kids spend too little time in school, lose funding based on the number of days/hours they fell short. But this was a more serious penalty.
Sorry this is so long. I would like to know what makes California have far above-average strictness in its legislation, than most other states?
California has a jumble of laws that are much stricter than most other states, and also very harsh penalties. What makes California a state with unusually S.T.R.I.C.T. legislation? There's a long list of strict laws in the state, but here are a few major ones:
1) Urinating on the streets can get you put on the sex offender list for the rest of your life. So someone who has to use the bathroom seriously badly, and no bathroom is nearby, must face a tough decision of either having an accident, leading to severe embarrassment, or to go outside in a corner, and be listed as a sex offender for life. It's obviously not very intelligent to urinate on the streets, but most states don't issue penalties of that kind of severity, and would most likely be a misdemeanor at most.
2) The gun laws are far stricter than most other states and some local city ordinances are "no-issue" (such as Los Angeles or San Francisco), meaning that most regular citizens can't apply for a gun permit at all. That violates the second amendment, which allows the right to bear arms. This is actually counterproductive, because stricter gun laws do not always automatically mean crime rates are reduced, like some people think. One example of this is that Illinois has very strict gun laws but Chicago still has a high murder rate. Criminals will always find a way to get a gun illegally, and the problem is then intensified because regular citizens can't even buy a gun for self defense. That allows criminals who are already breaking the law, to take advantage of that even more. Furthermore, open carry isn't even allowed in a county of over 200,000 people. California is a very large state, having nearly 15% of the total US population, with about 35 million people, and most big cities have higher crime rates so the stricter gun laws in those cases are understandable, but conversely, Texas is also a highly populated state but has very lenient gun laws.
3) The cost of living is extremely high. As in, the "average family", meaning, neither rich or poor, can't even afford to buy a decent house in some places, resulting in a high poverty rate and a higher average household size. In short, if you have a nice house and a nice job and for some reason you get fired, you're SCREWED.
4) Recently, the use of water has been seriously regulated, resulting in legal issues in California for excessive use of water. No other state has a law like that. People need water to survive, so why shouldn't people be able to use as much water as they need?
5) The age of consent in California is 18, as is a few other states. But California has it set up in a way that two people who are 17 1/2 years old, that have sex with each other can both be charged with a misdemeanor of raping each other under statutory rape and both can go to prison for a year. Age of consent and statutory rape laws are meant to protect younger children from being pressured into having sex from much older adults. I've never heard of two teenagers the same age both at the same time being charged with a misdemeanor. Usually, when it comes to statutory rape, one person is an offender and the other is a victim. If both are the same age, how is that determined? In short, no minors can have sex in California AT ALL, not even if they are in the same age and grade level, which is absurd considering that most high schools and middle schools offer sex education, and teen pregnancy rates have dropped in recent years. By grade 12, nearly half of females have already had sex. If this was the case, a big chunk of the state's teen population would serve some time in prison each year.
6) Just recently, California is no longer allowing exceptions from immunizations based on religious reasons and other stuff. If that's something that's been allowed for many years, it's likely the law got changed as a result of some form of abuse; has the exceptions from shots became abused in any way recently?
7) Kindergarten age entrance strictness: recently, California has had a December 2 cut-off for kindergarten for many years, but moved it up to September 1. This isn't new; most other states have also followed suit in recent years, but California is requiring people born between the September through December window to participate in a transitional kindergarten program, and then standard kindergarten the next year. Meaning that the kids born between that window can no longer be pushed ahead anymore. Many states make exceptions based on good cause and good reason, but California moved up the cutoff they had for decades, out of strictness. If children are not ready, sure, hold them back a year. But what this does is prohibit children who *are* ready to start, from starting school, without leniency.
8) The state rarely gives anyone mercy or forgiveness or second chances if someone makes a mistake. One example of this is in June 2009, a school district in a Los Angeles suburb made a mistake in having some school days a little too short by a few minutes to the point where it didn't legally count as a school day, in some of its schools. The state, out of anger, took it out on the kids and tried to have them spend 34 more days of class in summer school for the mistakes of adults, and threatened to take away a large amount of funding. Most places, if kids spend too little time in school, lose funding based on the number of days/hours they fell short. But this was a more serious penalty.
Sorry this is so long. I would like to know what makes California have far above-average strictness in its legislation, than most other states?
The simple answer is a fulltime legislature with too much time on its hands, term limits with inexperienced members and giving away power to legislative staffers and lobbyists, members playing to their bases and trying to show how tough they are and a pervading culture of, 'We know what's best for you little people so shut up and obey your betters." Realpolitix at its worst!
While they could be considered strict, the the majority are just illogical.
Peeing out in the open makes you a sex offender?! Completely absurd.
Immunization demands, that is just unconstitutional.
On the other hand- water restrictions, you are aware we are in a drought, right? We need those restrictions because some people have no consideration or brains to do the right thing.
San Francisco gun laws are probably due to the history of gun violence in the city, so while it is strict, it's not a law that was made on a whim with no reason.
School districts are locally managed, yes there are state laws that govern them all, but what happens in a district is up to the district, not the state.
Cost of living is not expensive everywhere in the state, just the largely populated areas. If someone has a nice house and losses thier job and are screwed, that's not the states fault. It's the persons fault for not living within their means and having a cushion in the bank.
Under aged teens having sex.....just because it's on the books, does not mean it is enforced.
I see this law as something to fall back on, protection just in case there is an issue between a minor and adult and it would be an issue brought into the light by the parents of the minor.
Now you forgot the law that states that one must get a license from fish and game to trap mice.
I bet that every single state has laws that make no sense or are beyond reasonable for the issue. Why pick on California?
Because so many people (huge population comparatively to other states) do whatever the f they want and think about only themselves and not the impact they have on others.
Even with laws and super stiff penalties, people still do whatever the f they think they can get away with. Cops can't police everything. There isn't enough budget to police people so they leash their dog for example. Get caught with no leash and your dog can get taken away from you. But that never happens.
My theory is that our odd laws are set up by the federal government in CA as a test ground. Many of the laws are later implemented in other states.
A common thought in other states is that their new crazy law is CA's fault. Blame often laid on new residents from CA.
I've just got to ask: Are you really bothered by the fact that you can't urinate on the streets? I find that more disturbing than the law on the books preventing it.
The simple answer is a fulltime legislature with too much time on its hands, term limits with inexperienced members and giving away power to legislative staffers and lobbyists, members playing to their bases and trying to show how tough they are and a pervading culture of, 'We know what's best for you little people so shut up and obey your betters." Realpolitix at its worst!
Hey, 57 and Curmudgeon, a host of other reasons not to move back home? I had never ever thought of these things.
Just yesterday I was speaking with a woman who owns a small clothing store that I shop. She goes to CA four times a year. Twice to go to visit a friend in LA and ditto for SF. I asked her why she doesn't move back there, since her closest friends are there (all three are divorced and older). She said that just visiting there is a headache: everything is so hectic, so 'rush, rush'; that it's 'noisy' (compared to NM); and the traffic is terrible (altho' the saving grace about SF is that you can walk and/or trolley just about all over town).
Since I've been very homesick (yes, AGAIN LOL) these past couple of weeks, I needed to hear what she had to say and read these posts of yours. Thanks so much!!
California has a jumble of laws that are much stricter than most other states, and also very harsh penalties. What makes California a state with unusually S.T.R.I.C.T. legislation? There's a long list of strict laws in the state, but here are a few major ones:
1) Urinating on the streets can get you put on the sex offender list for the rest of your life. So someone who has to use the bathroom seriously badly, and no bathroom is nearby, must face a tough decision of either having an accident, leading to severe embarrassment, or to go outside in a corner, and be listed as a sex offender for life. It's obviously not very intelligent to urinate on the streets, but most states don't issue penalties of that kind of severity, and would most likely be a misdemeanor at most.
2) The gun laws are far stricter than most other states and some local city ordinances are "no-issue" (such as Los Angeles or San Francisco), meaning that most regular citizens can't apply for a gun permit at all. That violates the second amendment, which allows the right to bear arms. This is actually counterproductive, because stricter gun laws do not always automatically mean crime rates are reduced, like some people think. One example of this is that Illinois has very strict gun laws but Chicago still has a high murder rate. Criminals will always find a way to get a gun illegally, and the problem is then intensified because regular citizens can't even buy a gun for self defense. That allows criminals who are already breaking the law, to take advantage of that even more. Furthermore, open carry isn't even allowed in a county of over 200,000 people. California is a very large state, having nearly 15% of the total US population, with about 35 million people, and most big cities have higher crime rates so the stricter gun laws in those cases are understandable, but conversely, Texas is also a highly populated state but has very lenient gun laws.
3) The cost of living is extremely high. As in, the "average family", meaning, neither rich or poor, can't even afford to buy a decent house in some places, resulting in a high poverty rate and a higher average household size. In short, if you have a nice house and a nice job and for some reason you get fired, you're SCREWED.
4) Recently, the use of water has been seriously regulated, resulting in legal issues in California for excessive use of water. No other state has a law like that. People need water to survive, so why shouldn't people be able to use as much water as they need?
5) The age of consent in California is 18, as is a few other states. But California has it set up in a way that two people who are 17 1/2 years old, that have sex with each other can both be charged with a misdemeanor of raping each other under statutory rape and both can go to prison for a year. Age of consent and statutory rape laws are meant to protect younger children from being pressured into having sex from much older adults. I've never heard of two teenagers the same age both at the same time being charged with a misdemeanor. Usually, when it comes to statutory rape, one person is an offender and the other is a victim. If both are the same age, how is that determined? In short, no minors can have sex in California AT ALL, not even if they are in the same age and grade level, which is absurd considering that most high schools and middle schools offer sex education, and teen pregnancy rates have dropped in recent years. By grade 12, nearly half of females have already had sex. If this was the case, a big chunk of the state's teen population would serve some time in prison each year.
6) Just recently, California is no longer allowing exceptions from immunizations based on religious reasons and other stuff. If that's something that's been allowed for many years, it's likely the law got changed as a result of some form of abuse; has the exceptions from shots became abused in any way recently?
7) Kindergarten age entrance strictness: recently, California has had a December 2 cut-off for kindergarten for many years, but moved it up to September 1. This isn't new; most other states have also followed suit in recent years, but California is requiring people born between the September through December window to participate in a transitional kindergarten program, and then standard kindergarten the next year. Meaning that the kids born between that window can no longer be pushed ahead anymore. Many states make exceptions based on good cause and good reason, but California moved up the cutoff they had for decades, out of strictness. If children are not ready, sure, hold them back a year. But what this does is prohibit children who *are* ready to start, from starting school, without leniency.
8) The state rarely gives anyone mercy or forgiveness or second chances if someone makes a mistake. One example of this is in June 2009, a school district in a Los Angeles suburb made a mistake in having some school days a little too short by a few minutes to the point where it didn't legally count as a school day, in some of its schools. The state, out of anger, took it out on the kids and tried to have them spend 34 more days of class in summer school for the mistakes of adults, and threatened to take away a large amount of funding. Most places, if kids spend too little time in school, lose funding based on the number of days/hours they fell short. But this was a more serious penalty.
Sorry this is so long. I would like to know what makes California have far above-average strictness in its legislation, than most other states?
Your thread title is misleading for the content or the content you selected is a mismatch for your thread title.
The items that you picked out do not actually have a common link at the state level, despite the implication that there's something wrong specifically with California for them to have happened. There are a lot of mixed concepts at multiple levels and a couple of misrepresentations.
Most importantly, you have mixed up state-wide and local issues. In my view, local laws (or even policies) are supposed to be measured to a lower standard than state-wide laws to reflect the freedom they have to cater to the local population, whom won't always reflect the rest of the state.
Hey, 57 and Curmudgeon, a host of other reasons not to move back home? I had never ever thought of these things.
Just yesterday I was speaking with a woman who owns a small clothing store that I shop. She goes to CA four times a year. Twice to go to visit a friend in LA and ditto for SF. I asked her why she doesn't move back there, since her closest friends are there (all three are divorced and older). She said that just visiting there is a headache: everything is so hectic, so 'rush, rush'; that it's 'noisy' (compared to NM); and the traffic is terrible (altho' the saving grace about SF is that you can walk and/or trolley just about all over town).
Since I've been very homesick (yes, AGAIN LOL) these past couple of weeks, I needed to hear what she had to say and read these posts of yours. Thanks so much!!
We were in Texas for many years and moved back to CA last year. If you do, you have to decide that putting up with those things is worth the trade offs...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
