Legalising and Regulating Prostitution

[Who's Doing What?]

As for the johns if they know their identity will be kept confidential unless a prostitute is assaulted they should have no problem with going to a designated area.

That is not reasonable. How could anybody trust that "their identity will be kept confidential" by this institution? I would not.

If you don't trust it don't go. What's the big deal?

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Charles Anthony,

for if indeed we cannot eleminitate problems, we should seek to control and localize them.

There is no need to mess with nature.

Then why was Pickton arrested?

and what if they do not fear running from the most foul authority of them all.... your State?

Well, they don't now. My problem is that I live and work in fear everyday because I am in the middle of a so-called 'red light district'. I see the nitty-gritty of the crack-cocaine trade, and prostitution, every day. Yesterday a man was beaten in the street in front of my business because he owed someone money for drugs.

What action could I take, with or without a state, to keep my customer base from avoiding the neighbourhood altogether, without infringing on this person's right to deal drugs and to beat/murder whomever he wishes?

[Charles Anthony]

Then why was Pickton arrested?

Just a guess: maybe because he got caught violating somebody's freedom. Some people do not like that.

What action could I take, with or without a state, to keep my customer base from avoiding the neighbourhood altogether, without infringing on this person's right to deal drugs and to beat/murder whomever he wishes?

With a state, all you can do is pay off the drug-dealer to go away. That is usually the only way you can deal with state-created problems.

Without a state, the two of you would not likely violate eachother's freedom.

On second thought, maybe I am missing the boat. Is it more than your own freedom that you claim to be rightfully yours?

[Riverwind]

But interestingly, apparently street Johns stats are dropping in Vancouver, as are street prostitutes, do to the identify a John program. So those Johns and the street prostitutes are taking their activities elsewhere.

Licensing and legitimizing prostitution have way too many pluses to be ignored.

Your own stats contradict your statement. Johns apparently want anonymity - they would never get that at a regulated brothel. This means they would still seek out prostitutes operating outside the law even if the gov't regulated and legalized it.

[BubberMiley]

Johns apparently want anonymity - they would never get that at a regulated brothel. This means they would still seek out prostitutes operating outside the law even if the gov't regulated and legalized it.

Your strawman arguments are making less and less sense. Why would a legal brothel be less anonymous than scoring prostitutes on the street, where you're likely to wind up on a website like this?

http://www.geocities.com/wccia/johns.html

Recognize anyone?

[Charles Anthony]

Why would a legal brothel be less anonymous than scoring prostitutes on the street,

Either you are deliberately trying to be silly or you are not logical.

If you just observe the behavior of both johns and prostitutes NOW, you would clue in that they try to hide their behavior.

The fact that UNDERCOVER officers have to pose as prostitutes to catch johns also suggests that hiding is part of what the johns want to do.

Furthermore, your "recognize a john" deal plays on public humiliation. Logically, the johns want to be unknown.

[BubberMiley]

Of course they want to remain anonymous. Explain why a legal service couldn't possibly be more anonymous than an illegal one, when people are posting licence plates of illegal johns on the web? Plenty of legal services offer anonymity and discretion. Even my ISP won't disclose any info about me without a warrant.

[Charles Anthony]

Blind submission to the state at its finest.

Explain why a legal service couldn't possibly be more anonymous than an illegal one,

Simple: your "legal service" requires registration and the way it is now does not.

[BubberMiley]

Simple: your "legal service" requires registration and the way it is now does not.

Why does it require registration? Even so, discretion can be assured, just as an ISP assures you they won't let your boss know what websites you visit. It seems a lot safer in terms of anonymity than driving around low-track areas at 4 in the morning where people are webcamming your every move.

It has nothing to do with "blind submission to the state." I feel more comfortable buying alcohol from a government liquor commission than I would from a bootlegger because, even though I am submitting to the all-powerful state, I am less subject to harassment from them because I'm partaking in a legal activity. Simply put, if it's legal, they don't have anything on you anyway.

[Nina]

I suppose if you called it dating, it would be acceptable.

Lets face it, every single time a young fella with raging hormones takes a young woman out on a date, (buys her flowers, pays for a meal, pays for the cinema etc.etc.) he is in all honesty hoping at the end of the evening to be able to have a sexual encounter with her (any young hormonal fella who claims otherwise is deluding himself).

Tell me, what is the difference between paying for sex in cash and paying for sex in kind?

Why do so many people feel that prostitution is any different?

[jefferiah]

I suppose if you called it dating, it would be acceptable.

Lets face it, every single time a young fella with raging hormones takes a young woman out on a date, (buys her flowers, pays for a meal, pays for the cinema etc.etc.) he is in all honesty hoping at the end of the evening to be able to have a sexual encounter with her (any young hormonal fella who claims otherwise is deluding himself).

Tell me, what is the difference between paying for sex in cash and paying for sex in kind?

Why do so many people feel that prostitution is any different?

I dont think this is true at all.

[Charles Anthony]

Why does it require registration? Even so, discretion can be assured, just as an ISP assures you they won't let your boss know what websites you visit.

Ooooohhhh Kaaaayy...... Let me put it to you a different way.

Would you feel confident that your discretion was safe from prying eyes, if, say, you found out that I worked at the check-out counter of your hypothetical "legal" brothel?

or, better yet...

Would you feel confident that your discretion was safe from prying eyes, if, say, you found out that the Koebel brothers worked at the check-out counter of your hypothetical "legal" brothel?

[BubberMiley]

Ooooh Kaaay.

Many businesses and services require a certain degree of discretion in their practices, and in a free society we are able to pick and choose the ones we trust. In addition to the ISP example I listed, people entrust sensitive information with banks, insurance companies, and massage parlors all the time. Even those services that we aren't so free to pick and choose, like liquor stores, healthcare providers, teachers, police, and tax collectors aren't rampantly giving up private information. There is privacy legislation that a legitimate business would have to abide by.

So your strawman argument that we would have to entrust information with the Koebel brothers is a non-starter.

[Charles Anthony]

So your strawman argument that we would have to entrust information with the Koebel brothers is a non-starter.

-- and a very difficult question to answer, certainly not one which can possibly elicit a straight answer from you.

[BubberMiley]

I'm trying to be straight, but I'm having trouble with your point. Are you saying that if the water supply were criminalized, we wouldn't have to worry about people like the Koebel brothers?

[ClearWest]

I suppose if you called it dating, it would be acceptable.

Lets face it, every single time a young fella with raging hormones takes a young woman out on a date, (buys her flowers, pays for a meal, pays for the cinema etc.etc.) he is in all honesty hoping at the end of the evening to be able to have a sexual encounter with her (any young hormonal fella who claims otherwise is deluding himself).

Tell me, what is the difference between paying for sex in cash and paying for sex in kind?

Why do so many people feel that prostitution is any different?

You are waaaaaaaaaaay underestimating the male gender. Males need companionship and platonic social interraction as much (if not more) than they need sex.

[Charles Anthony]

I'm trying to be straight, but I'm having trouble with your point.

I am suggesting that it is foolhardy to expect a john to trust ANYBODY else with the john's privacy. You provided some of the proof: public humiliation. That tactic only works because johns want to hide.

Males need companionship and platonic social interraction as much (if not more) than they need sex.

Some males actually cry too.

[ClearWest]

Males need companionship and platonic social interraction as much (if not more) than they need sex.

Some males actually cry too.

lol, I didn't want to reveal that much about us. I don't want them to think we're human.

[Catchme]

But interestingly, apparently street Johns stats are dropping in Vancouver, as are street prostitutes, do to the identify a John program. So those Johns and the street prostitutes are taking their activities elsewhere.

Licensing and legitimizing prostitution have way too many pluses to be ignored.

Your own stats contradict your statement. Johns apparently want anonymity - they would never get that at a regulated brothel. This means they would still seek out prostitutes operating outside the law even if the gov't regulated and legalized it.

No, there are apparently bawdy houses where they are taking their trade to. So, how about making them legal?

And why would legalized brothels not protect privacy?