San Fransisco May Allow Prostituion

[Lee Chambers]

Full story here:


SAN FRANCISCO (Oct. 21) - In this live-and-let-live town, where medical marijuana clubs do business next to grocery stores and an annual fair celebrates sadomasochism, prostitutes could soon walk the streets without fear of arrest.
San Francisco would become the first major U.S. city to decriminalize prostitution if voters next month approve Proposition K — a measure that forbids local authorities from investigating, arresting or prosecuting anyone for selling sex.



Opinions? I think this could turn out to be either a good idea or a bad one, depending on how things go down. Of course, that's IF it ends up getting passed. San Fran would earn themselves a new level of liberal if this goes through.

 

[rgraham666]

If they add regulations for safety and hygiene I think it's a damned fine idea.

 

[fieryjen]

If they add regulations for safety and hygiene I think it's a damned fine idea.

Yep. That's key right there.

Mandatory STD checks, taxes, all that stuff.

 

[Lee Chambers]

That's the kicker, Rob. They're not adding ANY regulations. They're simply preventing sex workers from being investigated or arrested. This isn't a technical legalization.

 

[fieryjen]

That's the kicker, Rob. They're not adding ANY regulations. They're simply preventing sex workers from being investigated or arrested. This isn't a technical legalization.

Huh. Well that sounds like it's not going to go well for very long.

 

[Corylea]

Prostitution is illegal in the State of California, so SF can't legalize it and regulate it; what Proposition K does is prohibit law enforcement personnel from enforcing the laws against it.

 

[Elianna]

And then my fear is... what happens if the worker is underage? Are you STILL not going to investigate even when you're concerned it's child exploitation? I know tons of kids who'd sell themselves for a drug fix.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

And then my fear is... what happens if the worker is underage? Are you STILL not going to investigate even when you're concerned it's child exploitation? I know tons of kids who'd sell themselves for a drug fix.

Which, in any other city than the Capitol of Egocentrism, would be the main argument that opponents would use. I'm not betting it would pass. There's a large Asian population there that might just turn to Eli's worries to knock it town.

 

[Corylea]

And then my fear is... what happens if the worker is underage? Are you STILL not going to investigate even when you're concerned it's child exploitation? I know tons of kids who'd sell themselves for a drug fix.

I know plenty of adults who, as children, decided that selling themselves to strangers for sex was better than being forced to have sex with Daddy. Do I want to take them out of prostitution and send them back to their families of origin? No. Do I want to take them out of prostitution and put them in a good foster home? Sure. The problem is finding a good foster home. And getting the authorities to believe a known prostitute.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

My hope is most of the citizens catch terminal crotch rot and die, so wholesome hetero sexual couples can move in.

 

[iluvyou3638]

i think it's a great idea if properly regulated. it could bring down the spread of STD's and be a good source of tax money.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Not likely. I'm betting that most of the anal sphincters in SF rot and fall on the carpet. That would be so funny to see.

 

[3113]

Which, in any other city than the Capitol of Egocentrism, would be the main argument that opponents would use.

My, my. For someone who supports gay and lesbian rights, we have quite a bone to pick with one of the few cities that was among the first to champion gay and lesbian rights. Why the problem with San Francisco? I've always found it a great city with generally great people--and I'm delighted that it decriminalized medical marijuana and tried to legalized gay marriage. Do you think they would have had the courage to do such things if they'd been less "egocentric"?

And really, I have to take issue with someone from L.A. calling S.F. egocentric. Please! We in L.A. have everyone in the country beat when it comes to egocentric...and you know what? I'm enough of an L.A. native to be proud of that.

 

[3113]

And then my fear is... what happens if the worker is underage? Are you STILL not going to investigate even when you're concerned it's child exploitation? I know tons of kids who'd sell themselves for a drug fix.

I'm going to presume that the law only applies to legal and consensual adults, the idea being that you can't arrest one adult for asking another adult to give them money for sex--not that you can't arrest an adult for taking a child off for sex, which is sex with a minor, which is still illegal. There are laws against sex with minors, against child abuse, and against rape, come to that. So if any of those laws were being broken, the cops could certainly look into it and do something about it. I seriously doubt this law undermines those laws.

 

[Elianna]

I know plenty of adults who, as children, decided that selling themselves to strangers for sex was better than being forced to have sex with Daddy. Do I want to take them out of prostitution and send them back to their families of origin? No. Do I want to take them out of prostitution and put them in a good foster home? Sure. The problem is finding a good foster home. And getting the authorities to believe a known prostitute.

Thus my reasoning for not making it any EASIER for child exploitation. Kids have enough shit they have to cope with.

The problem with the law is that it doesn't take into account what goes along with the prostitution business in America. In places where prostitution is legalized and is carefully monitored and such, I think that it works beautifully. But in SF or another place where it has always been a part of the underworld, it might make it more difficult to find OTHER more serious crimes. I'm just speculating, but, if you have worked with people living in marginality, you realize how much things like prostitution, drugs, and violence are interconnected. I don't know if you can just "disconnect" prostitution from that ring anymore without serious monitoring.

JMHO

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Perhaps I should have used the phrase Balkinized instead of egocentric. Blasted Bay Areaños couldn't even drop their particulated differences long enough to repair the damage by the La Prieta quake. Long after L.A. was back together, up and running, SF was still whimpering over the aesthetics of the Oakland Bay's replacement while every day the old one grew weaker and weaker. One more modest quake during rush hour and the entire lot would have been sitting at the bottom of the Bay. No one can get anything practical done up there because each minority of a minority of a minority won't budge from it's non-negotiable position. I used to live in The City in the 70's. It was a cool, cool place. The the Hashbury spread across the town and it went downhill bad, really bad. For all it's political rectitude, the place is a drug ridden hellhole. One of the reasons they want to forbid the police to get involved in dealing with prostitution is to free them up to chase real crime. Wait until they discover the White Slave traders moving in.

 

[lesbiaphrodite]

It should be legal everywhere. Sex is as much a vital need as food, clothing, affection, work and play. If a woman decides to sell sex for money it's her choice to do so. If it's forced, that's another matter. But, if it's legalized, then pimps and forced hooking would not be so prevalent.

 

[Liar]

In a perfect world, we minimize all the bad reasons to sell sex. If nobody does it because they are out of options, I see no problem with it.

First step towards that would be decriminalization of freelance prostitution. The second a comprehensive and functional drug policy instead of the current failed warfare. The third to change a whole society's attitude towards sex.

And after that it gets tricky.

 

[epiphany65]

Yep. That's key right there.

Mandatory STD checks, taxes, all that stuff.

It should be legal everywhere. Sex is as much a vital need as food, clothing, affection, work and play. If a woman decides to sell sex for money it's her choice to do so. If it's forced, that's another matter. But, if it's legalized, then pimps and forced hooking would not be so prevalent.

I agree with all you said except the sentence I've put in bold. I can go without sex for much longer than I can go without food or clothes and although I may not be happy about it, at least I won't starve to death or die of exposure.

 

[AchtungNight]

I have mixed feelings on this law. I support it because I agree we should have the right to sell our bodies if we want to; but at the same time I hope they will still enforce laws against aggravated pimping (defined in my home state, Texas, law as "promotion of prostitution where the prostitute is a minor and/or subject to threat, fraud, and/or force by the promoter- i.e. pimp). Health and wage standards is also a great idea. I wonder, though, if we might end up getting a case where a hooker gets raped and then has to defend both her chosen career and that the rape really was a rape. That could be a difficult case.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

I have mixed feelings on this law. I support it because I agree we should have the right to sell our bodies if we want to; but at the same time I hope they will still enforce laws against aggravated pimping (defined in my home state, Texas, law as "promotion of prostitution where the prostitute is a minor and/or subject to threat, fraud, and/or force by the promoter- i.e. pimp). Health and wage standards is also a great idea. I wonder, though, if we might end up getting a case where a hooker gets raped and then has to defend both her chosen career and that the rape really was a rape. That could be a difficult case.

If I understand what is proposed, the prostitutes will just be free from legal prosecution. No regs, no inspections (such things are illegal) and probably no protection from pimps, hustlers, white slavers, etc. What a mindless proposition.

 

[rgraham666]

If that's the case I'd vote not also.

 

[ottohauser1977]

A step in the right (or is that left) direction. Though some regulation would be good.

 

[slyc_willie]

If I understand what is proposed, the prostitutes will just be free from legal prosecution. No regs, no inspections (such things are illegal) and probably no protection from pimps, hustlers, white slavers, etc. What a mindless proposition.

I guess the distinction would be made between what is legal and illegal. Prostitution could be considered legal, but certain aspects of it might still be termed illegal. If all aspects were considered legal, then protection would be required -- in the form of sanctioned licenses, etc., -- and such things as pimping would be outright illegal.

Now, that would be a funny thing to see on an episode of Cops; officers arresting pimps for forcing 'protection' upon them.