Fixing What Harper Broke: A to-do list

[Smallc]

I want prostitution completely legalized. I think that endless fights that we can't win (and arguably shouldn't)are a waste of resources.

[Argus]

Actually, no it's not. Not until it's tested by the SC.

So... you're saying all laws which have not been heard by the SC are unconstitutional?

Oh wait, no, it's just the ones you don't like right?

[Argus]

I want prostitution completely legalized. I think that endless fights that we can't win (and arguably shouldn't)are a waste of resources.

Do you want often drug addicted prostitutes living next door to you, and a parade of often drunken johns driving in and out of your neighborhood?

Edited February 11, 2016 by Argus

[Argus]

LIAR. Then who is Argus below!!!!!!

You know what? I'm not interested in discussing this with you. You're way too emotionally overwrought on the subject of prostitution.

[On Guard for Thee]

So... you're saying all laws which have not been heard by the SC are unconstitutional?

Oh wait, no, it's just the ones you don't like right?

Nope, didn't say that at all. Laws don't get tested for constitutionality unless and until they come before the courts either through disputes between parties of through reference questions. Then it's up to them to either like or unlike them. Nothing to do with you or I.

[Argus]

Nope, didn't say that at all. Laws don't get tested for constitutionality unless and until they come before the courts either through disputes between parties of through reference questions. Then it's up to them to either like or unlike them. Nothing to do with you or I.

So until that time they're constitutional?

[Big Guy]

Nope, didn't say that at all. Laws don't get tested for constitutionality unless and until they come before the courts either through disputes between parties of through reference questions. Then it's up to them to either like or unlike them. Nothing to do with you or I.

Previous governments have consulted with our Supreme Court as to constitutionality and wording BEFORE they tabled the legislation. That way they did not waste their and SC time on legislation that would just be later overturned.

[On Guard for Thee]

Previous governments have consulted with our Supreme Court as to constitutionality and wording BEFORE they tabled the legislation. That way they did not waste their and SC time on legislation that would just be later overturned.

That would be what I refer to when I mentioned "reference questions".

[On Guard for Thee]

So until that time they're constitutional?

Nope, not that either. What part of "until tested" don't you get?

[Smallc]

Do you want often drug addicted prostitutes living next door to you, and a parade of often drunken johns driving in and out of your neighborhood?

That seems like a lot of stereotyping, and something we could limit significantly with legalization and regulation.

I also want to decriminalize all drugs and stop throwing people in jail needlessly so...

[PIK]

That seems like a lot of stereotyping, and something we could limit significantly with legalization and regulation.

I also want to decriminalize all drugs and stop throwing people in jail needlessly so...

That is not stereotyping. Those are facts. Put a hooker next door to you and see who shows up.

[Smallc]

That is not stereotyping. Those are facts. Put a hooker next door to you and see who shows up.

Legalize it and regulate. Allow them to hire security. Now see who shows up.

Btw, opinion isn't a fact.

[CITIZEN_2015]

You know what? I'm not interested in discussing this with you. You're way too emotionally overwrought on the subject of prostitution.

When you are totally out of ammunition and lose the debate real bad not to mention that you repeatedly made false untrue statements then I am too emotional (and you said same thing on the subject of Federal elections last October) and you cease to debate. No problem I let the readers to decide who was right in this debate and from what i see there is no support for your arguments.

Edited February 11, 2016 by CITIZEN_2015

[CITIZEN_2015]

I want prostitution completely legalized. I think that endless fights that we can't win (and arguably shouldn't)are a waste of resources.

I don't actually agree with complete legalization of prostitution. It could encourage young girls entering the profession in large scale (college and university girls now working on summer jobs can be encourage to make quick money). It may also legitimize exploitation of women by men (like abusive Johns who demand unsafe services or much worse the parasites (pimps) who may exploit young simple minded girls. What I do prefer is decriminalization.

The industry should be regulated so that no exploitation or pimping or underage will be allowed and no unsafe sexual activity of any kind should be permitted. While abusive johns (including those who knowingly may see underage and pimped workers) should be severely punished and violent or explosive pimps be put behind bars and keys thrown away, however, those adults (and in my view the age should be at least 21 for sex workers) who consent to work in this industry or be clients (again adults) who wish to engage in consenting paid sex should be able to under strict regulations.

As it is now (under bill C-36 being illegal) it is very unsafe for anyone especially sex workers. Clients (who under new laws are criminals) demand unsafe services (bare services) and some sex workers may have to comply to pay bills or support dependents. Some clients who come across exploited or underage or pimped son't dare to contact law enforcement and report the cases. Many clients refused to provide info and sex workers have to see them without being able to screen violent or abusive clients or in isolated unsafe areas and again sex workers have t comply as their good law abiding clients have vanished thanks to Harper, MacKay and newly imposed laws.

Edited February 11, 2016 by CITIZEN_2015

[CITIZEN_2015]

I want prostitution completely legalized. I think that endless fights that we can't win (and arguably shouldn't)are a waste of resources.

Deleted as it was a repeat by mistake.

Edited February 11, 2016 by CITIZEN_2015

[Smallc]

I don't actually agree with complete legalization of prostitution. It could encourage young girls entering the profession in large scale (college and university girls now working on summer jobs can be encourage to make quick money). It may also legitimize exploitation of women by men (like abusive Johns who demand unsafe services or much worse the parasites (pimps) who may exploit young simple minded girls. What I do prefer is decriminalization.

The industry should be regulated so that no exploitation or pimping or underage will be allowed and no unsafe sexual activity of any kind should be permitted. While abusive johns (including those who knowingly may see underage and pimped workers) should be severely punished and violent or explosive pimps be put behind bars and keys thrown away, however, those adults (and in my view the age should be at least 21 for sex workers) who consent to work in this industry or be clients (again adults) who wish to engage in consenting paid sex should be able to under strict regulations..

I think you and I are talking about the same thing in different language. When I say legalization, I mean the same thing that Trudeau does with marijuana. I don't mean limitless legalization.

[Big Guy]

No nation in the history of the world has eradicated prostitution. The nations which have legalized it (or had never made it a crime) are controlling it, making it safe for the sex workers, creating jobs for people and raking in $million is tax money.

To what I see, the majority of opposition to legalization is based on the dangers involved - these dangers and conditions exist only because it is illegal. As to young males and females and college students being enticed by big money through legalization - they are already doing that.

The major opposition to the idea of buying sexual acts is one of morals, ethics and religious grounds. These are all unique to every individual and should not be used in an argument.

Legalize marijuana and prostitution, regulate the use and tax the bejeebers out of the users. The rest of us can use the money.

[Argus]

Previous governments have consulted with our Supreme Court as to constitutionality and wording BEFORE they tabled the legislation. That way they did not waste their and SC time on legislation that would just be later overturned.

Really? How often? With every bill they passed?

[Argus]

Nope, not that either. What part of "until tested" don't you get?

So then we're back to saying all laws are unconstitutional until tested. Interesting way to look at things.

[CITIZEN_2015]

No nation in the history of the world has eradicated prostitution. The nations which have legalized it (or had never made it a crime) are controlling it, making it safe for the sex workers, creating jobs for people and raking in $million is tax money.

So very true.

To what I see, the majority of opposition to legalization is based on the dangers involved - these dangers and conditions exist only because it is illegal. As to young males and females and college students being enticed by big money through legalization - they are already doing that.

First part again is very true though I don't fully agree with second part. Legalization will draw more likely much more college students to this profession as more clients will be drawn too.

The major opposition to the idea of buying sexual acts is one of morals, ethics and religious grounds. These are all unique to every individual and should not be used in an argument.

My reasons are none of above but rather that it could lead to exploitation and that is why we need to decriminalize rather than legalize it and strictly regulate it (like the New Zealand model) and impose heavy punishments for those who break the regulations (those who make demand of unsafe services illegal, to make seeing underage, pimped workers illegal, to make any kind of violence illegal, to make coercing and pimping and trafficking highly illegal with severe punishments, raise the age to 21 at least ..........). Some may enter this profession out of desperation for quick money or drug addicts. This is exploitation too if anyone sees this group of workers. I also don't agree marijuana should be legal until it is proven behind doubt that it is not harmful to adults (and must remain illegal for under 21).

Edited February 11, 2016 by CITIZEN_2015

[Argus]

That seems like a lot of stereotyping, and something we could limit significantly with legalization and regulation.

I also want to decriminalize all drugs and stop throwing people in jail needlessly so...

It's only stereotyping because according to the stats 80% of prostitutes are drug addicts. But if you're okay with having drug addicted hookers living next door, and drunken johns seeking sex coming in and out late into the morning, hey, good on you. Other people have kids and have to get up early for work. They'd just as soon not have a party next door every night featuring lowlifes.

[CITIZEN_2015]

It's only stereotyping because according to the stats 80% of prostitutes are drug addicts. But if you're okay with having drug addicted hookers living next door, and drunken johns seeking sex coming in and out late into the morning, hey, good on you. Other people have kids and have to get up early for work. They'd just as soon not have a party next door every night featuring lowlifes.

Another false claims or statistics. Not so. The figure came from the prohibitionists and it was a lie Btw, they said 90% are drug addicts. May be true for street prostitutes which is now less than 10% of all sex workers but drug addiction is very low among other 90% group of sex workers.

If ever decriminalize, setting up bawdy houses in residential areas would likely become illegal.

[Smallc]

It's only stereotyping because according to the stats 80% of prostitutes are drug addicts. But if you're okay with having drug addicted hookers living next door, and drunken johns seeking sex coming in and out late into the morning, hey, good on you. Other people have kids and have to get up early for work. They'd just as soon not have a party next door every night featuring lowlifes.

Think of the children.

Regulate it, tax it.

[eyeball]

Legalize marijuana and prostitution, regulate the use and tax the bejeebers out of the users. The rest of us can use the money.

Why the bejeebers exactly? I can see taxing the bejeebers out of stinking rich users but not because they're users.

[On Guard for Thee]

So then we're back to saying all laws are unconstitutional until tested. Interesting way to look at things.

Only if you like to chase your tail in circles, which it seems you do. A law can be either one good or bad, and is determined by the process's I outlined.