CDZ Why Show the Hookers? Why Not Show the Johns?

[danielpalos]

How would you know how much it costs to be "entertained" at a Nevada brothel?

Internet...

actually, I have no idea, I'm just guessing.

But my point stands... are they busting these girls for a good reason, or are they busting them because they are undercutting the legal brothels on price.

These women are victims.....odds are they have been abused their entire lives, and need help. Often they are controlled by criminals, or addicted to drugs......get them help.

Ah, another conservative "infantilizing" women.

They are big girls, they are making their own choices.

Hey, did it ever occur to you that some women become hookers because they like being hookers?

A hookers union may have classes on "retiring in five years or so".

 

[Toronado3800]

Why are people opposed to people con-sensually trading sex?

People love pretending to be for small government then using big government to impose their religious rules on everyone else.

Its a slippery slope. First hookers are banned, then you are having to kneel and worship a city of some fanatic's choice twice a day.

The NRA really needs to step up its game fighting government over reach into our personal lives.

 

[JoeB131]

The NRA really needs to step up its game fighting government over reach into our personal lives.

Why?

Frankly, the NRA is pretty clear on what it's about.

Promoting gun ownership by scaring the shit out of as many people as possible while hiding how dangerous guns in civilian hands actually are.

They aren't about "Freedom". If the rest of us have to walk through metal detectors and security guards, that's OUR problem, not theirs.

If our schools have more security guards than social workers, well, geez, not their problem. They aren't paying for it or the 270 BILLION in economic losses we have every year.

 

[2aguy]

The NRA really needs to step up its game fighting government over reach into our personal lives.

Why?

Frankly, the NRA is pretty clear on what it's about.

Promoting gun ownership by scaring the shit out of as many people as possible while hiding how dangerous guns in civilian hands actually are.

They aren't about "Freedom". If the rest of us have to walk through metal detectors and security guards, that's OUR problem, not theirs.

If our schools have more security guards than social workers, well, geez, not their problem. They aren't paying for it or the 270 BILLION in economic losses we have every year.

You don't know what you are talking about. There are close to 600 million guns in the hands of law abiding citizens in this country and over 17.25 million of them have carry permits......these same people use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop violent criminals, and save lives...one estimate puts the lives saved at close to 175,000 a year...

The problem we have is that people like you support policies that put violent, known, repeat gun criminals back into the neighborhoods in democrat controlled cities...where they go on to commit murder in tiny areas of these cities. Had they been kept in jail, those victims would still be alive. They were known criminals, they had repeat gun offenses, and people like you let them back out of jail.

You are the problem......not the law abiding gun owner who never uses their legal gun for crime.....as to cost....you never want to face the fact, the truth and the reality that guns in the hands of law abiding people save lives...more lives than the criminals you release take...

Annual Defensive Gun Use Savings Dwarf Study's "Gun Violence" Costs - The Truth About Guns

Our man Bruce Krafft — whose posts we dearly miss — did the math back in 2012. Here it is:
Our fearless leader suggested that I take a look at the flip side of the anti’s latest attack on our freedoms (a recycled strategy from the Clinton-era Public Health model of gun control): the monetary cost of gun violence.
For example, the Center for American Progress touted the “fact” that the Virginia Tech massacre cost taxpayers $48.2 million (including autopsy costs and a fine against Virginia Tech for failing to get their skates on when the killer started shooting).
It’s one of the antis’ favorite tricks: cost benefit analysis omitting the benefit side of the equation. So what are the financial benefits of firearm ownership to society? Read on . . .
In my post Dennis Henigan on Chardon: Clockwork Edition, I did an analysis of how many lives were saved annually in Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs). I used extremely conservative numbers. Now I am going to use some less conservative ones.
The Kleck-Gertz DGU study estimated that there are between 2.1 and 2.5 million DGUs a year in the U.S. The Ludwig-Cook study came up with 1.46 million. So let’s split the difference and call it 1.88 million DGUs per year.
In the K-G article Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun, 15.7 percent of people who had a DGU reckoned they almost certainly saved a life. Ignoring the ‘probably’ and ‘might have’ saved a life categories for simplicity, 15.7 percent of 1.88 million gives us 295,160 lives saved annually.
[NB: A number of people have questioned the 15.7 percent stat. Remember: many states regard the mere act of pulling a gun on someone a form of deadly force. In addition, virtually every jurisdiction in the nation requires that an armed self-defender must be in “reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm” before using (or in some places even threatening to use) deadly force.]
How can we get a dollar figure from 1.88 million defensive gun uses per year? Never fear, faithful reader, we can count on the .gov to calculate everything.
According to the AZ state government, in February of 2008 a human life was worth $6.5 million. Going to the Inflation Calculator and punching in the numbers gives us a present value of $6.93 million.
So figuring that the average DGU saves one half of a person’s life—as “gun violence” predominantly affects younger demographics—that gives us $3.465 million per half life.


Putting this all together, we find that the monetary benefit of guns (by way of DGUs) is roughly $1.02 trillion per year. That’s trillion. With a ‘T’.


I was going to go on and calculate the costs of incarceration ($50K/year) saved by people killing 1527 criminals annually, and then look at the lifetime cost to society of an average criminal (something in excess of $1 million). But all of that would be a drop in the bucket compared to the $1,000,000,000,000 ($1T) annual benefit of gun ownership.


When compared to the (inflation adjusted from 2002) $127.5 billion ‘cost’ of gun violence calculated by by our Ludwig-Cook buddies, guns save a little more than eight times what they “cost.”

Which, I might add, is completely irrelevant since “the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil, and Constitutional right — subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility.”

So even taking Motherboard’s own total and multiplying it by 100, the benefits to society of civilian gun ownership dwarf the associated costs.

 

[JoeB131]

You don't know what you are talking about. There are close to 600 million guns in the hands of law abiding citizens in this country and over 17.25 million of them have carry permits.

Guy, we banned lawn darts after one death.

We make everyone have their shoes X-rayed because one guy lit his shoes on fire in 2002.

We have 33,000 Gun deaths, EVERY YEAR. 70,000 injuries. 400,000 crimes. 270 Billion in economic damages.

It's really unacceptable to those of us who don't need to "compensate' for their shortcomings.

 

[2aguy]

You don't know what you are talking about. There are close to 600 million guns in the hands of law abiding citizens in this country and over 17.25 million of them have carry permits.

Guy, we banned lawn darts after one death.

We make everyone have their shoes X-rayed because one guy lit his shoes on fire in 2002.

We have 33,000 Gun deaths, EVERY YEAR. 70,000 injuries. 400,000 crimes. 270 Billion in economic damages.

It's really unacceptable to those of us who don't need to "compensate' for their shortcomings.

You lie by omission.....of the gun deaths....


Gun accidental death with 600 million guns in private hands and over 17.25 people carrying guns for self defense....495.

https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/leading_causes_death.html


2016 495

Suicide with guns...which do not count since the Japanese, Koreans, and Chinese have extreme gun control, only criminals and cops are allowed to have guns, and their suicide rates jumping off of buildings and in front of trains is higher than our gun suicide rate..


Gun Suicide.....22,938

Then gun murder.....11,004 in 2016....with 70-80% of the victims being actual criminals engaged in the criminal life style....



FBI....11,004

Expanded Homicide Data Table 4


And on the other end....lives saved?

Case Closed: Kleck Is Still Correct

that makes for at least 176,000 lives saved—less some attackers who lost their lives to defenders. This enormous benefit dwarfs, both in human and economic terms, the losses trumpeted by hoplophobes who only choose to see the risk side of the equation.

And the money saved when armed Americans stop criminals?

Annual Defensive Gun Use Savings Dwarf Study's "Gun Violence" Costs - The Truth About Guns


It’s one of the antis’ favorite tricks: cost benefit analysis omitting the benefit side of the equation. So what are the financial benefits of firearm ownership to society? Read on . . .


In my post Dennis Henigan on Chardon: Clockwork Edition, I did an analysis of how many lives were saved annually in Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs). I used extremely conservative numbers. Now I am going to use some less conservative ones.
The Kleck-Gertz DGU study estimated that there are between 2.1 and 2.5 million DGUs a year in the U.S. The Ludwig-Cook study came up with 1.46 million. So let’s split the difference and call it 1.88 million DGUs per year.
In the K-G article Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun, 15.7 percent of people who had a DGU reckoned they almost certainly saved a life. Ignoring the ‘probably’ and ‘might have’ saved a life categories for simplicity, 15.7 percent of 1.88 million gives us 295,160 lives saved annually.
[NB: A number of people have questioned the 15.7 percent stat. Remember: many states regard the mere act of pulling a gun on someone a form of deadly force. In addition, virtually every jurisdiction in the nation requires that an armed self-defender must be in “reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm” before using (or in some places even threatening to use) deadly force.]
How can we get a dollar figure from 1.88 million defensive gun uses per year? Never fear, faithful reader, we can count on the .gov to calculate everything.
According to the AZ state government, in February of 2008 a human life was worth $6.5 million. Going to the Inflation Calculator and punching in the numbers gives us a present value of $6.93 million.
So figuring that the average DGU saves one half of a person’s life—as “gun violence” predominantly affects younger demographics—that gives us $3.465 million per half life.


Putting this all together, we find that the monetary benefit of guns (by way of DGUs) is roughly $1.02 trillion per year. That’s trillion. With a ‘T’.


I was going to go on and calculate the costs of incarceration ($50K/year) saved by people killing 1527 criminals annually, and then look at the lifetime cost to society of an average criminal (something in excess of $1 million). But all of that would be a drop in the bucket compared to the $1,000,000,000,000 ($1T) annual benefit of gun ownership.


When compared to the (inflation adjusted from 2002) $127.5 billion ‘cost’ of gun violence calculated by by our Ludwig-Cook buddies, guns save a little more than eight times what they “cost.”


Which, I might add, is completely irrelevant since “the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil, and Constitutional right — subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility.”


So even taking Motherboard’s own total and multiplying it by 100, the benefits to society of civilian gun ownership dwarf the associated costs.

 

[JoeB131]

You lie by omission.....of the gun deaths....

Guy, this thread isn't about guns, it's about prostitution. Try to keep on topic.

Do you have like a "bat signal" that tells you whenever people are saying bad things about guns?

 

[boedicca]

Living in Nevada, my immediate response is to ask why they’re working on the streets and not in a clean, well-regulated brothel?

But I do agree that the best way to “clean this up” is to show the faces of the Johns. Let the whole world know what they’re doing. See how their friends and families react.

“Carrying out undercover operations in the area (Willow Street) has become a routine response to complaints from residents, yet women keep returning to the area,” reads the article.

Because that’s where the customers are, duh.

More @ Peter Wolfgang: Show Us the Faces of the 'Johns' Instead

Why the hookers? Hookers are the drug dealers; Johns are the users.

Although one could argue that the Pimps are the real drug dealers, and the Hookers are the drugs.

 

[2aguy]

You lie by omission.....of the gun deaths....

Guy, this thread isn't about guns, it's about prostitution. Try to keep on topic.

Do you have like a "bat signal" that tells you whenever people are saying bad things about guns?

You are the one who took it off track, I answered you posts.....#63, where you brought the NRA into a conversation about the victims of human trafficking.....you did that, not me...

 

[2aguy]

Living in Nevada, my immediate response is to ask why they’re working on the streets and not in a clean, well-regulated brothel?

But I do agree that the best way to “clean this up” is to show the faces of the Johns. Let the whole world know what they’re doing. See how their friends and families react.

“Carrying out undercover operations in the area (Willow Street) has become a routine response to complaints from residents, yet women keep returning to the area,” reads the article.

Because that’s where the customers are, duh.

More @ Peter Wolfgang: Show Us the Faces of the 'Johns' Instead

Why the hookers? Hookers are the drug dealers; Johns are the users.

Although one could argue that the Pimps are the real drug dealers, and the Hookers are the drugs.

The women are too often the victims of exploitation...they need help. Many of them were destroyed as children and have had no way out........we should get them help.

 

[boedicca]

Living in Nevada, my immediate response is to ask why they’re working on the streets and not in a clean, well-regulated brothel?

But I do agree that the best way to “clean this up” is to show the faces of the Johns. Let the whole world know what they’re doing. See how their friends and families react.

“Carrying out undercover operations in the area (Willow Street) has become a routine response to complaints from residents, yet women keep returning to the area,” reads the article.

Because that’s where the customers are, duh.

More @ Peter Wolfgang: Show Us the Faces of the 'Johns' Instead

Why the hookers? Hookers are the drug dealers; Johns are the users.

Although one could argue that the Pimps are the real drug dealers, and the Hookers are the drugs.

The women are too often the victims of exploitation...they need help. Many of them were destroyed as children and have had no way out........we should get them help.

Agreed. Getting them away from their pimps is a good step.

 

[2aguy]

Living in Nevada, my immediate response is to ask why they’re working on the streets and not in a clean, well-regulated brothel?

But I do agree that the best way to “clean this up” is to show the faces of the Johns. Let the whole world know what they’re doing. See how their friends and families react.

“Carrying out undercover operations in the area (Willow Street) has become a routine response to complaints from residents, yet women keep returning to the area,” reads the article.

Because that’s where the customers are, duh.

More @ Peter Wolfgang: Show Us the Faces of the 'Johns' Instead

Why the hookers? Hookers are the drug dealers; Johns are the users.

Although one could argue that the Pimps are the real drug dealers, and the Hookers are the drugs.

The women are too often the victims of exploitation...they need help. Many of them were destroyed as children and have had no way out........we should get them help.

Agreed. Getting them away from their pimps is a good step.

Yeah..... this is a problem with no easy solutions.... I have a relative who is a police officer, they arrested a girl who was a prostitute. He told her, look, I know you are being trafficked, and we can help you, but you have to tell us you want help.....she was too afraid to get that help..... the pimps are violent and get the girls addicted to drugs.......

 

[Polishprince]

Living in Nevada, my immediate response is to ask why they’re working on the streets and not in a clean, well-regulated brothel?

But I do agree that the best way to “clean this up” is to show the faces of the Johns. Let the whole world know what they’re doing. See how their friends and families react.

“Carrying out undercover operations in the area (Willow Street) has become a routine response to complaints from residents, yet women keep returning to the area,” reads the article.

Because that’s where the customers are, duh.

More @ Peter Wolfgang: Show Us the Faces of the 'Johns' Instead

In Vegas, they couldn't show out-of-town johns because of the city's official motto "What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas".

They really can't violate their own policies.

 

[longknife]

As long as prostitution remains illegal, there will be pimps and madams who take advantage of vulnerable females.

 

[2aguy]

Living in Nevada, my immediate response is to ask why they’re working on the streets and not in a clean, well-regulated brothel?

But I do agree that the best way to “clean this up” is to show the faces of the Johns. Let the whole world know what they’re doing. See how their friends and families react.

“Carrying out undercover operations in the area (Willow Street) has become a routine response to complaints from residents, yet women keep returning to the area,” reads the article.

Because that’s where the customers are, duh.

More @ Peter Wolfgang: Show Us the Faces of the 'Johns' Instead

In Vegas, they couldn't show out-of-town johns because of the city's official motto "What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas".

They really can't violate their own policies.

Andrew Klavan is an author who writes crime fiction....does a lot of research into criminal behavior....he pointed out once in an interview that even in the legal brothels in Las Vegas, most of the women are controlled by pimps who take their money........it is a nasty business for these poor women....

 

[2aguy]

As long as prostitution remains illegal, there will be pimps and madams who take advantage of vulnerable females.

Even when it is legal, the criminals still exploit the women...

Trafficked women learn to cook at chic restaurant - CNN

 

[Toronado3800]

As long as prostitution remains illegal, there will be pimps and madams who take advantage of vulnerable females.

Even when it is legal, the criminals still exploit the women...

Trafficked women learn to cook at chic restaurant - CNN

Logic problem.

Consider if making something (like pot) legal only gets rid of 99% of the organized crime is it worth it?

I've listened to too many correct arguments against prohibition.

 

[Toronado3800]

The NRA really needs to step up its game fighting government over reach into our personal lives.

Why?

Frankly, the NRA is pretty clear on what it's about.

Promoting gun ownership by scaring the shit out of as many people as possible while hiding how dangerous guns in civilian hands actually are.

They aren't about "Freedom". If the rest of us have to walk through metal detectors and security guards, that's OUR problem, not theirs.

If our schools have more security guards than social workers, well, geez, not their problem. They aren't paying for it or the 270 BILLION in economic losses we have every year.

You don't know what you are talking about. There are close to 600 million guns in the hands of law abiding citizens in this country and over 17.25 million of them have carry permits......these same people use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop violent criminals, and save lives...one estimate puts the lives saved at close to 175,000 a year...

The problem we have is that people like you support policies that put violent, known, repeat gun criminals back into the neighborhoods in democrat controlled cities...where they go on to commit murder in tiny areas of these cities. Had they been kept in jail, those victims would still be alive. They were known criminals, they had repeat gun offenses, and people like you let them back out of jail.

You are the problem......not the law abiding gun owner who never uses their legal gun for crime.....as to cost....you never want to face the fact, the truth and the reality that guns in the hands of law abiding people save lives...more lives than the criminals you release take...

Annual Defensive Gun Use Savings Dwarf Study's "Gun Violence" Costs - The Truth About Guns

Our man Bruce Krafft — whose posts we dearly miss — did the math back in 2012. Here it is:
Our fearless leader suggested that I take a look at the flip side of the anti’s latest attack on our freedoms (a recycled strategy from the Clinton-era Public Health model of gun control): the monetary cost of gun violence.
For example, the Center for American Progress touted the “fact” that the Virginia Tech massacre cost taxpayers $48.2 million (including autopsy costs and a fine against Virginia Tech for failing to get their skates on when the killer started shooting).
It’s one of the antis’ favorite tricks: cost benefit analysis omitting the benefit side of the equation. So what are the financial benefits of firearm ownership to society? Read on . . .
In my post Dennis Henigan on Chardon: Clockwork Edition, I did an analysis of how many lives were saved annually in Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs). I used extremely conservative numbers. Now I am going to use some less conservative ones.
The Kleck-Gertz DGU study estimated that there are between 2.1 and 2.5 million DGUs a year in the U.S. The Ludwig-Cook study came up with 1.46 million. So let’s split the difference and call it 1.88 million DGUs per year.
In the K-G article Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun, 15.7 percent of people who had a DGU reckoned they almost certainly saved a life. Ignoring the ‘probably’ and ‘might have’ saved a life categories for simplicity, 15.7 percent of 1.88 million gives us 295,160 lives saved annually.
[NB: A number of people have questioned the 15.7 percent stat. Remember: many states regard the mere act of pulling a gun on someone a form of deadly force. In addition, virtually every jurisdiction in the nation requires that an armed self-defender must be in “reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm” before using (or in some places even threatening to use) deadly force.]
How can we get a dollar figure from 1.88 million defensive gun uses per year? Never fear, faithful reader, we can count on the .gov to calculate everything.
According to the AZ state government, in February of 2008 a human life was worth $6.5 million. Going to the Inflation Calculator and punching in the numbers gives us a present value of $6.93 million.
So figuring that the average DGU saves one half of a person’s life—as “gun violence” predominantly affects younger demographics—that gives us $3.465 million per half life.


Putting this all together, we find that the monetary benefit of guns (by way of DGUs) is roughly $1.02 trillion per year. That’s trillion. With a ‘T’.


I was going to go on and calculate the costs of incarceration ($50K/year) saved by people killing 1527 criminals annually, and then look at the lifetime cost to society of an average criminal (something in excess of $1 million). But all of that would be a drop in the bucket compared to the $1,000,000,000,000 ($1T) annual benefit of gun ownership.


When compared to the (inflation adjusted from 2002) $127.5 billion ‘cost’ of gun violence calculated by by our Ludwig-Cook buddies, guns save a little more than eight times what they “cost.”

Which, I might add, is completely irrelevant since “the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil, and Constitutional right — subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility.”

So even taking Motherboard’s own total and multiplying it by 100, the benefits to society of civilian gun ownership dwarf the associated costs.

So the NRA just cares about guns and is unwilling to join a greater coalition in support of personal freedoms?

If the government can control what your own body's sticks and holes do why do you think they'll let you carry around a 30 caliber stick with a hole in it?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

we get what we pay for, under Capitalism.

Not for $15.00/hr.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Guy, we banned lawn darts after one death.

We make everyone have their shoes X-rayed because one guy lit his shoes on fire in 2002.

And you consider these measures reasonable?