Vote No on Proposition 35: Human Trafficking

This is the sixth part of a series of posts analyzing California’s propositions:

What Proposition 35 Really Does

Proposition 35 is almost certain to be approved by California voters. It bans human trafficking. Who isn’t against human trafficking?

But there are actually a number of reasons to vote against Proposition 35.

Human trafficking is already banned by California law, of course. This is actually kind of obvious; it would have been a really incredible oversight if human trafficking was not previously illegal in California.

What Proposition 35 actually does is that it changes the current law. It increases criminal penalties for human trafficking.

What’s wrong with that, you might ask? The vast majority of Californians would support an increase in penalties for human trafficking.

The thing is that the federal government deals with human trafficking, not the state government. The legislative analyst states that:

Currently, human trafficking cases are often prosecuted under federal law, rather than California state law, even when California law enforcement agencies are involved in the investigation of the case. This is partly because these types of crimes often involve multiple jurisdictions and also because of the federal government’s historical lead role in such cases.

That is, because human trafficking often crosses state lines, usually the federal government deals with it. This is why there are only 18 individuals convicted of human trafficking in state prison, as of March 2012.

So this proposition handles something that’s not the state’s responsibility.

In addition, this proposition mostly deals with something that the typical voter has little knowledge about: proper penalties for criminal activities. Most voters have no idea whether the sentence enhancement of great bodily injury should be six or ten additional years in jail, which is one change this proposition proposes. I certainly don’t.

There are people who are qualified to set prison sentences. These are the experts and the lawmakers, who spend their whole lives studying these issues. People like you and me, who just spend a couple of hours (or even worse, seconds) reading about this proposition, are not. Prison sentences for criminal activities are – yet another – activity that would be best left to the legislature to deal with, rather than the broken proposition system.

Why to Vote Against Proposition 35

Proposition 35 sounds great. Punish human trafficking! Let’s do it!

But human trafficking is not handled by the state of California – it’s handled by the federal government. So Proposition 35 is mostly irrelevant.

Proposition 35 changes prison sentences for human traffickers. But sentences for criminals should be set by the experts and the legislature. They shouldn’t be set by voters who have only thirty minutes in the ballot box to vote for ten propositions, half of which they don’t understand.

Proposition 35 sounds too good to be true. It is.

About these ads
This entry was posted in California and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Vote No on Proposition 35: Human Trafficking

  1. John Smith says:

    I agree with you on this one. The idiots will always vote for greater punishment for all criminals. Lets have capital punishment for cannabis use and end the drug problem. People have this insane idea that increasing penalties is always good. What they dont realize – because they never see these people – is how these harsh laws affect people’s lives. What decided this one for me is the prostitute who says that if she uses her wages to pay for her kid’s college fees, he will be marked as a sexual predator for life as a pimp.
    There are laws already on the books that address sex trafficking; use them.
    And while you are at it, legalize all prostitution so it can be monitored, licensed, and safe. But yeah; trafficking should be (and is) treated like kidnapping or other abusive non-consensual crimes.

    • inoljt says:

      Yes, human beings always tend to advocate harsher punishments than the current ones on the law. On the other hand, punishments have actually become less harsh (no more days of cutting off one’s ear for theft). At the same time crime has actually gone down over the centuries.

  2. too bad so sad says:

    i’m still voting yes!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s