NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/21/san.francisco.prostitution.ap/index.html

Decriminalizing prostitution? Does that town have no shame? ;)

"It will allow workers to organize for our rights and for our safety," said Patricia West, 22, who said she has been selling sex for about a year by placing ads on the Internet. She moved to San Francisco in May from Texas to work on Proposition K.

Does the image of activist hookers make anyone else giggle? :D

"Prozzies of the world! UNITE! THROW OFF YOUR BONDAGE (eh for a tenner) AND OTHER SUCH THINGS!"

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/21/san.francisco.prostitution.ap/index.html

Decriminalizing prostitution? Does that town have no shame? ;)


Does the image of activist hookers make anyone else giggle? :D

No, not really...

This on the other hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tLSAWJSAog

Political activism through mud wrestling ftw. :D

No, not really...

This on the other hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tLSAWJSAog

;)
Oh, Euronews, I love it so :D

No, not really...

This on the other hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tLSAWJSAog

Political activism through mud wrestling ftw. :D

Yay! :D

Does the image of activist hookers make anyone else giggle? :D

Yes, yes it do.


I don't think that the whole concept is too good though, it needs definate revision.

No, not really...

This on the other hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tLSAWJSAog

Political activism through mud wrestling ftw. :D

That takes the term 'Political Mudslinging' to a WHOLE new level.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/21/san.francisco.prostitution.ap/index.html

Decriminalizing prostitution? Does that town have no shame? ;)



Does the image of activist hookers make anyone else giggle? :D

I agree with decriminalizing prostitution. It will make prostitutes safer, because if they're abused, they can then actually go to the police.

And in the case of God's Wrath... fucking bring it.

I agree with decriminalizing prostitution. It will make prostitutes safer, because if they're abused, they can then actually go to the police.


Can, maybe, but much harder to do so.

Reading the whole article, it doesn't decriminalize prostitution. What it does is prevent investigations into prostitution. That means things like pimps will have free reign as long as they prevent their prostitutes from running off, while also crippling human trafficking investigations. If a prostitute ran off and reported her pimp, she'd still be arrested as a prostitute.

This will have very ugly consequences.

Can, maybe, but much harder to do so.

Reading the whole article, it doesn't decriminalize prostitution. What it does is prevent investigations into prostitution. That means things like pimps will have free reign as long as they prevent their prostitutes from running off, while also crippling human trafficking investigations.

This will have very ugly consequences.

Hmm, that seems like a silly, half ass way to do it.

And in the case of God's Wrath... fucking bring it.

I second that!

Hmm, that seems like a silly, half ass way to do it.

It will actually make things worse for human trafficking victims and abused prostitutes, as they are still in an illegal profession, meaning they can't go to the police because they might get arrested, and the police can't make any moves against the profession as a whole, including pimps.

In short, this is a green light to pimps saying "Do whatever you want to your prostitutes."

It's disgusting. And that people are celebrating it, well, either they didn't read the whole thing, or they're living in magic dream land where pimps, drug addiction and human trafficking don't exist.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/21/san.francisco.prostitution.ap/index.html

Decriminalizing prostitution? Does that town have no shame? ;)



Does the image of activist hookers make anyone else giggle? :D

How fitting that prostitution could be legalized through a proposition.

I disaprove of prostitution. No woman should have to sink to that level.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/21/san.francisco.prostitution.ap/index.html

Decriminalizing prostitution? Does that town have no shame? ;)



Does the image of activist hookers make anyone else giggle? :D

Well, after all, prostitution is the oldest profession in the world. :p

It will actually make things worse for human trafficking victims and abused prostitutes, as they are still in an illegal profession, meaning they can't go to the police because they might get arrested, and the police can't make any moves against the profession as a whole, including pimps.

In short, this is a green light to pimps saying "Do whatever you want to your prostitutes."

It's disgusting. And that people are celebrating it, well, either they didn't read the whole thing, or they're living in magic dream land where pimps, drug addiction and human trafficking don't exist.

I agree that decriminalization is a copout for legalization. I potentially dangerous one. But then again, we're talking about San Francisco here. I think they drastically underestimate the ugliness of the human condition.

How fitting that prostitution could be legalized through a proposition.

Not here though. It's basically a proposition to screw over prostitution even further dressed up in "it's pseudo legal now" double speak.

I agree that decriminalization is a copout for legalization. I potentially dangerous one. But then again, we're talking about San Francisco here. I think they drastically underestimate the ugliness of the human condition.

So.... a green light to do worse shit than any of us can imagine?

So.... a green light to do worse shit than any of us can imagine?

I hope not. Maybe San Francisco is as sweet and lovable as they think it is. Time will tell.

I disaprove of prostitution. No woman should have to sink to that level.

I approve of legalizing prostitution on the grounds that no one should be able to tell a woman what she can do with her body.

As for prostitution itself, if the woman wants to do it, who am I to judge?

I hope not. Maybe San Francisco is as sweet and lovable as they think it is. Time will tell.

It's a losing bet.

It's a losing bet.

Aye, you're right. It's really only safe to visit the place if you're wearing a high level Hazmat suit with an air supply source at least three miles beyond the city limits.

Well, after all, prostitution is the oldest profession in the world. :p

I always thought motherhood was the oldest profession, or maybe soldiering. Of course, if soldiering is the oldest profession, then prostitution is right behind it, because wherever you have soldiers, you're going to have whores. It's as inevitable as rats in barns.

As to whether San Francisco has any shame, I think that question has been answered in the negative pretty throughly over the years.

The Netherlands has yet to sink like Atlantis and Nevada isn't a smoking crater, so obviously God doesn't hate legalized prostitution. He just hates being God, because who's He gonna nail?

:D

Actually, the reason why God has smited neither is that I have photos of him paying a prostitute for sex. And she charge him triple as an "incompetence penalty."

Guess he's not omnipotent after all.

Selling is legal.

Fucking is legal.

Why isn't selling fucking legal?

Of all the things a human can do to another human, surely giving them an orgasm isn't among the bad things, is it?

I've never understood the criminality of prostitution.

if anything "tempts god's wrath" it is fanatical pseudo-conservatism.

know one knows "the will of god", only that its big, friendly and gives great hugs, but every revealer of organized belief it has choosen to be channeled by, has been a moderate and responsible socialist, and essentially, until their message became corrupted by popular greed, that is what the beliefs each of them started, were and are about trying to teach people.

NOT about what anyone does or does not go to bed with, where, when or how often.
THAT was a 'social teaching' something beliefs include as a way of practicing self dicipline as a means of developing mindfulness, but not some sort of inheirent spiritual 'morality'.

Selling is legal.

Fucking is legal.

Why isn't selling fucking legal?

Of all the things a human can do to another human, surely giving them an orgasm isn't among the bad things, is it?

I've never understood the criminality of prostitution.The problem is it never works out in pratice the way it does in theory. Once you start treating sex, and potential partners, as a commodity you open up the floodgates for abuse. Despite anyones best attempts it remains an opressive and degrading business and is the almost exclusive domain of the desperate, downtrodden and drug-addicted and those that prey upon them. Decriminalization such as this measure is at least an attempt to strip a little of the slime from the practice but it won't eliminate abuse.

The problem is it never works out in pratice the way it does in theory. Once you start treating sex, and potential partners, as a commodity you open up the floodgates for abuse. Despite anyones best attempts it remains an opressive and degrading business and is the almost exclusive domain of the desperate, downtrodden and drug-addicted and those that prey upon them. Decriminalization such as this measure is at least an attempt to strip a little of the slime from the practice but it won't eliminate abuse.

doesn't the banning of it, contribute directly and materially, to that oppression and abuse? i don't see how it can fail to, or anyone imagine that it does not.

doesn't the banning of it, contribute directly and materially, to that oppression and abuse? i don't see how it can fail to, or anyone imagine that it does not.

It's an issue of human mental health. Having sex on the scale that it's an actual profession is usually a sign of a mental issue.

There are those who do it because they enjoy it. They, however, are incredibly rare.

doesn't the banning of it, contribute directly and materially, to that oppression and abuse? i don't see how it can fail to, or anyone imagine that it does not.They have legal brothels in Nevada and the treatment, conditions and overall seediness of the whole affair are only marginally better than the illegal version. Yes, the illegality is part of the problem, which this measure seeks to remove at least in part, but it goes deeper than that. The fantasy is the gorgeous woman who picks and chooses her clients and is well paid by considerate men of means. Reality isn't so kind. The 'business' that surrounds it doesn't really care if you like what or who you do, if you're well paid or if you're even safe. It's a business of the most ruthless nature and the primary concern is money, sadly much of which does not 'trickle down' to the service provider.

They have legal brothels in Nevada and the treatment, conditions and overall seediness of the whole affair are only marginally better than the illegal version. Yes, the illegality is part of the problem, which this measure seeks to remove at least in part, but it goes deeper than that. The fantasy is the gorgeous woman who picks and chooses her clients and is well paid by considerate men of means. Reality isn't so kind. The 'business' that surrounds it doesn't really care if you like what or who you do, if you're well paid or if you're even safe. It's a business of the most ruthless nature and the primary concern is money, sadly much of which does not 'trickle down' to the service provider.

Sounds like Investment Banking. :D

I always thought motherhood was the oldest profession, or maybe soldiering. Of course, if soldiering is the oldest profession, then prostitution is right behind it, because wherever you have soldiers, you're going to have whores. It's as inevitable as rats in barns.

As to whether San Francisco has any shame, I think that question has been answered in the negative pretty throughly over the years.

Warring and whoring come hand in had, like Hanzel and Gretel, leaving bits and pieces of people on the floor like a trail of gory bread crumbs. *nod*

Sounds like Investment Banking. :DWell I aways said that the only difference between pimps and bankers is the pimps dress better...

Selling is legal.

Fucking is legal.

Why isn't selling fucking legal?

Of all the things a human can do to another human, surely giving them an orgasm isn't among the bad things, is it?

I've never understood the criminality of prostitution.

Pay your respects ... a genius far greater then our own came up with this gag :)

The Netherlands has yet to sink like Atlantis and Nevada isn't a smoking crater, so obviously God doesn't hate legalized prostitution. He just hates being God, because who's He gonna nail?

:D
And they've even made it easier by being mostly below sea level...

NAS is correct; what the bill specifically makes provision for will not be of benefit to the prostitutes themselves.

However, that accepted, I'd fully endorse legalised prostitution; were it legal, it would attract far greater police scrutiny, hence countering the abuses endemic in the current system.

Not here though. It's basically a proposition to screw over prostitution even further dressed up in "it's pseudo legal now" double speak.
So I saw later on... Things are either legal or illegal, there's no in between. Nevada seems to get along just fine without the gobbledygook that California seems to need.

So I saw later on... Things are either legal or illegal, there's no in between. Nevada seems to get along just fine without the gobbledygook that California seems to need.

I think you're failing to understand the issue. This isn't about California, it's about San Francisco. San Fran has no authority to tell the state what is, and is not, illegal. Prostitution is, and will continue to be, illegal in the state of California, San Fran can't control that.

What they CAN control however, is the city police. Some in San Fran want to make prostitution legal, but they can't change state law, the only thing they can do is control what city police do.

Does the image of activist hookers make anyone else giggle? :D

If you are using giggle as a euphemism for sexually excited, then yes, it is making me 'giggle'.

Can, maybe, but much harder to do so.

Reading the whole article, it doesn't decriminalize prostitution. What it does is prevent investigations into prostitution. That means things like pimps will have free reign as long as they prevent their prostitutes from running off, while also crippling human trafficking investigations. If a prostitute ran off and reported her pimp, she'd still be arrested as a prostitute.

This will have very ugly consequences.

Too bad the sex workers themselves disagree with you. You will notice that all the ones interviewed in the article were supportive of it.

I always find it a bit depressing to see these debates go on for pages with no one bothering to find out what the affected people themselves think about it. It has the bitter taste of paternalism, of people who have never had to deal with the reality of the situation trying to 'save' the 'poor victims'.

I disaprove of prostitution. No woman should have to sink to that level.

well some women chose to do it for other reasons not because they "sink to that level"

well some women chose to do it for other reasons not because they "sink to that level"

Well, that's their choice. I disaprove of people being forced into it.

Well, that's their choice. I disaprove of people being forced into it.

So then you don't disapprove of prostitution. You disapprove of forced labour, or slavery, right?

So then you don't disapprove of prostitution. You disapprove of forced labour, or slavery, right?

I guess... DAM you all! :D

Can, maybe, but much harder to do so.

Reading the whole article, it doesn't decriminalize prostitution. What it does is prevent investigations into prostitution. That means things like pimps will have free reign as long as they prevent their prostitutes from running off, while also crippling human trafficking investigations. If a prostitute ran off and reported her pimp, she'd still be arrested as a prostitute.

This will have very ugly consequences.

The article says the propostion "forbids local authorities from investigating, arresting or prosecuting anyone for selling sex".

Now, I haven't read the bill itself, but if this is true it means that a prostitute who reported her pimp could not be arrested for prostitution or be prosecuted for it.

Now, this means that a pimp could probably not be investigated, arrested, or prosecuted for being a pimp. However, he could be both investigated, arrested, and prosecuted for assault, kidnapping, etc.

i am moving there to be a pimp. heroin + hookers = lots of money

The Netherlands has yet to sink like Atlantis ...

Maybe not like Atlantis, but it's still below sea level (http://www.iamsterdam.com/introducing/nature_geography/amsterdam_water/water_levels). I blame the Rossebuurt.

I disaprove of prostitution. No woman should have to sink to that level.
What level? The level to be legally allowed to pay for a male prostitute?

Decriminalizing prostitution is good. Now, the next step is to make it a legal occupation with health care and pension benefits.


http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/MULE.gif
25 years

I guess... DAM you all! :D

That should stop the water from flowing, yes. By the way, there are more nations in Europe where prostitution is legal. Granted, not every country has a blatant tourist trap such as the Red Light District in Amsterdam.

That should stop the water from flowing, yes. By the way, there are more nations in Europe where prostitution is legal. Granted, not every country has a blatant tourist trap such as the Red Light District in Amsterdam.
:$ St. Pauli comes to mind.


http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/MULE.gif
25 years

Well, what do you expect? Hamburg is a harbour town, after all. Sailors need their entertainment, these days the Reeperbahn has more to offer in that area than just commercially available sex.

This (http://economics.uchicago.edu/pdf/Prostitution%205.pdf) highly preliminary draft of a study of the economics of actual prostitutes suggests that the likelihood of arrest and conviction for either prostitutes or their customers is extremely low, even when police are focusing their attention on prostitution. It doesn't seem likely that preventing the police from going after prostitutes is going to have much of an effect on the overall level of prostitution. It might, however, hamper the police in investigating associated crimes such as trafficking.

What level? The level to be legally allowed to pay for a male prostitute?

Decriminalizing prostitution is good. Now, the next step is to make it a legal occupation with health care and pension benefits.


http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/MULE.gif
25 years

Yeah, see, why does no one ever think of the male prostitutes? Seriously, guys, it doesn't have to be a one way street.

Especially when you factor in homosexuality and bisexuality. http://generalitemafia.ipbfree.com/uploads/ipbfree.com/generalitemafia/emo-sleazygrinvp9.png

:$ St. Pauli comes to mind.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/MULE.gif
25 years


And now some things look a whole lot different under certain lighting.

http://www.crestpacificbeach.com/Images/Crest%20Liquor_Beer_St%20Pauli%20Girl.jpg

Reading the whole article, it doesn't decriminalize prostitution. What it does is prevent investigations into prostitution. That means things like pimps will have free reign as long as they prevent their prostitutes from running off, while also crippling human trafficking investigations. If a prostitute ran off and reported her pimp, she'd still be arrested as a prostitute.


No, she wouldn't. The article specifically says that authorities cannot arrest or prosecute anyone for prostitution.

The article says the propostion "forbids local authorities from investigating, arresting or prosecuting anyone for selling sex".

No, she wouldn't. The article specifically says that authorities cannot arrest or prosecute anyone for prostitution.

Forbids from making arrests as in making busts, but does that apply to taking in people who show up at the station? I'll give that it doesn't seem very clear, at least without looking at the exact bill, but as it is, I don't think it's the panacea people believe it is. And of course, there's the other problem I've described below.


Now, this means that a pimp could probably not be investigated, arrested, or prosecuted for being a pimp. However, he could be both investigated, arrested, and prosecuted for assault, kidnapping, etc.

The problem is de-stigmatizing prostitution to the point where prostitutes feel safe enough to report this sort of action, and more than that, where they are able to, with a reasonable level of certainty that it won't fall through, nothing happens, and they end up back with the pimp.

Without the investigations of pimp activity, how are you going to get enough evidence to prosecute? Getting evidence enough to prosecute rapists is hard enough as it is, and that's with actual investigations. Prosecuting pimps who enslave their prostitutes through a system of abuse and drugs with this hamstringing of investigation methods will be nigh impossible.

Once again, the prostitutes are left out to hang.

And more than that, how do you expect to curb human trafficking at all if you're not allowed to investigate or make arrests? On the slim hope that someone will escape and make a report? But then there's the no investigation thing again.

No, I don't think this will lower instances of abuse and human trafficking. If anything, it will increase it.

I disaprove of prostitution. No woman should have to sink to that level.

I approve of legalizing prostitution on the grounds that no one should be able to tell a woman what she can do with her body.

As for prostitution itself, if the woman wants to do it, who am I to judge?

What about male prostitutes?

Selling is legal.

Fucking is legal.

Why isn't selling fucking legal?

For those who aren't aware, I don't know about the rest that followed but this is an unattributed George Carlin quote, not an original Intangelon quote.

It's an issue of human mental health. Having sex on the scale that it's an actual profession is usually a sign of a mental issue.


How so? Does that apply to other pleasurable activities done as a profession or is sex somehow special in this regard?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/21/san.francisco.prostitution.ap/index.html

Decriminalizing prostitution? Does that town have no shame? ;)



Does the image of activist hookers make anyone else giggle? :D
It may make it safer for both the worker and the client... and if it's not forbidden it may not be so attractive.

Forbids from making arrests as in making busts, but does that apply to taking in people who show up at the station?
You are being purposefully obtuse. I am pretty sure "can't arrest anyone for prostitution" applies in all cases in which the opportunity would arise.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/21/san.francisco.prostitution.ap/index.html

Decriminalizing prostitution? Does that town have no shame? ;)

Good, it will make the industry safer. And I never thought it did have shame.

Does the image of activist hookers make anyone else giggle? :D

Yes

And in the case of God's Wrath... fucking bring it.

Don't know bout you but I'd perfer to be laid and fight God then be chill with
God and not be fucked

Good, it will make the industry safer.

Why?

Rape and abuse cases have a low enough conviction rate as it is, you really think the police will expend the time and effort ensuring everything is 'safer' for prostitutes, that they'll get better treatment in court?

People live in la-la land.

I would make it a criminal offense to visit prostitutes, this would be non-enforced unless there's an active reason to do so, as in a public complaint, a disturbance of the peace or a complaint of either rape or abuse by the prostitute. In this case, the customer is automatically arrested for visiting, any other charges are treated accordingly. The prostitute is charged with nothing, only required to be a witness at any court hearing.

You are being purposefully obtuse. I am pretty sure "can't arrest anyone for prostitution" applies in all cases in which the opportunity would arise.

Even so, it does not address the rest of my post, namely, that it will make things far more dangerous for prostitutes, since pimps and the like will have nearly free reign to do as they will as long as they don't produce a corpse or allow an escapee. No investigations remember?

Why?

Rape and abuse cases have a low enough conviction rate as it is, you really think the police will expend the time and effort ensuring everything is 'safer' for prostitutes, that they'll get better treatment in court?

People live in la-la land.

Don't forget that the police won't be given the funds or authority to make investigations into prostitution or human trafficking either, thanks to this proposition. So for everyone cheering it along, either they support, are ignorant, or don't care about, human trafficking.

Even so, it does not address the rest of my post, namely, that it will make things far more dangerous for prostitutes, since pimps and the like will have nearly free reign to do as they will as long as they don't produce a corpse or allow an escapee. No investigations remember?



Don't forget that the police won't be given the funds or authority to make investigations into prostitution or human trafficking either, thanks to this proposition. So for everyone cheering it along, either they support, are ignorant, or don't care about, human trafficking.

We've been on the same side of this debate before, I added to my post as above - thoughts?

Why?

Rape and abuse cases have a low enough conviction rate as it is, you really think the police will expend the time and effort ensuring everything is 'safer' for prostitutes, that they'll get better treatment in court?

People live in la-la land.

Because I didn't read the article correctly, thats why. But if it were to be legalised that would be different and would make things safer.

I would make it a criminal offense to visit prostitutes, this would be non-enforced unless there's an active reason to do so, as in a public complaint, a disturbance of the peace or a complaint of either rape or abuse by the prostitute. In this case, the customer is automatically arrested for visiting, any other charges are treated accordingly. The prostitute is charged with nothing, only required to be a witness at any court hearing.

So we will aresst those doing the drugs but those selling it will get off scot free I got ya.

Even so, it does not address the rest of my post, namely, that it will make things far more dangerous for prostitutes, since pimps and the like will have nearly free reign to do as they will as long as they don't produce a corpse or allow an escapee. No investigations remember?

No investigations of prostitution. Assault is not prostitution.

So we will aresst those doing the drugs but those selling it will get off scot free I got ya.

No :confused:

It's more akin to prosecuting the buyer but not the drug, the issue is that prostitutes, unlike drugs, are human beings.

The seller would be the pimp, and I'd be quite happy to have them behind bars as well.

Anyone actually interested can read this: http://www.ilo.org/dyn/declaris/DECLARATIONWEB.DOWNLOAD_BLOB?Var_DocumentID=6676

Legalisation increases trafficking and increases illegal prostitution, raise the supply and you're simply meeting unlimited demand.

We've been on the same side of this debate before, I added to my post as above - thoughts?

Making it illegal to solicit may or may not work. On the surface, it looks like it may work, but insofar as I know, it seems to operate on the hope that pimps and organized groups of human traffickers won't intimidate the prostitutes/slaves to silence.

Making prostitution illegal/legal won't really solve the primary problem that arises from the act, namely parasites who come in to monopolize the money by controlling the people with force and/or drugs. Of course you can't take out the money aspect, because that's almost always the reason why anyone goes into (or gets forced into) the business in the first place, and would be nigh impossible anyway.

Legalizing it and forcing streetwalkers to work in licensed brothels just means that you'll still end up with the problems of facing illegal brothels, and still have the occasional streetwalker.

There's no universal cure, I'll admit, but so far, the only thing that looks like it might produce the least problems (which doesn't mean it won't have a host of its own problems) would be to regulate/unionize it. Or maybe not.

One thing for certain though, would be an absolute need for an increase in harsh penalties for pimps and human traffickers, as well as more thorough investigations.

No investigations of prostitution. Assault is not prostitution.

And if the prostitutes are too scared to make the report, there won't be an investigation. And people can be made too fearful to do so with force and/or drugs, which won't be investigated until a report is made.

See the catch-22?

Your ideas only work in a happy world where all prostitutes and slaves (human trafficking) are brave, upstanding people ready to make a daring Hollywood style escape to report their abusers and are guaranteed a conviction with 100% success rate and sentences long enough to keep them from coming back to enact revenge.

Reality doesn't work like that.

It's hard enough to get convictions for rape and spousal abuse. What makes you think pimps will be easier to convict, especially with the lack of pre-existing investigations that the proposition intends?

Making it illegal to solicit may or may not work. On the surface, it looks like it may work, but insofar as I know, it seems to operate on the hope that pimps and organized groups of human traffickers won't intimidate the prostitutes/slaves to silence.

Making prostitution illegal/legal won't really solve the primary problem that arises from the act, namely parasites who come in to monopolize the money by controlling the people with force and/or drugs. Of course you can't take out the money aspect, because that's almost always the reason why anyone goes into (or gets forced into) the business in the first place, and would be nigh impossible anyway.

Legalizing it and forcing streetwalkers to work in licensed brothels just means that you'll still end up with the problems of facing illegal brothels, and still have the occasional streetwalker.

There's no universal cure, I'll admit, but so far, the only thing that looks like it might produce the least problems (which doesn't mean it won't have a host of its own problems) would be to regulate/unionize it.

It mostly works in Sweden, although they differ in that being a customer is simply illegal and police can actively arrest without any notification by the prostitute or public, trafficking has dropped to near 0 but the downside is that prostitutes need to very much go underground because customers will not openly approach.

First, what works in Sweden may not work elsewhere and, second, the aim of automatic arrest due to active complaint rather than passive investigation means customers have slightly less risk, hence there's still some visibility.

My difference is that the police will only be called in on complaint, not just that they see it going on.

No one expects to stamp out prostitution, and this still allows freedom of choice on the part of the prostitute but provides far greater protection.

It mostly works in Sweden, although they differ in that being a customer is simply illegal and police can actively arrest without any notification by the prostitute or public, trafficking has dropped to near 0 but the downside is that prostitutes need to very much go underground because customers will not openly approach.

First, what works in Sweden may not work elsewhere and, second, the aim of automatic arrest due to active complaint rather than passive investigation means customers have slightly less risk, hence there's still some visibility.

My difference is that the police will only be called in on complaint, not just that they see it going on.

No one expects to stamp out prostitution, and this still allows freedom of choice on the part of the prostitute but provides far greater protection.

I suppose it does. But as you've acknowledged, what works in Sweden may not work in other places. I suspect this is especially so in places where pimps and human trafficking cartels are well entrenched.

To make it work in Sweden, I suspect you would need to launch a massive and thorough clean up, with hefty jail terms for pimps and traffickers. This would probably entail a cost in both manpower and assets that is truly staggering.

Well, after all, prostitution is the oldest profession in the world. :pDirty stinkin' apes (Epic Planet of the Apes Yell) came and took my hookers four million years ago.:mad:

Dirty stinkin' apes (Epic Planet of the Apes Yell) came and took my hookers four million years ago.:mad:

You suck as a pimp, yo!:eek2:

No investigations of prostitution. Assault is not prostitution.

Neither is human trafficking, strangely enough.

And if the prostitutes are too scared to make the report, there won't be an investigation.

As a general rule, if the victim of a crime won't make a report, there won't be an investigation.

As a general rule, if the victim of a crime won't make a report, there won't be an investigation.

So human trafficking and slavery gets a free pass with this proposition, because the victims are usually in no condition to make a report. Wonderful.

It will actually make things worse for human trafficking victims and abused prostitutes, as they are still in an illegal profession, meaning they can't go to the police because they might get arrested, and the police can't make any moves against the profession as a whole, including pimps.

In short, this is a green light to pimps saying "Do whatever you want to your prostitutes."

It's disgusting. And that people are celebrating it, well, either they didn't read the whole thing, or they're living in magic dream land where pimps, drug addiction and human trafficking don't exist.

Would the proposed measure decriminalize assault and battery and human trafficking, too?

It's an issue of human mental health. Having sex on the scale that it's an actual profession is usually a sign of a mental issue.

There are those who do it because they enjoy it. They, however, are incredibly rare.

The same could be said of most lawyers.

*hides*

I think you're failing to understand the issue. This isn't about California, it's about San Francisco. San Fran has no authority to tell the state what is, and is not, illegal. Prostitution is, and will continue to be, illegal in the state of California, San Fran can't control that.

What they CAN control however, is the city police. Some in San Fran want to make prostitution legal, but they can't change state law, the only thing they can do is control what city police do.

Please don't ever call it that again. Seriously. Imagine someone calling it "Bosto".

Funny enough, selling fucking is legal. You can legally get paid to fuck another person--but only if a video camera's involved, it seems. So why pornography and not prostitution?

I seriously need to find my Philosophy of Sex book and cite some of the essays on this. They're excellent.

Would the proposed measure decriminalize assault and battery and human trafficking, too?

No, it would merely make A&B and human trafficking linked to prostitution effectively hands off insofar as investigations go. You can't have investigations without leads, and the sex industry is where you normally start when looking into for most of the worst cases of human trafficking.

So unless the pimps and smugglers abuse or smuggle right in front of the police, there's nothing they can do.

Funny enough, selling fucking is legal. You can legally get paid to fuck another person--but only if a video camera's involved, it seems. So why pornography and not prostitution?

I seriously need to find my Philosophy of Sex book and cite some of the essays on this. They're excellent.I've heard this arguement before. If I recall, the reasoning/loophole here is that you're not getting paid for the act, you're selling the rights to reproduce/distribute your image/recorded performance.

No :confused:

It's more akin to prosecuting the buyer but not the drug, the issue is that prostitutes, unlike drugs, are human beings.

The seller would be the pimp, and I'd be quite happy to have them behind bars as well.

Anyone actually interested can read this: http://www.ilo.org/dyn/declaris/DECLARATIONWEB.DOWNLOAD_BLOB?Var_DocumentID=6676

Legalisation increases trafficking and increases illegal prostitution, raise the supply and you're simply meeting unlimited demand.

Seems interesting and I may just read it later. With a legalised prostution it allows the government to place in restrictions and regulations that if it was illegal it wouldn't be able to do so. This would include ensuring that STD's are kept in check and not allowing people with one to sell their body, other include ensuring that consumers are protected under cusotmer rights and such as well as bringing brothels up to safety standards with other industries. etc.

*Raises hand politely*

Hi. I have a question: So Congressmen can do with male boy pages, and San Franciscans cannot do it with professional courtesans? I demand justice for all people!!! Anyone applying to be a Congressional Page? (Just kidding)

So human trafficking and slavery gets a free pass with this proposition, because the victims are usually in no condition to make a report. Wonderful.

And they get a free pass without the proposition as well.

And they get a free pass without the proposition as well.

Without the proposition, the police at least get the funding and authority to make investigations without having the need for a victim to show up floating in the harbor.

They have legal brothels in Nevada and the treatment, conditions and overall seediness of the whole affair are only marginally better than the illegal version. Yes, the illegality is part of the problem, which this measure seeks to remove at least in part, but it goes deeper than that. The fantasy is the gorgeous woman who picks and chooses her clients and is well paid by considerate men of means. Reality isn't so kind. The 'business' that surrounds it doesn't really care if you like what or who you do, if you're well paid or if you're even safe. It's a business of the most ruthless nature and the primary concern is money, sadly much of which does not 'trickle down' to the service provider.
and that's what happens when you legalize it but don't regulate it. can you imagine the place if it had regular health inspections of both premises and workers? where a safe and clean work environment is required by law?

Usually, Non Aligned States, for the crime of prostitution, the officer has to witness or have reported the act of selling sex. Just because you know the woman is a prostitute isn't enough to arrest her.

Usually, Non Aligned States, for the crime of prostitution, the officer has to witness or have reported the act of selling sex. Just because you know the woman is a prostitute isn't enough to arrest her.

I'm not talking so much about prostitution as I am the problems the lack of pro-active investigations will do in terms of pimps and human trafficking.

So they cannot arrest a prostitute if she turns herself in. But that doesn't account for much, because it relies on prostitutes not being completely cowed by pimps, who often use force and drugs to ensure their hold over the prostitutes.

So human trafficking and slavery gets a free pass with this proposition, because the victims are usually in no condition to make a report. Wonderful.

Human slavery is not prostitution. It is an entirely different crime, even if the slave is being used for sexual purposes.

Please don't ever call it that again. Seriously. Imagine someone calling it "Bosto".

Better that than him calling it the disgusting "Frisco." *cringes*

Why doesn't anyone compare the rates of all the things that old church ladies say will befall society if prostitution is ignored to what they are in places where prostitution has been legal for years?

It logically has to benefit one argument or the other, yet neither side cites it.

Human slavery is not prostitution. It is an entirely different crime, even if the slave is being used for sexual purposes.

How do you tell the difference, when you're not allowed to investigate the matter which on the surface, only appears to be prostitution? It's not like pimps and human traffickers have actual auction blocks where they put their slaves up for the highest bidders.

Prostitution and human trafficking are intrinsically linked. You can't crack down on one without at least following the leads from the other. No, maybe you can. But it will likely be much harder, more expensive, more time consuming, and likely to leave more victims out in the cold as the process grinds along.

Anyone actually interested can read this: http://www.ilo.org/dyn/declaris/DECLARATIONWEB.DOWNLOAD_BLOB?Var_DocumentID=6676

Legalisation increases trafficking and increases illegal prostitution, raise the supply and you're simply meeting unlimited demand.

Your source does not say that at all.

If you read the conclusion of the paper you linked to, you would read the following at the bottom of page 23 and the top of page 24:

However, we have not examined the link between legalization of prostitution and prostitution incidence, and have not found any correlation between legalized prostitution and trafficking.

I suggest that you read your sources carefully before claiming they support your argument.

Does anyone have any source of any sex workers in the area, and their opinions on the legislation? I noticed that their voice has been ignored so far in this debate.

and that's what happens when you legalize it but don't regulate it. can you imagine the place if it had regular health inspections of both premises and workers? where a safe and clean work environment is required by law?


See example, the Netherlands Antilles, most notably the island of Curacao.

Prostitution is tolerated. A large open-air brothel called "Le Mirage" or "Campo Alegre" operates near the airport since the 1940s. As prostitution exists in most parts of the world, Curaçao has implemented a different approach on handling prostitution. By monitoring, containing and regulating it, the workers in these establishments are given a safe environment and access to medical practitioners.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-sfsex15-2008sep15,0,5860203.story

According to the above link, it is the sex workers themselves who are trying to get this legislation passed.

If this law is supposedly so awful for sex workers, why are they supporting it?

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-sfsex15-2008sep15,0,5860203.story

According to the above link, it is the sex workers themselves who are trying to get this legislation passed.

If this law is supposedly so awful for sex workers, why are they supporting it?

She's an incall worker. I think what most people think of when they tink, prostution is the low-level, pimped out, most likely strung out street whore. These people would se no difference from the changing of the law: thei lives would still suck. Upper class escorts, craigslist girls, and other incall type activities (not counting Asian Massage Parlors, which is a whole nother type of hell, supposedly) would benefit greatly from the passing of the law.

Proposition K would ban San Francisco police from using any public resources to investigate or prosecute sex workers on prostitution charges. Critics say the law would attract pimps, human smugglers and others who profit from the sex trade.

Also note, this according to this article, this doesn't say that S.F. would stop trying to prosecute pimps, drug pushers, and customers.

So human trafficking and slavery gets a free pass with this proposition, because the victims are usually in no condition to make a report. Wonderful.

Does battery get a "free pass" in this country? If not, this line of argument is silly.

No crime is investigated unless something brings it to the attention of the authorities. That doesn't mean that anyone is getting a "free pass".

I'm not talking so much about prostitution as I am the problems the lack of pro-active investigations will do in terms of pimps and human trafficking.

So they cannot arrest a prostitute if she turns herself in. But that doesn't account for much, because it relies on prostitutes not being completely cowed by pimps, who often use force and drugs to ensure their hold over the prostitutes.
Observational points (unless someone can link to Prop K)
Human Trafficking is NOT prostitution. it's a seperate crime that can include kidnapping.
Pimps who regularly beat their girls/force them to do drugs does not fall under 'investigating prostitution' but investigating assault and battery and drug use.

to investigate prostitution would probably be more like going to a massage parlor as a customer with the express objection to see if prostitution is going on, probably can extend to regular sweeps of streetwalkers and even patrolling for streetwalkers.

I don't think it will hamper any sting operation focusing on the Johns. but for me to be sure, It would be nice to read the proposition.

oh and I don't know about anywhere else, but here, the cops are real chummy with the walkers (even tho it's illegal here.) so a woman sporting a couple of bruises will get noticed.


See example, the Netherlands Antilles, most notably the island of Curacao. thanks. great example of treating Prostitution as any other business.

http://www.yesonpropk.org/initiative.html

There is the text of Proposition K. It was devised by the Erotic Service Providers Union.

Here is the report done by the Public Defender's office:

http://www.yesonpropk.org/Pub_Defender_Analysi_ProstMeasure.pdf

Please note that the PD's analysis states clearly that it should not impede law enforcement officials from investigating human trafficking or abuses against sex workers, and will significantly reduce the caseload.

So, as well as having the sex workers and the Public Defender supporting it, it also seems to be getting support from health (http://yesonpropk.org/CSTD.html) and legal (http://yesonpropk.org/NLG.html) experts.

Lets compare the options here:

Prostitution is illegal:
- Prostitute comes into a police station and tells police her pimp has hit her. Police arrest the prostitute for selling sex and go looking for the pimp for assault/battery.

Prostitution is legal:
- Prostitute comes into a police station and tells police her pimp has hit her. Police go looking for the pimp for assault/battery.

Suppose you were a prostitute. All else being equal, which situation would you like better? (Because of course, making prostitution legal certainly doesn't make prostitutes less willing to report crimes against them)

Let's look at it from a differnet angle. If this goes through, this will make San Francisco a tourist haven...again. And if the whores are smart enough to do it behing closed doors, it doesn't have to hurt esttablished tourism or property values! Everyone wins!

Let's look at it from a differnet angle. If this goes through, this will make San Francisco a tourist haven...again. And if the whores are smart enough to do it behing closed doors, it doesn't have to hurt esttablished tourism or property values! Everyone wins!

In a city known for gay pride, straight prostitutes having to hide behind closed doors is rather ironic.

Lol. Plus if you could legally get laid in San Francisco, Oakland would officially have no reason to exist anymore! Yay!

/hides from Oakland based posters.

After reading Prop K, your fears about it preventing investigation in traffiking and other crimes can be laid to rest.

Section 2. Requiring the San Francisco Police Department and San Francisco County Office of the District Attorney to enforce existing laws regardless of the victim’s sex worker status.

The San Francisco Police Department, the Office of the District Attorney, and associated law enforcement agencies shall be required to practice consistent and rigorous enforcement against coercion, extortion, battery, rape and other violent crimes, regardless of the victim’s status as a sex worker.

The San Francisco Police Department and the Office of the District Attorney shall be required to practice full disclosure in the investigation and prosecution of charges of rape, extortion, sexual assault, and battery against sex workers, exotic dancers or erotic service providers.


Law enforcement agencies shall not allocate any resources for the investigation and prosecution of prostitutes for prostitution

so it's actually forcing police to fully investigate any and all reports/complaints reported by Prostitutes.

and that's what happens when you legalize it but don't regulate it. can you imagine the place if it had regular health inspections of both premises and workers? where a safe and clean work environment is required by law?

Usually, Non Aligned States, for the crime of prostitution, the officer has to witness or have reported the act of selling sex. Just because you know the woman is a prostitute isn't enough to arrest her.

But you CAN go out undercover and arrest anyone who offers their services.

But you CAN go out undercover and arrest anyone who offers their services.

Hard to say really. while the Proposal is more that if a known prostitute reports a crime, the police cannot take her profession into account. The proposal notes instances where the cops treated known prostitutes with less civility and their complaints with less... seriousness than if it wasn't a known prostitute doing the reporting.

but this statement:
Law enforcement agencies shall not allocate any resources for the investigation and prosecution of prostitutes for prostitution.
sounds like a no. but that is on the sellers. nothing to protect the Johns.

How do you tell the difference, when you're not allowed to investigate the matter which on the surface, only appears to be prostitution?

How do you tell the difference between a good marriage and an abusive relationship when, on the surface, it just seems like a marriage?

Clearly, the cops should be investigating all marriages!

She's an incall worker. I think what most people think of when they tink, prostution is the low-level, pimped out, most likely strung out street whore. These people would se no difference from the changing of the law: thei lives would still suck. Upper class escorts, craigslist girls, and other incall type activities (not counting Asian Massage Parlors, which is a whole nother type of hell, supposedly) would benefit greatly from the passing of the law.


Also note, this according to this article, this doesn't say that S.F. would stop trying to prosecute pimps, drug pushers, and customers.

Actually only about 25% of prostitutes are street-walkers. Most operate from brothels or are call girls.

Lol. Plus if you could legally get laid in San Francisco, Oakland would officially have no reason to exist anymore! Yay!

/hides from Oakland based posters.

Yes it would. It would still have its Mexican restaurants.

Did you used to live around here?

Yes it would. It would still have its Mexican restaurants.

Did you used to live around here?

Born in and spent the first 8 years after decanting in Fairfield. Step mom and her family's from Oakland/Vallejo.

/hides from Oakland based posters.Hell, i do that already, out of self-defense, and i'm nowhere NEAR there (not coincidentally)

Born in and spent the first 8 years after decanting in Fairfield. Step mom and her family's from Oakland/Vallejo.

Cool.

Your source does not say that at all.

If you read the conclusion of the paper you linked to, you would read the following at the bottom of page 23 and the top of page 24:



I suggest that you read your sources carefully before claiming they support your argument.

Does anyone have any source of any sex workers in the area, and their opinions on the legislation? I noticed that their voice has been ignored so far in this debate.

In context...

In particular, we find that prostitution incidence and openness – including the permeability of borders - in countries of destination affect the demand of TV in the destination countries. In addition, female youth unemployment also plays a significant role in fueling the supply of TV. Policies that focus on addressing these underlying factors of human trafficking could have an important impact on the market, in addition to the protection and prevention of TV. However, we have not examined the link between legalization of prostitution and prostitution incidence, and have not found any correlation between legalized prostitution and trafficking.

They haven't noted it because they didn't specifically study it, there are correlations.

http://mc2.vicnet.net.au/home/catwaust/files/leginvic.htm - the case of Melbourne.

In context...



They haven't noted it because they didn't specifically study it, there are correlations.

http://mc2.vicnet.net.au/home/catwaust/files/leginvic.htm - the case of Melbourne.

Nice editorial written by anti-legalisation activists. Do you have an actual study that shows that legalisation of prostitution increases trafficking and increases illegal prostitution?

And I liked the way that the editorial portrayed all men as abusive, all sex workers as drug-addled victims, and defined all sex work as violence. No attempt to cloud the debate with emotional rhetoric there.:rolleyes:

Lol. Plus if you could legally get laid in San Francisco, Oakland would officially have no reason to exist anymore! Yay!

/hides from Oakland based posters.

Hell, i do that already, out of self-defense, and i'm nowhere NEAR there (not coincidentally)

Don't make me get out my green-and-gold baseball bat and hand out whoopings.

I don't care if prostitution is decriminalized. It is the world's oldest profession, after all.

Please don't ever call it that again. Seriously. Imagine someone calling it "Bosto".

San Fran, San Fran, San Fran....


http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff315/Sarothai/Smileys/winkingsmiley.gif

Don't make me get out my green-and-gold baseball bat and hand out whoopings.
I don't mind the whoopings, but ya better make sure there's a bit of pitch for the bat.
We should probably also discuss safewords.
*nods*