California where up is down

[agavi...@gmail.com]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/california-democrats-legalize-child-prostitution/article/2610540

[The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior]

On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 6:29:27 AM UTC-6, the_andr...@yahoo.com wrote:
> http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/california-democrats-legalize-child-prostitution/article/2610540

The road to hell and all that - but man, if the reporting is accurate there, that's a horrible law

[xyzzy]

I doubt this is an accurate portrayal. The law says the underage victims can't be arrested. It doesn't let off the adults who exploit them (e.g. Pimps, Johns, etc).

[The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior]

On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 7:18:36 AM UTC-6, xyzzy wrote:
> I doubt this is an accurate portrayal. The law says the underage victims can't be arrested. It doesn't let off the adults who exploit them (e.g. Pimps, Johns, etc).

Right and the article doesn't say they will be - just that they now have greater incentive to run underage girls b/c they, the prostitutes, won't be arrested.

[The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior]

Surprisingly few articles about this law - went looking for more info - found this which has this very weird quote

http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-sac-essential-politics-updates-california-lawmakers-reject-bold-step-1471556676-htmlstory.html

Assembly Judiciary Committee Chairman Mark Stone (D-Scotts Valley), who co-authored the bill, said..... “Let’s say collectively there is no such thing as a child prostitute because there is no such thing as a child prostitute.”

[agavi...@gmail.com]

It's a completely accurate portrayal and you're correct the thinking is they can now go after the pimp and John which they can do now. The difference is they can no longer arrest the child and get them into protective custody.

Juvenile records are often expunged so the concerns with stigma seem to be assuaged a bit.

If it were your 14 year old daughter, you'd probably be okay with her arrest when the other option is living the life of a prostitute.

[xyzzy]

That's the part I object to. There is not more incentive to run teenage girls because the adult running them is no less likely to be arrested. You think they really care what happens to their product? In fact without fear of arrest your teenage sex workers may be more likely to go to or work with authorities.

This law makes it legal to be a teen victim. Not an exploiter of teens.

I'm not saying this law is all good. I'm saying that article is intentionally deceiving.

[The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior]

See, I disagree - IMO, there's LESS risk to pimps b/c their girls aren't getting picked up - now, the girls won't rat them out in exchange for less/no jail time.

Additionally, you've given incentive to run underage girls b/c there's no fear of arrest at all & perversely, you've made it harder on overage girls who can't compete on an even playing field as it were - they still have arrest risk, underage girls don't

The easy and logical prediction is that Cali will quickly see a sharp uptick in underage prostitutes - is that really what they want?

[Con Reeder, unhyphenated American]

But if they can't be arrested, how do you ever tell who their pimps
are? Doesn't this incent pimps to use *more* underage prostitutes?

This is a dejure recognition of a defacto situation, to some extent,
but it will be interesting to see the results.

--
There's nothing sweeter than life nor more precious than time.
-- Barney

[Con Reeder, unhyphenated American]

On 2016-12-30, xyzzy <xyzzy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> That's the part I object to. There is not more incentive to run
> teenage girls because the adult running them is no less likely to be
> arrested. You think they really care what happens to their product?

Sure they do, when they are the ones who have to bail them out.

> In fact without fear of arrest your teenage sex workers may be more
> likely to go to or work with authorities.
>
> This law makes it legal to be a teen victim. Not an exploiter of teens.
>
> I'm not saying this law is all good. I'm saying that article is
> intentionally deceiving.

Intentionally? Would this be like the law was intentionally meaning
to harm underage women should it not work out well?

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

It appears that male liberals can't satisfy adult women or men.

Hugh

[darkst...@gmail.com]

On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 4:29:27 AM UTC-8, the_andr...@yahoo.com wrote:
> http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/california-democrats-legalize-child-prostitution/article/2610540

It's becoming more and more apparent that, if the Trumpkins want a sane country, they're going to have to send troops to take California by force.

In early 2017.

Mike

[darkst...@gmail.com]

On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 6:44:49 AM UTC-8, J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:

> It appears that male liberals can't satisfy adult women or men.

So when does the shooting start, pig?

Mike

[wolfie]

"the_andr...@yahoo.com" wrote

> The difference is they can no longer arrest the child

Right.

> and get them into protective custody.

Wrong. They'll now take them into custody, returning
them to their legal guardian. If they have no guardian
they enter state programs for victims of child abuse.

[xyzzy]

Thank you for the clarification. I suspected that was the case but did not know for sure

[xyzzy]

In the end we're just a bunch of middle aged dudes speculating theoretically. I guess the question I really want answered is: what do people who actually work to help sex workers think of this law?

[wolfie]

"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" wrote

> ... this very weird quote

> Assembly Judiciary Committee Chairman Mark Stone ... said

> “Let’s say collectively there is no such thing as a child
> prostitute because there is no such thing as a child
> prostitute.”

a) A prostitute is someone who agrees to provide sex for money.
b) A child can't provide consent to sex.
c) There's no such thing as a child prostitute since a child
can't agree to provide sex for money.

So a child can't be a prostitute. This obviously leads to
the hammer in the law:

d) Providing a child for sex ("pimping") isn't a "pimp" law
violation; it's sexual abuse of a child, with much harsher penalties.
e) Since the other party can't legally get consent, he's not
a "john", he's a child rapist.

Getting arrested for being a pimp is one thing. Getting arrested
for sexual abuse of a child is something else.
Getting arrested for hiring a prostitute is one thing. Getting
arrested for rape of a child is another.

[The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior]

This is worst kind of tautology, IMO - just b/c kids can't legally consent to sex doesn't mean they don't have sex, etc etc etc

Brilliant way to "get rid" of a problem - just tautoligize it right out of business. Meanwhile, girls under the age of 18 will still be fucking for money

[The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior]

On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 10:38:28 AM UTC-6, xyzzy wrote:
> In the end we're just a bunch of middle aged dudes speculating theoretically. I guess the question I really want answered is: what do people who actually work to help sex workers think of this law?

You're correct - along with "and what are the results?" If child prostitution goes down, then it's a good law. And if it increases...not so much so (extenuating circumstances and all that)

Just really not seeing how it's gonna help

[xyzzy]

I don't see it that way. This isn't merely a tautology. It provides the legal basis for more severe charges on those who sexually exploit children.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 08:29:10 -0800 (PST), darkst...@gmail.com
wrote:

I believe the precedent rule is "when you see the whites of their
eyes".

Hugh

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 07:57:20 -0800 (PST), darkst...@gmail.com
wrote:

If Trump unzipped and took it out most CA people would think it was
the Fountain of Youth and want a sip. You can start the line.

Hugh

[wolfie]

"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" wrote

> This is worst kind of tautology, IMO

There's a pretty big difference between throwing
someone into the legal system for a misdemeanor
and making them a ward of the state and getting
them help.

[The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior]

I think we're talking different things suddenly - I'm talking just language in the above bit about tautology

[agavi...@gmail.com]

On what basis will they take them into custody?

[wolfie]

"the_andr...@yahoo.com" wrote

> On what basis will they take them into custody?

They'll have reasonable belief the child is being
sexually abused; the law allows them to take
them into custody w/o a warrant. But they don’t
go to jail; they go to child services (in protective
custody.)

[agavi...@gmail.com]

Isn't that already an option?

What about a 16 or 17 year olds who persist in their chosen profession?

[wolfie]

"the_andr...@yahoo.com" wrote

> Isn't that already an option?

If a cop sees someone breaking the law, they arrest them.
It's their job. The only real change is to decriminalize the
activity on the part of the child so the police can't arrest
them; they take them into custody and turn them over to
child services instead.

> What about a 16 or 17 year olds who persist in their chosen profession?

They turn 18 and go about their lives.

[agavi...@gmail.com]

So, a cop can only arrest people now. But they'll begin helping them as soon as this law is enacted? Does the law change the role of the police?

[unklbob]

It's not tautology, it's the law. Stat rape is a "strict liability" offense--evidence of the crime *is* the crime, with no mitigating circumstances, at least for adults. Procuring minors is a very heavy sentence crime, so that might outweigh the benefit of your street merchandise not getting arrested. So the johns have to worry about a stat rape charge on top of a regular prostitution bust, might be a deterrent.

[The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior]

On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 8:55:41 PM UTC-6, unklbob wrote:
> It's not tautology, it's the law. Stat rape is a "strict liability" offense--evidence of the crime *is* the crime, with no mitigating circumstances, at least for adults. Procuring minors is a very heavy sentence crime, so that might outweigh the benefit of your street merchandise not getting arrested. So the johns have to worry about a stat rape charge on top of a regular prostitution bust, might be a deterrent.

Again - talking two slightly different things

Saying kids can't consent to sex and therefore, there's no such thing as child prostitution IS a tautology.

[wolfie]

"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" wrote

> Saying kids can't consent to sex and therefore, there's
> no such thing as child prostitution IS a tautology.

They can't, legally, consent to sex with adults. I don't
know what your problem with that is. Since they can't
consent, they can't commit a criminal act which requires
consent as part of the definition.

[The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior]

Right - but kids have sex - and kids have sex for money. WTF are we gonna call it other than what it is, child prostitution?

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

Obamapedocare.

Hugh

[wolfie]

"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" wrote

> Right - but kids have sex - and kids have sex for money.
> WTF are we gonna call it other than what it is, child
> prostitution?

A 6yo is pimped out by her loser father. Is she a prostitute or
a victim of child abuse?

[Ken Olson]

Unfortunately, both.

--
"If you're going to kick authority in the teeth, you might as well use
two feet."
- Keef

[The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior]

The act is child prostitution

What would you call it?

[darkst...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 1:24:05 PM UTC-8, The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior wrote:

> The act is child prostitution
>
> What would you call it?

Some would call it the only job the person is ever going to see -- which see the example of the dad pimping out the six year old.

Shoot that dad.

Mike

[The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior]

Too nice.

Boil in tar

[wolfie]

"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" wrote

> wolfie wrote:

>> A 6yo is pimped out by her loser father. Is she a prostitute or
>> a victim of child abuse?

> The act is child prostitution

Yes, because that's English for "prostitution of a child."

> What would you call it?

We're not talking about "it", we're talking about her.
Is she a prostitute? She's obviously a child.

[The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior]

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 3:56:56 PM UTC-6, wolfie wrote:
> "The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" wrote
>
> > wolfie wrote:
>
> >> A 6yo is pimped out by her loser father. Is she a prostitute or
> >> a victim of child abuse?
>
> > The act is child prostitution
>
> Yes, because that's English for "prostitution of a child."
>

Thank you! Gah - was that so difficult?

[wolfie]

"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" wrote

> Thank you! Gah - was that so difficult?

Change the subject of the tautology and declare victory? Pshaw!

[Bob Herman]

In article <ed756704-1feb-4fa0-8faa-
d64fb9...@googlegroups.com>

"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" <Iamtj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

He's a democrat. What else would you expect from the degenerate
party?

These fucks are the ones who wanted to elect Clinton as POTUS.
Nuke the entire northern part of California and be done with it.

[Joe Cooper]

"Bob Herman" <bhe...@outlook.com> wrote in
news:ad7cef29597b3623...@dizum.com:

> Nuke the entire northern part of California and be done with it.

Hold it right there! (You forgot LA County.)

--
泥on't let Democrats get away with pretending to care about blacks while
they fight tooth and nail against any policy that would give blacks a
chance to earn their share of the American Dream." (Tom Trinko)

[Byker]

"Joe Cooper" wrote in message
news:XnsA6F056EC28C...@213.239.209.88...

"Bob Herman" <bhe...@outlook.com> wrote in
news:ad7cef29597b3623...@dizum.com:
>>
>> Nuke the entire northern part of California and be done with it.
>
> Hold it right there! (You forgot LA County.)

Everything west of the San Andreas fault is fair game...

[Siri Cruise]

In article <Yo6dnWnDK5lzpvTF...@earthlink.com>,

And you're outraged by 'not my president'.

I see you've gatherred all the idiots who refuse to learn facts.

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
Free the Amos Yee one.
Yeah, too bad about your so-called life. Ha-ha.

[Joe Cooper]

"Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote in news:Yo6dnWnDK5lzpvTFnZ2dnUU7-
NnN...@earthlink.com:

That sounds about right... my old high school sat right on the San Andreas
fault. There was a section of the science area which had broken off from
the main building...so one piece was going in one direction, while the
other went the other way... it was disconcerting :-)

[Damon Hynes, Cyclone Ranger]

That'll be the day I go back to Annandale.

[Camarillo Brillo]

On 1/1/2017 10:36 AM, Siri Cruise wrote:
> I see you've gatherred all the idiots who refuse to learn facts.

Why did you let yourself be gathered?

[Some dued]

My old school is in Stillwater Oklahoma, which is no longer a stranger to earthquakes.

[Siri Cruise]

In article <XnsA6F06384CE...@213.239.209.88>,

Joe Cooper <drag...@removeunseen.is> wrote:

> "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote in news:Yo6dnWnDK5lzpvTFnZ2dnUU7-
> NnN...@earthlink.com:
>
> > "Joe Cooper" wrote in message
> > news:XnsA6F056EC28C...@213.239.209.88...
> >
> > "Bob Herman" <bhe...@outlook.com> wrote in
> > news:ad7cef29597b3623...@dizum.com:
> >>>
> >>> Nuke the entire northern part of California and be done with it.
> >>
> >> Hold it right there! (You forgot LA County.)
> >
> > Everything west of the San Andreas fault is fair game...
>
> That sounds about right... my old high school sat right on the San Andreas

San Francisco is east of it.

[Bob Herman]

In article <XnsA6F06384CE...@213.239.209.88>

Joe Cooper <drag...@removeunseen.is> wrote:
>
> "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote in news:Yo6dnWnDK5lzpvTFnZ2dnUU7-
> NnN...@earthlink.com:
>
> > "Joe Cooper" wrote in message
> > news:XnsA6F056EC28C...@213.239.209.88...
> >
> > "Bob Herman" <bhe...@outlook.com> wrote in
> > news:ad7cef29597b3623...@dizum.com:
> >>>
> >>> Nuke the entire northern part of California and be done with it.
> >>
> >> Hold it right there! (You forgot LA County.)
> >
> > Everything west of the San Andreas fault is fair game...
>
> That sounds about right... my old high school sat right on the San Andreas
> fault. There was a section of the science area which had broken off from
> the main building...so one piece was going in one direction, while the
> other went the other way... it was disconcerting :-)

What a great teaching aid. Science and geopolitics in the same
spot.

[Siri Cruise]

Go back to sleep. You're still a drunk. An angry drunk who is perpetually beyond
arm's reach is not frightenning. It's somewhere between ludicrous and pathetic.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sun, 1 Jan 2017 11:42:30 -0800 (PST), Some dued
<theodo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>My old school is in Stillwater Oklahoma, which is no longer a stranger to earthqua

Wasn't that where Bob Fenimore played?

Hugh

[18 days until Obama is out of office]

In article <chine.bleu-02421...@news.eternal-
september.org>

Siri Cruise <chine...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> In article <Yo6dnWnDK5lzpvTF...@earthlink.com>,
> "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:
>
> > "Joe Cooper" wrote in message
> > news:XnsA6F056EC28C...@213.239.209.88...
> >
> > "Bob Herman" <bhe...@outlook.com> wrote in
> > news:ad7cef29597b3623...@dizum.com:
> > >>
> > >> Nuke the entire northern part of California and be done with it.
> > >
> > > Hold it right there! (You forgot LA County.)
> >
> > Everything west of the San Andreas fault is fair game...
>
> And you're outraged by 'not my president'.
>
> I see you've gatherred all the idiots who refuse to learn facts.

Try running faster. Maybe you'll get away next time.

--
http://bit.ly/2hXtZt6

"Look, the average Democrat voter is just plain stupid. They're
easy to manipulate. That's the easy part."

-Hillary Rodham Clinton, 2005

[Cy Ubinger]

The San Andreas fault is a strike-slip fault, not a normal or thrust
fault. Nothing is going to "drop off" into the ocean. What's going to
happen is that, soon, Los Angeles will be just to the west of San Francisco.

[Bob Herman]

In article <chine.bleu-02421...@news.eternal-
september.org>
Siri Cruise <chine...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>

> In article <Yo6dnWnDK5lzpvTF...@earthlink.com>,
> "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:
>
> > "Joe Cooper" wrote in message
> > news:XnsA6F056EC28C...@213.239.209.88...
> >
> > "Bob Herman" <bhe...@outlook.com> wrote in
> > news:ad7cef29597b3623...@dizum.com:
> > >>
> > >> Nuke the entire northern part of California and be done with it.
> > >
> > > Hold it right there! (You forgot LA County.)
> >
> > Everything west of the San Andreas fault is fair game...
>
> And you're outraged by 'not my president'.
>
> I see you've gatherred all the idiots who refuse to learn facts.

We know all we need to know about Obama and Hillary the twin
liars.

Watching immature children have fits and constantly lie to your
face gets old after a while.

When I grew up that kind of shit would last about 60 seconds,
after which your ass would be too sore to sit on for a couple
days.

That's called attitude adjustment and character building.
Something every liberal is in desperate need of.

[Ken Olson]

At least the really good weed will be closer to the masses.

[Ridley's Hollow]

In article <wugaA.184387$LJ2.1...@fx18.iad>

"Air-fuel bomb New York, San Francisco, Chicago and Los Angeles
first."

Won't be soon enough and diesel fuel is cheap. It's going to
stink to high heaven for a few weeks but the remaining
scavengers, rodents and ants will soon take care of that.

Make sure you got plenty of ammo.

[Bob Herman]

In article <Yo6dnWnDK5lzpvTF...@earthlink.com>

Done!

[Michael Press]

In article <wugaA.184387$LJ2.1...@fx18.iad>,

Land west of the SAF was an island in the Pacific. It will be again.
So, yes, a slice of coastal California will drift off of North America.

--
Michael Press

[Bob Herman]

In article <chine.bleu-E7AA1...@news.eternal-

september.org>
Siri Cruise <chine...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>

> In article <XnsA6F06384CE...@213.239.209.88>,
> Joe Cooper <drag...@removeunseen.is> wrote:
>
> > "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote in news:Yo6dnWnDK5lzpvTFnZ2dnUU7-
> > NnN...@earthlink.com:
> >
> > > "Joe Cooper" wrote in message
> > > news:XnsA6F056EC28C...@213.239.209.88...
> > >
> > > "Bob Herman" <bhe...@outlook.com> wrote in
> > > news:ad7cef29597b3623...@dizum.com:
> > >>>
> > >>> Nuke the entire northern part of California and be done with it.
> > >>
> > >> Hold it right there! (You forgot LA County.)
> > >
> > > Everything west of the San Andreas fault is fair game...
> >
> > That sounds about right... my old high school sat right on the San Andreas
>
> San Francisco is east of it.

San Fransicko is no stranger to collateral damage. God has
given that den of iniquity plenty of warnings. When it comes
time to rain fire and brimstone for the last time, they will get
their fair share.

[Some dued]

I mentioned my old school as a reference to the "Annondale" quote, but I didn't realize that quote was already in reference to someone else's "my old school" quote.

[agavi...@gmail.com]

> That'll be the day I go back to Annandale.

Love those guys

[Byker]

"Bob Herman" wrote in message
news:25fa17eb28250c32...@dizum.com...

>
> San Fransicko is no stranger to collateral damage. God has given that den
> of iniquity plenty of warnings. When it comes time to rain fire and
> brimstone for the last time, they will get their fair share.

Imagine the live coverage of fags in the Castro District killing each other
over the last bottles of AZT...

[Siri Cruise]

In article <TZCdnWyR2vQtS_TF...@earthlink.com>,

When your impotency becomes so apparent that all you can do is wish for some god
to kill for you, yeah, you've announced your irrelevancy.

That reminds of a Iranian movie where moslems are all killed going after
Rushdie, so the movie ends with Allah striking Rushdie with a bolt of lightning.
Rushdie is still alive.

[Some dued]

I just noticed another poster in this thread has the alias "Camarillo Brillo" which is another musical reference, more obscure than Anandale...

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sun, 1 Jan 2017 19:10:06 -0500, Ken Olson <kol...@freedomnet.org>
wrote:

>At least the really good weed will be closer to them asses.

I corrected your typo in the last two words.

Hugh

[Joe Cooper]

"Bob Herman" <bhe...@outlook.com> wrote in

news:d673d5e8f3b5990c...@dizum.com:

> In article <XnsA6F06384CE...@213.239.209.88>
> Joe Cooper <drag...@removeunseen.is> wrote:

[...]

>> That sounds about right... my old high school sat right on the San
>> Andreas fault. There was a section of the science area which had
>> broken off from the main building...so one piece was going in one
>> direction, while the other went the other way... it was disconcerting
>> :-)
>
> What a great teaching aid. Science and geopolitics in the same
> spot.

That it was. The building was brick, but the corner which joined the
science wing with the main building was cracked - and patched with
concrete. Every time they patched it, the fault would wobble, and it
would crack again. (The now demolished Santa Clara Union High School)

Truthfully, we didn't give it much more thought than most Californians do
today...quakes were something one learned to live with.

[Joe Cooper]

Cy Ubinger <cy...@jose.jimenez.org> wrote in
news:wugaA.184387$LJ2.1...@fx18.iad:

> The San Andreas fault is a strike-slip fault, not a normal or thrust
> fault. Nothing is going to "drop off" into the ocean. What's going
> to happen is that, soon, Los Angeles will be just to the west of San
> Francisco.

At least all the fruitloops will be in the same (sunken) county :-)

--
“Don't let Democrats get away with pretending to care about blacks while

[Siri Cruise]

In article <XnsA6F15D603C1...@213.239.209.88>,

Joe Cooper <drag...@removeunseen.is> wrote:

> Cy Ubinger <cy...@jose.jimenez.org> wrote in
> news:wugaA.184387$LJ2.1...@fx18.iad:
>
> > The San Andreas fault is a strike-slip fault, not a normal or thrust
> > fault. Nothing is going to "drop off" into the ocean. What's going
> > to happen is that, soon, Los Angeles will be just to the west of San
> > Francisco.
>
> At least all the fruitloops will be in the same (sunken) county :-)

RT. Ha ha hahahaha ha hahaha ha ha haha.

[Ken Olson]

Since it involves SF the asses are really significant. ;)

[Cy Ubinger]

On 1/1/2017 6:05 PM, Michael Press wrote:
> In article <wugaA.184387$LJ2.1...@fx18.iad>,
> Cy Ubinger <cy...@jose.jimenez.org> wrote:
>
>> On 1/1/2017 9:27 AM, Byker wrote:
>>> "Joe Cooper" wrote in message
>>> news:XnsA6F056EC28C...@213.239.209.88...
>>>
>>> "Bob Herman" <bhe...@outlook.com> wrote in
>>> news:ad7cef29597b3623...@dizum.com:
>>>>>
>>>>> Nuke the entire northern part of California and be done with it.
>>>>
>>>> Hold it right there! (You forgot LA County.)
>>>
>>> Everything west of the San Andreas fault is fair game...
>>
>> The San Andreas fault is a strike-slip fault, not a normal or thrust
>> fault. Nothing is going to "drop off" into the ocean. What's going to
>> happen is that, soon, Los Angeles will be just to the west of San Francisco.
>
> Land west of the SAF was an island in the Pacific. It will be again.

Bollocks on both.

> So, yes, a slice of coastal California will drift off of North America.

No, it won't.

[Cy Ubinger]

Not going to happen - guaranteed.

[Siri Cruise]

In article <TPIaA.163886$BE2.1...@fx22.iad>,

'But that would be wrong.'
~~ R Nixon