Busting the John Instead of the Hooker - Good Policy or Potential Disaster?

[konradv]

There are actually three criminals involved; the "john", the prostitute, and the pimp. And now HIV and Aids can be added to the health hazards.

The pimp keeps the prostitute hooked on drugs which may eventually kill her. The prostitute may have sex with 30 or 40 or 50 "johns" a day, any of which may have god know what disease. The "john" goes home and spreads it to his wife/gf. The pimp drives off in a new Cadillac to find more girls. And the beat goes on!

We should legalize this, and tax it?

It is legal in Nevada! Legalization though is another argument. George is (from my perspective) proposing a double standard. Sure a fine upstanding man loses a lot of face if he is busted solicitating a prostitute but if you commit the crime you must be willing to do the time or pay the consequences. That is what is wrong with society today, everybody wants a free ride! When you do or say something there are consequences, letting people off without paying those consequences is what leads to anarchy. Thats why there are laws and morals. This thread and the comments contained within show how far this country has fallen into the abyss of me, me ,me. It is no wonder why politics are so muddied with lies and mud throwing, why our families are falling apart and why we, America, are looked at by the world as imbeciles.

Why should I be willing to do the time? Maybe I made a political statement. Did the original Tea Partiers turn themselves in? Rosa Parks committed a crime. Was she wrong? Simply saying, one must take their punishment and shut up, takes away my right to protest on a certain level. Just because something is a crime, doesn't mean we have to accept it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This will just encourage everyone to become a hooker

That'll be $200 for reading this post

 

[MikeK]

[...]

This thread is prompted by a post MikeK made in the other thread on legalizing prostitution. I await, with interest, the comments on this OP.

While the laws against prostitution certainly are worthy of thoughtful review, my main interest where this specific issue (decoy/sting operation) is concerned is the insidiously inconspicuous drift toward police state methods of law enforcement which these operations clearly represent.

The example which George Constanza (and I) have presented for consideration is unique in one outstanding way; men are being arrested and socially stigmatized for allegedly "promoting prostitution" when in fact they were plainly enticed by a police officer into committing the act they are charged with. While the authorities offer some artfully contorted reasons why the rules of entrapment do not apply in this situation, there is no question that these victims of the decoy team were entrapped by them.

If it can be established that each of the men arrested by this decoy team did proceed to the location where they were arrested with deliberate intent to find and proposition a prostitute, then there is some basis whereby the rules of entrapment are null. But if a man is simply passing by on his way to somewhere and he notices an attractive woman and stops to engage her in conversation, and the woman, who is not a prostitute but a police officer, intentionally lures him into offering her money for sex, this is unmitigated enticement.

The man has been enticed by the police into committing an offense. The most relevant fact is the offense could not have taken place without the deliberate and calculated actions of the police. But what concerns me most is how little outrage is expressed by the majority of citizens who become aware of this incremental step in the direction of laissez faire authoritarian control of citizen conduct.

Once this step has been taken and gone unchallenged -- what's next?

 

[MikeK]

From the libertarian, consenting adult point of view, why shouldn't two people be able to freely have sex, with one paying the other money? Why does selling sex for a specific, mutually agreed upon price have to be illegal?

The short answer: Religious fanaticism and a wide variety of sexual hangups, mainly repression, latent inhibition and guilt feelings.

 

[MikeK]

There are actually three criminals involved; the "john", the prostitute, and the pimp. And now HIV and Aids can be added to the health hazards.

The pimp keeps the prostitute hooked on drugs which may eventually kill her. The prostitute may have sex with 30 or 40 or 50 "johns" a day, any of which may have god know what disease. The "john" goes home and spreads it to his wife/gf. The pimp drives off in a new Cadillac to find more girls. And the beat goes on!

We should legalize this, and tax it?

Marv,

I can best respond to this with an anecdote which I hope you don't find boring or imposing.

I was stationed on Japan and Okinawa in the mid-1950s. At the time prostitution was legal, plentiful, very inexpensive and tightly controlled by the Far East Occupation Command, which imposed strict rules and required a weekly medical checkup of all registered prostitutes. That medical checkup involved a blood sample, vaginal smear and saliva sample, all of which were analyzed on the spot.

Each girl who passed the tests (very few failed) was issued a dated card which she was required to post on the wall of her room. In addition to the medical tests the girls and their rooms were randomly inspected for cleanliness by Navy nurses with MP authority.

During my 18 month tour of duty I can tell you that I patronized a large number of different prostitutes on average of three to five times a week -- as did most of the Marines I served with. Although we were required to swallow two penicillin tablets when signing out on liberty and two more when signing in, I never used a condom and I never caught any kind of sexually transmitted disease.

Fast forward to 1959. I met a really good-looking woman on Myrtle Beach, SC, and ended up in a motel with her that night. In addition to her good looks this woman was the image of cleanliness and smelled like a bar of soap. But I caught gonorrhea from her.

The moral of the story is if prostitution were legal, taxed, and tightly controlled by health departments with enforcement authority, there would be very little of the kind of problems associated with it in its presently illegal status.

 

[MikeK]

The prostitution laws seem to cause more problems than they fix.

They do indeed.

That said, if the state wishes to shut down an anti social activity, they need to do so in a way that does not create more problems and actually works.

Without resorting to forceful police state methods there is no way to eliminate ("shut down") the practice of prostitution.

All of the problems associated with prostitution in America today are consequent to the stupidly prohibitive laws.

 

[MikeK]

It is legal in Nevada! Legalization though is another argument.

George is (from my perspective) proposing a double standard. Sure a fine upstanding man loses a lot of face if he is busted solicitating a prostitute but if you commit the crime you must be willing to do the time or pay the consequences. That is what is wrong with society today, everybody wants a free ride! When you do or say something there are consequences, letting people off without paying those consequences is what leads to anarchy. Thats why there are laws and morals. This thread and the comments contained within show how far this country has fallen into the abyss of me, me ,me. It is no wonder why politics are so muddied with lies and mud throwing, why our families are falling apart and why we, America, are looked at by the world as imbeciles.

What you perceive as wanting a free ride is in this example a simple matter of arguing against what is an unreasonable, unnecessary and counterproductive set of laws. What I find most interesting about your position is you appear to manifest a textbook example of the authoritarian mentality. You seem to be demanding punishment without considering the need for or validity of the law which has been violated.

Disregarding the moral aspect because it is influenced by such individualized factors as religion, personal attitudes, etc., do you believe government should have the power to prohibit two mature, properly disposed adults from engaging in a sexual act because it includes the exchange of money?

If so, why?

 

[camcooh2]

Certainly the police stings re entrapment are deeply offensive. How about we run the same game on the cops? How about setting up "stings" where cops are offered bribes, for example? I don't think that would go over so big but the police love to play these kind of games with the public. I think everybody should share in the fun.

 

[zzzz]

It is legal in Nevada! Legalization though is another argument.

George is (from my perspective) proposing a double standard. Sure a fine upstanding man loses a lot of face if he is busted solicitating a prostitute but if you commit the crime you must be willing to do the time or pay the consequences. That is what is wrong with society today, everybody wants a free ride! When you do or say something there are consequences, letting people off without paying those consequences is what leads to anarchy. Thats why there are laws and morals. This thread and the comments contained within show how far this country has fallen into the abyss of me, me ,me. It is no wonder why politics are so muddied with lies and mud throwing, why our families are falling apart and why we, America, are looked at by the world as imbeciles.

What you perceive as wanting a free ride is in this example a simple matter of arguing against what is an unreasonable, unnecessary and counterproductive set of laws. What I find most interesting about your position is you appear to manifest a textbook example of the authoritarian mentality. You seem to be demanding punishment without considering the need for or validity of the law which has been violated.

Disregarding the moral aspect because it is influenced by such individualized factors as religion, personal attitudes, etc., do you believe government should have the power to prohibit two mature, properly disposed adults from engaging in a sexual act because it includes the exchange of money?

If so, why?

I am only saying that the law is the law. If it is in effect, enforce it equally! If the people don't want it change it. But if not then enforce it. This is the same argument I have with illegal immigration. There is a law on the books and the federal officials took an oath to uphold the laws of the country, so do it!

I have no problem with legalized prostitution as long as it is done like it is in Nevada, as a controlled form of business with health checks and so forth. The same goes for certain drugs, legalize them the way alcohol and cigs are legalized. Just tax them like everything else.

 

[Madeline]

George, there aren't many crimes a high status person could be arrested for that would not be shameful and carry heavy out-of-court consequences. I have a friend who was a lawyer until he got caught shoplifting and the bar took his license. I knew kids in law school who snorted cocaine on the PAL pavilion where we held one of our end-of-school parties. (They did not get caught, but what a monster risk, eh?)

I also resist your underlying assumption that prostitution is a victimless crime and hurts nobody. It certainly hurts the neighborhood that gets turned over to pimps and whores. It hurts the women who are forced into it, or forced to remain in it. It hurts the sex partners of men who use whores, and infect them with everything from AIDS to herpes. It hurts the children and loved ones of the whores.

And this notion that jail "doesn't hurt" someone who has a marginal lifestyle? That is so elitist I cannot believe you said it. I'm sick to death of this preference for jailing only the poor and allowing the rich to get off on "house arrest" etc.

 

[Madeline]

Certainly the police stings re entrapment are deeply offensive. How about we run the same game on the cops? How about setting up "stings" where cops are offered bribes, for example? I don't think that would go over so big but the police love to play these kind of games with the public. I think everybody should share in the fun.

I think this idea is a hoot...and has merit. We should dangle backtalking club-goers in front of Cleveland cops and see what happens.


Reported beating of a Morehouse graduate by off-duty officer adds to controversy in Cleveland's Warehouse District | cleveland.com

 

[Immanuel]

Good idea.

Some products, like prostitution, pose health and crime hazards. All products require a market. Take away the market, and the hazards go with it.

True - but, in this case, shouldn't the potential harm to the male customer be considered, since it is so out of proportion to the crime committed? Compare the potential harm to the real criminal here - the hooker herself. Very little potential harm to the hooker as a practical matter.

No, I don't agree. The customer knows that he is breaking the law. If he is not willing to suffer the consequences of breaking the law, then he should not be breaking the law in the first place.

Immie

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Legalize it, tax it.

 

[konradv]

Good idea.

Some products, like prostitution, pose health and crime hazards. All products require a market. Take away the market, and the hazards go with it.

True - but, in this case, shouldn't the potential harm to the male customer be considered, since it is so out of proportion to the crime committed? Compare the potential harm to the real criminal here - the hooker herself. Very little potential harm to the hooker as a practical matter.

No, I don't agree. The customer knows that he is breaking the law. If he is not willing to suffer the consequences of breaking the law, then he should not be breaking the law in the first place.

Immie

I certainly don't agree with THAT!!! Why should he be willing to suffer the consequences? All the police and society have to do is mind their own business. To much time and expense is spent on these types of victimless crimes, when there are all sorts of violent crimes going on daily.

 

[Madeline]

Street whoring is NOT a victimless crime.

 

[konradv]

Street whoring is NOT a victimless crime.

Only because the laws have made it so. Legalize, regulate and tax. If that were done, I fail to see where you get a "victim". There'd be no need for "protection" from pimps. Health issues would be dealt with in the licenscing procedure and the taxes would pay for it all and probably a lot more.

 

[Immanuel]

Street whoring is NOT a victimless crime.

Only because the laws have made it so. Legalize, regulate and tax. If that were done, I fail to see where you get a "victim". There'd be no need for "protection" from pimps. Health issues would be dealt with in the licenscing procedure and the taxes would pay for it all and probably a lot more.

I don't have a problem with legalizing, regulating and taxing it.

However, it is currently a crime. The John's know it. They take the risk when they commit the crime.

My philosophy is don't come crying to me when you get busted doing something you know is against the law and expect to get any damned sympathy from me.

As far as I am concerned, dope should be legalized too, but for the moment it is not. People that use it take a risk of getting caught and when they do, that is their tough shit. If they didn't want to get busted then they should not be using it in the first place.

Immie

 

[William Joyce]

Prostitution seems to cause a host of problems around it. As it general rule, it seems that when you want to end a market, it is more effective to remove the customer from the equation than the supplier.

The drug market is a great example of this. As long as the customer base is constant, the supply will come in. No mater what the interdiction methods.

The Reagan policy on cocaine and the Kennedy Johnson policy on opium derivatives caused problems way beyond just the enforcement on the streets, and hurt US foreign policy.

Make it expensive for the johns, the hookers will go away. There are always more hookers, but the supply has to meet the demand. Reduce the demand, you reduce the supply.

This is what the "Freakonomics" guys say. Don't know, but I'm intrigued by the contrariness of it.

I'll tell you something that may surprise some on the board, but the reason they don't hit drug BUYERS or sex BUYERS too hard is that yes, many of them are white (drugs) or white men (sex). Police and prosecutors and judges just have a little bit of a harder time seeing "one of their own" suffer too much, so, they lay off.

I generally support laws outlawing prostitution, horndog that I am. Disease-spreading is a real harm. But so is the simple social fabric tearing of this practice. I realize it's probably going to be found in every society, and I don't suggest the death penalty for it. But keeping it in tight check by making it illegal and doing the occasional law enforcement sting is a good thing.

 

[MikeK]

I generally support laws outlawing prostitution, horndog that I am. Disease-spreading is a real harm. But so is the simple social fabric tearing of this practice. I realize it's probably going to be found in every society, and I don't suggest the death penalty for it. But keeping it in tight check by making it illegal and doing the occasional law enforcement sting is a good thing.

I'll bet you don't believe that legalizing and controlling prostitution is the surest way to reduce the spread of STDs.

Right?

 

[George Costanza]

Street whoring is NOT a victimless crime.

Technically, it is. I know what you are referring to here, and you are right; but prostitution is still a victimless crime in the sense that the crime itself does not involve a victim in the direct sense.

You could argue that drug usage is not a victimless crime because of the harm it causes to the family and loved ones of the drug user. Yet drug usage is constantly cited as a victimless crime. Murder, rape, robbery, burglary - now there are your crimes that involve victims.