Politics > Politics-USA > Gov. Gibbons signs bill: The bill was introduced in response to astudy that found 11 children died of abuse while in the protective custodyof the Clark County Department of Child and Family Services between 2001and 2004.
| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"fx" |
| Date: |
19 May 2007 11:56:22 AM |
| Object: |
Gov. Gibbons signs bill: The bill was introduced in response to astudy that found 11 children died of abuse while in the protective custodyof the Clark County Department of Child and Family Services between 2001and 2004. |
Gov. Gibbons signs Internet predator bill
http://www.nevadaappeal.com/article/20070519/ELECTIONS/105190108
Associated Press
May 19, 2007
Comment Print Friendly Print Email Email
Gov. Jim Gibbons on Friday signed into law a bill making it easier to
prosecute Internet predators who go online to lure someone they think is
a child but instead turns out to be a police investigator.
AB72, a reaction to a Nevada Supreme Court ruling against prosecutors in
such cases, would broaden current state law that makes it illegal to
knowingly contact or try to contact someone less than 16 with the intent
to lure that person into sexual conduct.
Also signed by Gibbons were:
• AB261, requiring child welfare agencies to release more information
about children in their care who die or are critically injured.
The bill was introduced in response to a study that found 11 children
died of abuse while in the protective custody of the Clark County
Department of Child and Family Services between 2001 and 2004.
• AB306, which makes it easier for authorities to confiscate property
from those convicted of technological crimes.
Under current law, state prosecutors who win a "technological crime"
conviction must rely on local-level prosecutors to bring separate, civil
charges to force offenders to forfeit property. The new law changes that
by allowing the state prosecutors to pursue criminal forfeitures in
technological crimes the same way they do in racketeering cases.
• AB117, which would give parents and siblings of a person going through
a divorce a right to sit in on court proceedings.
CURRENTLY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES VIOLATES MORE CIVIL RIGHTS ON A
DAILY BASIS THEN ALL OTHER AGENCIES COMBINED INCLUDING THE NATIONAL
SECURITY AGENCY/CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY WIRETAPPING PROGRAM....
CPS Does not protect children...
It is sickening how many children are subject to abuse, neglect and even
killed at the hands of Child Protective Services.
every parent should read this .pdf from
connecticut dcf watch...
http://www.connecticutdcfwatch.com/8x11.pdf
http://www.connecticutdcfwatch.com
Number of Cases per 100,000 children in the US
These numbers come from The National Center on
Child Abuse and Neglect in Washington. (NCCAN)
Recent numbers have increased significantly for CPS
*Perpetrators of Maltreatment*
Physical Abuse CPS 160, Parents 59
Sexual Abuse CPS 112, Parents 13
Neglect CPS 410, Parents 241
Medical Neglect CPS 14 Parents 12
Fatalities CPS 6.4, Parents 1.5
Imagine that, 6.4 children die at the hands of the very agencies that
are supposed to protect them and only 1.5 at the hands of parents per
100,000 children. CPS perpetrates more abuse, neglect, and sexual abuse
and kills more children then parents in the United States. If the
citizens of this country hold CPS to the same standards that they hold
parents too. No judge should ever put another child in the hands of ANY
government agency because CPS nationwide is guilty of more harm and
death than any human being combined. CPS nationwide is guilty of more
human rights violations and deaths of children then the homes from which
they were removed. When are the judges going to wake up and see that
they are sending children to their death and a life of abuse when
children are removed from safe homes based on the mere opinion of a
bunch of social workers.
BE SURE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOUR CANDIDATES STANDS ON THE ISSUE OF
REFORMING OR ABOLISHING CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES ("MAKE YOUR CANDIDATES
TAKE A STAND ON THIS ISSUE.") THEN REMEMBER TO VOTE ACCORDINGLY IF THEY
ARE "FAMILY UNFRIENDLY" IN THE NEXT ELECTION...
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
