Prostitution and Law Enforcement

.... because once yer *Busted* , it's Too Late =

[URL]http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1012053refund1.html[/URL]


p.s. = Apparently the Video Vig had nothing to do with this particular Arrest

Every Monger at some point blows more money on a girl than he should have

..... but take heart , Gentle·mongers = at least you arent' *this* guy !!! =

[URL]http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1026053hull1.html[/URL]

Dog Darn , do I *hate* these Stories , be·cause they demonstrate yet again how the Legal System — and especially the Criminal Justice System — is so stacked against us MEN

Here's the story of a guy who infected *seven* women with HIV getting sentenced to basically a Life Sentence ; while your average HIV+ Hooker exposes seven men A NIGHT to their dis·ease = when's the last time you heard of one of them getting major league Hard Time for their Crimes ??

[URL]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9917108/[/URL]

Maybe its just me, but I feel this guys 21 year sentence was well deserved. Its probably biased on my part, but I feel a guy (or woman) deliberately infecting people is different than a drug addicted prostitute selling herself to feed her habit. I guess, for me, it's because I personally assume every prostitute to be HIV +, and if I roll the dice and go bareback, then I assume the responsibility for my health. Whereas, if I meet a gal through traditional means, I'm much less careful.

Now, if you took this same guy, and he was having unprotected sex at gay bathhouses, I think his sentence would have been much shorter, because again, I think the jury or judge would feel any rational intelligent adult would know the risks of going bareback in such a situation.

[QUOTE=Civ2000]Maybe its just me, but I feel this guys 21 year sentence was well deserved. Its probably biased on my part, but I feel a guy (or woman) deliberately infecting people is different than a drug addicted prostitute selling herself to feed her habit. I guess, for me, it's because I personally assume every prostitute to be HIV +, and if I roll the dice and go bareback, then I assume the responsibility for my health. Whereas, if I meet a gal through traditional means, I'm much less careful. [/QUOTE]


You would better serve Your·self if you assumed that EVERY woman who agreed to have bare·back Sex with you
was HIV+ , Civ·2K

What makes you think that the Non·Virgin yer jumping has NO communicable dis·eases ?? Or is HIV·neg ??

If you follow this Train of Thought out to its Logical Conclusion , you'll have to Admit that sending a MAN
to PRISON for LIFE — for having done what a Woman Street·Walker does on a nightly basis — is just [b][i]UN·FAIR !!![/b][/i]

I think the key issue here is whether the man or woman KNOWINGLY infected another person.

If they knowingly infected another person with the deadly HIV virus (a probable death sentence), then throw the book at them. If they did NOT know they were infected with HIV and it could be proven, they should receive some lesser punishment.

The gender issue should be treated neutrally. In other words, men and women should be treated the same when it comes to administering the law.

When it comes to equating the punishment of a drug dealer, prostitute, or someone who knowingly infected another person with HIV is another matter. That may be trying to compare apples and oranges.

BBB

[QUOTE=PsyberZombie]You would better serve Your·self if you assumed that EVERY woman who agreed to have bare·back Sex with you
was HIV+ , Civ·2K

What makes you think that the Non·Virgin yer jumping has NO communicable dis·eases ?? Or is HIV·neg ??

If you follow this Train of Thought out to its Logical Conclusion , you'll have to Admit that sending a MAN
to PRISON for LIFE — for having done what a Woman Street·Walker does on a nightly basis — is just [b][i]UN·FAIR !!![/b][/i][/QUOTE]

I think I'll pass on serving myself since I always wear protection. I carry my own, but most of the SW's I pick up don't really seem to care if I wear one or not. I wear protection because I assume she has something that I don't want to catch.

I'm quite aware that any gal I meet might have a communicatable disease, however it is a risk I'm willing to take at this time. I've been vacinated against Hep A & B; am not too worried about gonnorhea, syph, or clamydia as they can usually be treated; nor am I worried about herpes since it is a minor and relatively easily treated disease; so that basically leaves me with HIV. Since it is still relatively rare in non-drug using and non SW females, it is a chance I'm willing to take.

Now, I still believe that guy deserved life in prison. He was deliberately infecting females, almost for the fun of it, so it seems. We had a guy in our state do the same thing. Now the SW should probably serve a lenthy sentence as well, especially if she is deliberately infecting Johns. I still think a guy is an idiot if he has bbfs with a hooker. If he assumes she is HIV + like I do, he can bang her seven nights a week in relative safety if he wears a condom. I've known two HIV + SW's and both always insisted on condom use, usually to the loud and boisterous protests from their customers.

Originally posted on the Orange County , California Board =

[URL]http://www.usasexguide.info/forum/showpost.php?p=400200&postcount=1224[/URL]

Strippers are Hookers , and the Hooker who hooked the biggest Fish in history is [URL="http://www.deathtoallextremists.com/images/Wallpaper/Anna%20Nicole%20Smith.jpg"]Anna Nicole Smith[/URL] , who managed to get an 89 yr old Texas Oil Tycoon / Billionaire to marry her shortly be·fore he died

A decade later , Anna Nicole and the Family of the guy are *still* fighting over his Estate . And now George Dubya has stepped in·to the fray , backing Ms Smith !!

Here's an Article titled [b]**** White House Aids Playboy Playmate in Court **** [/b] =

[URL]http://*******.com/doctf[/URL]

I had visions of Roberts , Scalia , and Thomas declaring them·selves unable to make up their minds and so requiring Ms Smith to appear in chambers for a Private Session to "See if she can prove that she's worth all those Millions"

.... but in reality , the Case is only about clarifying an arcane Legal Doctrine known as [URL="http://www.law.pitt.edu/wasserman/other7.htm"]Supplemental Jurisdiction[/URL]

May·be next time , boys !!

[url]http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=33300&archive=true[/url]

Patronizing a prostitute is now a specific crime for servicemembers

By Jeff Schogol, Stars and Stripes
Mideast edition, Saturday, January 7, 2006

ARLINGTON, Va. — For the first time, the Department of Defense has specifically made it a crime for a servicemember to patronize a prostitute. The punishment: up to a year in prison, forfeiture of pay and dishonorable discharge.

The formal order came in a presidential executive order signed without fanfare Oct. 14, directing changes in the Manual for Courts-Martial. It is part of an assault the military has been waging against human trafficking.

A Defense Department spokeswoman, Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke, said in an e-mailed response to questions that “prostitution” and “pandering” will now be among the offenses covered by Article 134 of the courts-martial manual.

Paying for sex used to fall under the “Solicitation of Another to Commit an Offense” listed as part of Article 134, which executes the corresponding section in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Krenke said.

It prohibits “all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces” and “all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.”

But the October executive order makes prostitution and pandering specific offenses, she said.

Krenke said that the DOD made the change as part of its effort to combat human trafficking by taking on the sex exploitation industry, as set forth in a December 2002 National Security Presidential Directive that says in part:

“Our policy is based on an abolitionist approach to trafficking in persons, and our efforts must involve a comprehensive attack on such trafficking, which is a modern day of slavery. In this regard, the U.S. Government opposes prostitution and any related activities, including pimping, pandering, or maintaining brothels as contributing to the phenomenon of trafficking in persons.”

The military needs to change its general mind-set that tolerates prostitution, said Sara Mendelson, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

Mendelson, author of a report on human trafficking and peacekeeping in the Balkans, said the military needs to get the word out about the change on prostitution to make it effective.

“The issues is not whether activists or experts in Washington, D.C., know about it, it’s whether the soldier in the field understands; it’s whether the commander in the field understands that this is a change from the previous regulation in the Manual for Courts-Martial,” she said.

As early as November 2004, the services began to write online training courses that cover prostitution within the framework of human trafficking, Krenke said.

Krenke said it teaches that “you don’t have to be a professional criminal to contribute to the trafficking industry. You aid and encourage trafficking in persons without engaging in it directly, by hiring a prostitute.”

While the change to the courts-martial manual makes it clearer that prostitution is illegal, Marine commanders from the top down already know that prostitution is a punishable offense and have taken steps to combat it, wrote Marine Corps spokesman Maj. Douglas Powell via e-mail.

“Marines are briefed by their commanders, especially those who are deploying overseas, that they should not engage in prostitution,” Powell said.

[QUOTE=Star Dreamer]Krenke said it teaches that “you don’t have to be a professional criminal to contribute to the trafficking industry. You aid and encourage trafficking in persons without engaging in it directly, by hiring a prostitute.” [/QUOTE]

This is like saying that you 'aid and encourage' Chop·Shops by buying a car

A even better analogy is one that the government and anti·drug groups actually do use = that you 'aid & encourage' terrorism when you buy a baggie of marijuana

[ see = [URL]http://www.usembassy.it/file2001_12/alia/a1120508.htm[/URL] ]

Of course , if the pot was legal in the first place , you wouldn't have to find an illegal source for it , with the proceeds ending up in the hands of terrorists instead of the Tax coffers

[QUOTE=PsyberZombie]A even better analogy is one that the government and anti·drug groups actually do use = that you 'aid & encourage' terrorism when you buy a baggie of marijuana [/QUOTE]Use this same logic on gass guzzlers: You support terrorist countries when you drive around in a gass guzzler; and see how pissed off people get.

Yet it seems to me that this is more true than the drug analogy.

Proof positive that the trannies are out there , Gentle·men =

[URL]http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/02/060203014239.ygp5w1s5.html[/URL]

May·be *this* will keep Uncle LEO from shaking down the local SWs for free BJs to go with their do·nuts =

[URL]http://www.local6.com/news/6833079/detail.html[/URL]


p.s. Pinellas County is where St Petersburg & Clearwater , FL are located

With his camera skills , this fired LEO would make a great addition to our little community , don't you think ??

[URL]http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0208061munsey1.html[/URL]