The legislator is looking for a new way of banning threats against CA schools

From Denise AmmosCalmness

This story was originally published by CalmattersS Register about their ballots.

The legislator of the Internal Empire wants to facilitate the sanctioning of the people who give threats affecting schools or places of worshipS

The state proposal Senator Susan BlodA Democrat from West Covina has sparked a broad opposition as well as support from dozens of organizations. He confronts police, prosecutors and employees’ groups against youth and disability defenders and ACLU.

Existing law already says it is a crime to threaten something that can cause death or major bodily harm to someone. If the threat is “unambiguous, unconditional, immediate and specific” and causes “sustainable fear” in a person, crime is a crime or crime.

Rubio, a former teacher at the State School in the Baldwin School and the Monrovi school areas, said he supported this bill to emphasize the location of the threat, not the victim of the threat. She said that calls or sending text messages often waste time and money for schools and first responding and traumatized people.

“I saw the fee that these threats take on students and communities,” she said in a statement. “Even when the danger is not real, fear is and the trauma remains with children long after the blocking is over.”

But there is a disagreement whether a new law is needed. Opponents point out that this bill is similar to the existing law.

Rubio said the existing law has too many doors, but this bill will give the authorities more opportunities.

“California’s law should not allow anyone to threaten mass shooting at school and move away without consequences, simply because no individual is mentioned in the threat,” she said.

Groups representing children pointed to this Young people often make threats They do not mean and do not consider the legal consequences. A new law, they are afraid that they will make the schools even more than a liberty conductor for some students.

“This allows police intervention to what is perceived as a threat, even if it is just a joke, mental collapse or expression of yourself through art,” says Kevin Maturano, an associate of fresh youth policy.

“And like any criminal policy, it will most focus on black -brown students. But beyond the harm to young people, this bill will also lose millions of dollars to taxpayers.”

Rubio stated that proposals were stated that the perpetrators under 18 would be charged with crimes, not by crimes, “to balance accountability and to keep young people on their way to growth rather than imprisonment.”

The bill adopted the Public Safety Committee 6-0 in March. On April 7, he was placed on the Budget Credit Committee voltage file, where most accounts that cost extra money. Legislators are expected to look at it next month.

This is at least the eighth time when such a measure came before the meeting since 2015. Two such bills adopted in 2015 but were vetoed and others failed in a committee, including during last year’s legislative session.

This time, 32 organizations have registered support for IT, including associations representing police officers, sheriff deputies, school resources and prosecutors’ officers, as well as the California City League, the Hindu America Foundation, the Rio Hindo College and the San Djugas to prevent weapons.

It included 16 organizations, including ACLU California Action, Alliance for Boys and Men of Color, the California Association of Public Defenders, the California Children’s Protection Fund and the California Disability Rights.

This article was Originally Published on CalMatters and was reissued under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Noderivatives License.