Prostitution: should it be legal or not?

[Tani Coyote]

Distinguishing between drug users and drug pushers is dumb?

No, it just seems silly to do it half and half.

It's called progression and requires an analytic process longer than one step. To clarify it for you: We'd rather prosecute criminals than victims.

Why make selling/buying of it a crime at all? Why not just make it 100% legal, and use the taxes to cover the costs the victims incur on society?

Any voluntary exchange of goods and/or services should be legal. Prohibition is never better than taxation and regulation.

This opens a neat question: should it be legal to pay someone to kill you?

 

[Perfection]

Keep prostitution illegal, it's sexier when you're breaking the law.

 

[CaptainF]

Distinguishing between drug users and drug pushers is dumb?

There are no such things as drug "pushers". People who sell drugs are meeting a demand, not forcing drugs on people.

This opens a neat question: should it be legal to pay someone to kill you?

Is murder legal?

 

[Tani Coyote]

Is murder legal?

No, but murder is involuntary.

Whereas, if you paid someone x amount of money to kill you, it's 100% consensual, making it a different beast.

It ultimately goes back to: do we have the right to end our own lives?

 

[metatron]

It ultimately goes back to: do we have the right to end our own lives?

Yes.
Actually that's part of one's right to one's life and to self-determination.

This opens a neat question: should it be legal to pay someone to kill you?

That would be a rather bold step towards enlightenment, which i don't expect any of our [insert derogation here] societies to take, but...
...yes.

 

[Elta]

your post just strikes me as funny. I get this impression of a guy faking he can't speak English just to run up a large cab bill taking you to the wrong place. I think I've only taken a cab once in Las Vegas (to get home from the airport). Expensive they are.

If you are here for more than a couple days it's best to rent a car. Sadly, we have no other decent way of getting around. Our bus system is okay, but the strip bus can be very crowded. The monorail isn't that bad, but it's located too far away from the strip imho, and doesn't go downtown, or to the airport limiting its effectiveness.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Yes.
Actually that's part of one's right to one's life and to self-determination.

But then you have those people who say the right to life is inalienable... which means even you can't get rid of it.

But yes, I agree. We all have a right to suicide. Even suicide by someone else's arms. (Suicide by cop has become an increasingly popular choice)

Though the argument can be made you probably aren't in the right state of mind when you consider it.

That would be a rather bold step towards enlightenment, which i don't expect any of our [insert derogation here] societies to take, but...
...yes.

We can always do it half and half style and make it legal to pay someone to kill you but make it illegal to actually carry out the contract.

 

[metatron]

What is the legend for that map?

green = Prostitution is legal and regulated
blue = Prostitution (the exchange of sex for money) legal, but brothels are illegal; prostitution is not regulated
red = Prostitution is illegal (in Norway, Sweden and Iceland the buying, in essentially all other places the selling or both)

It's wikipedias map: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_prostitution

Please note Bangladesh, Lebanon, Turkey and Senegal.

We have to have a talk with Tasmanians. To fail at a thing like this is beneath them.

The map does not sufficiently differentiate between different types or degrees of illegality. For example, in Norway and Sweden, selling sexual services is not illegal, only buying them is. And the maximum penalty for getting caught here is (google) six months in jail, or a fairly steep fine.

Trust me: Your reputations as the more enlightened parts is sufficient that any sane person would asume you have cooked up a rather special kind of red in the first place.

Good brothels push bad brothels out of business.

No they don't (or at least not as much as you'd think). But that's not the point anyway.

But then you have those people who say the right to life is inalienable... which means even you can't get rid of it.

As i said: Determining your life's end is part of that inalienable right.

Though the argument can be made you probably aren't in the right state of mind when you consider it.

Yeah, i think that about dem jackasses who slide down those 85% slopes with their snowboards, too.
Oh, and lot's of religious folk.

We can always do it half and half style and make it legal to pay someone to kill you but make it illegal to actually carry out the contract.

Where did you get that half and half thing from. Here (and in most places in Europe) most drugs qualify as a non-prescribable medication, not an illegal substance (like weapon's grade plutonium). That makes the use, well, technically legal. Possesion, production and trafficing being illegal it's a moot point.
Punishing someone harder for trafficking than for possesion isn't that illogical either since those are two different offences.
As far as prostitution is concerned except Norway, Iceland and Sweden nobody does that half and half thing. And i am sure they have some reasoning that makes the whole thing less half-and-half-ish, too.
*shrug*

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

No, it just seems silly to do it half and half.

Clarify. Why would punishing users rather than treating them be better for society?

There are no such things as drug "pushers". People who sell drugs are meeting a demand, not forcing drugs on people.

Drug trafficker, then.

 

[Flying Pig]

Clarify. Why would punishing users rather than treating them be better for society?

You could say that not punishing them will mean less deterrant, meaning more users, meaning more money spent on treating them: money not being spent on hospitals, schools and ammunition.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

I was under the impression that most drug users are of the lower socioeconomic rungs, typically ones who receive government welfare. I don't see how criminalizing them would result in a lower cost to society. We wouldn't even be able to fine them to recoup the costs. Better to turn them into productive members of society beyond just cheap, unskilled labor.

 

[Flying Pig]

I was under the impression that most drug users are of the lower socioeconomic rungs, typically ones who receive government welfare. I don't see how criminalizing them would result in a lower cost to society. We wouldn't even be able to fine them to recoup the costs.

If we say that instead of punishing them, we will treat them, then more people will use drugs because there is no punishment, and it will cost society the money to treat them.

Better to turn them into productive members of society beyond just cheap, unskilled labor.

If you can do that, I'll be impressed. Even the army doesn't try to deal with those people.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Clarify. Why would punishing users rather than treating them be better for society?

Well, when I say it seems silly, I mean I'm for full legalisation.

So I'll leave this for resident Prohibitionists.

If the user's not committing a crime, why should the trafficker? They are merely providing a good.

 

[Cutlass]

If we say that instead of punishing them, we will treat them, then more people will use drugs because there is no punishment, and it will cost society the money to treat them.



If you can do that, I'll be impressed. Even the army doesn't try to deal with those people.

The punishment does not deter drug use. And is horribly expensive. If the treatment will reduce drug use, it's a better use of the money.

 

[Flying Pig]

The punishment does not deter drug use. And is horribly expensive. If the treatment will reduce drug use, it's a better use of the money.

I'd agree mostly, but I'd say that there are probably a few people who would think less about accepting that first drag if they knew that they'd never be punished for it.

 

[Cutlass]

I'd agree mostly, but I'd say that there are probably a few people who would think less about accepting that first drag if they knew that they'd never be punished for it.

The drug treatment, depending on how it is structured, is no walk in the park. Personally I lean towards treatment combined with home confinement with an ankle bracelet and mandatory community service instead of prison. That would serve as a punishment much less expensive, and damaging, than prison combined with real treatment and real negative consequences to discourage use.

 

[Souron]

Please note Bangladesh, Lebanon, Turkey and Senegal.

Bangladesh: "Bangladesh is a source and transit country for men, women, and children subjected to trafficking in persons, specifically forced labor and forced prostitution. ... Children – both boys and girls – are trafficked within Bangladesh for commercial sexual exploitation, bonded labor, and forced labor. Some children are sold into bondage by their parents, while others are induced into labor or commercial sexual exploitation through fraud and physical coercion. Women and children from Bangladesh are also trafficked to India for commercial sexual exploitation. ... Bangladeshi children and adults are also trafficked internally for commercial sexual exploitation, domestic servitude, and bonded labor. Recent reports indicate many brothel owners and pimps addict Bangladeshi girls to steroids, with devastating side effects, to make them more attractive to clients; the drug is reported to be used by 90 percent of females between 15 and 35 in Bangladeshi brothels."

Lebanon: "Lebanon is a source and destination country for women and children subjected to trafficking in persons, specifically conditions of forced labor and forced prostitution. ... The Lebanese government’s “artiste” visa program, which facilitated the entry of 4,518 women from Eastern Europe, Morocco, and Tunisia in 2009 to work in the adult entertainment industry, serves to sustain a significant sex trade and facilitates sex trafficking. There is limited anecdotal information indicating that some children in Lebanon may be subjected to situations of forced labor and commercial sexual exploitation"

Turkey: "Turkey is a destination and transit country for women and children subjected to trafficking in persons, specifically forced prostitution, and for some women and men in forced labor. ... Officials identified an increased number of women subjected to forced prostitution from Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Kyrgyzstan in 2009. ... According to local experts, sex trafficking victims are generally forced into prostitution in illegal brothels or are “leased” by clients and kept in private residences or hotels. Although a much smaller problem, some internal trafficking involving Turkish citizens in both the legal and illegal prostitution sectors may occur."

Senegal: "Senegal is a source, transit, and destination country for children and women subjected to trafficking in persons, specifically forced labor, forced begging, and commercial sexual exploitation. ... In addition to forced begging, Senegalese boys and girls are subjected to involuntary domestic servitude, forced labor in gold mines, and commercial sexual exploitation. ... NGO observers ... believe that most local women in forced prostitution remain in Senegal. Women and girls from other West African countries, particularly Liberia, Ghana, Sierra Leone, and Nigeria, may be subjected to commercial sexual exploitation in Senegal, including for international sex tourism."

Source:US department of State's Trafficking in persons report

These countries are not models of well regulated prostitution. Turkey in particular demonstrates how legal brothels do not drive illegal brothels out of business.

 

[Cashie]

Meh. Prostitution should be legal, but regulated (health, immigration)
Being [il]legal shouldn't interfere too much with the supply/demand anyway.

The freer the market, the less expensive the sex.

 

[Flying Pig]

Personally I lean towards treatment combined with home confinement with an ankle bracelet and mandatory community service instead of prison. That would serve as a punishment much less expensive, and damaging, than prison combined with real treatment and real negative consequences to discourage use.

That would be great, except it would be a pig to enforce. You think how many prisoners one prison guard can keep order over, and think how many policemen you'd need to make sure these people didn't leave their homes: not to mention the fact that being kept at home on their own raises major ethical issues, but letting them out in the community raises others.

 

[Angst]

Although some women may benefit from "having a place to go", I think that the increase in the market due to legalization would result in more women who are trafficked who will not receive those benefits and need them.

This is simply not true.

If sufficiently legally supported, legal work will be protected by the state, and the workers would have the rights to speak to their state of mistreatment. If a job is illegal, one can't expect the state to help one when one talks to it about corruption, mistreatment, etc. since an illegal job would already be illegal in itself.

A legal prostitute can come to the state and ask for help, telling on a trafficker in the process.

An illegal one can't. An illegal prostitute would get arrested in the process. An illegal prostitute would have no out.