General Reports

[QUOTE=GMan7547;7007414]My son uses my phone for games and anytime I get a text, he blirts out that I got a text message, who's it from, and what the text message says. While I have used those apps in the past, I would prefer a completely separate phone, number, and plan so that I can keep all of my hobbies away from the fam.[/QUOTE]Hahahahaha, now that could be a problem. I bought a tracfone at Walmart and buy the $20 or $30 cards to add service every month. I think the phone itself was around $60 or so - definitely under $100. Pay for everything in cash and do not give them any personal information when setting it up. No name, email, address, backup phone number, nothing.

GMan, I use TextMe and Google Voice on my regular phone. Haven't had any problems. Whenever I think about getting a second physical phone, I think of the consequences of my SO finding it. Everyone knows what a second phone means.

I bury the apps off the main page (iPhone), so they aren't visible if someone casually pics up the phone. I also have my screen lockout set to 30 seconds or 1 minute. If need be, the apps can be deleted from the phone, then re-installed later to pick-up where you left off. Google Voice can be checked anywhere - you can text using your desktop GMail account.

[QUOTE=GMan7547;7006583]What burner phones do you guys use that gives you the most bang for your buck? I don't want to spend a huge amount on a secondary phone and service, but I am not using my main phone / number for any of my hobbies. I probably don't need unlimited talk / text, but at least enough that would last me throughout the year. Would probably want some sort of data so if I am on the go, I can check some profiles on my phone without having to be sneaky.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=CuriousVaMan;7007853]GMan, I use TextMe and Google Voice on my regular phone. Haven't had any problems. Whenever I think about getting a second physical phone, I think of the consequences of my SO finding it. Everyone knows what a second phone means.

I bury the apps off the main page (iPhone), so they aren't visible if someone casually pics up the phone. I also have my screen lockout set to 30 seconds or 1 minute. If need be, the apps can be deleted from the phone, then re-installed later to pick-up where you left off. Google Voice can be checked anywhere - you can text using your desktop GMail account.[/QUOTE]Where do you store your favorites contact information? Does Google voice offer a private contact list?

Thank you,

H19.

[QUOTE=CoopDawg;7007823]Hahahahaha, now that could be a problem. I bought a tracfone at Walmart and buy the $20 or $30 cards to add service every month. I think the phone itself was around $60 or so - definitely under $100. Pay for everything in cash and do not give them any personal information when setting it up. No name, email, address, backup phone number, nothing.[/QUOTE]Very good advice! I have already been caught from my wife in the past so I don't want to go through that again. It's all about keeping this as separate as possible.

[QUOTE=JjPhillip69;7041351]My problem with the overwhelming majority of "high end" is their ridiculously invasive screening process. No I am not going to give someone in their line of work a picture of my DL or work credentials. Especially starting December first. I don't know who the people are that willingly provide this kind of information but I wish they would all stop.[/QUOTE]Can someone link me to whatever is happening December 1st? People have told me to do my research well I have and didn't find shit.

[QUOTE=LizardMan14;7044621]Can someone link me to whatever is happening December 1st? People have told me to do my research well I have and didn't find shit.[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.ncleg.gov/Sessions/2023/Bills/House/PDF/H971v6.pdf[/URL]

"AN ACT DIRECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TO DEVELOP HUMAN TRAFFICKING AWARENESS TRAINING, REQUIRING LODGING ESTABLISHMENTS, ACCOMMODATION FACILITATORS, AND PROPERTY MANAGERS FOR VACATION RENTALS TO IMPLEMENT HUMAN TRAFFICKING AWARENESS TRAINING, INCREASING THE PUNISHMENT FOR A FIRST OFFENSE OF SOLICITING A PROSTITUTE, MODIFYING LAWS RELATED TO HUMAN TRAFFICKING, AND MODIFYING THE DEFINITION OF VICTIM IN THE CRIME VICTIM'S COMPENSATION ACT. ".

Section 4 amends the charge of solicitation of a person for purposes of prostitution from a misdemeanor to a felony, noting there will be no prayer of judgement allowed for first time offenders which means automatic jail time if convicted.

Goes into effect Dec 1 of this year.

[QUOTE=ProfessorVan;7044843][URL]https://www.ncleg.gov/Sessions/2023/Bills/House/PDF/H971v6.pdf[/URL]

"AN ACT DIRECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TO DEVELOP HUMAN TRAFFICKING AWARENESS TRAINING, REQUIRING LODGING ESTABLISHMENTS, ACCOMMODATION FACILITATORS, AND PROPERTY MANAGERS FOR VACATION RENTALS TO IMPLEMENT HUMAN TRAFFICKING AWARENESS TRAINING, INCREASING THE PUNISHMENT FOR A FIRST OFFENSE OF SOLICITING A PROSTITUTE, MODIFYING LAWS RELATED TO HUMAN TRAFFICKING, AND MODIFYING THE DEFINITION OF VICTIM IN THE CRIME VICTIM'S COMPENSATION ACT. ".

Section 4 amends the charge of solicitation of a person for purposes of prostitution from a misdemeanor to a felony, noting there will be no prayer of judgement allowed for first time offenders which means automatic jail time if convicted..[/QUOTE]Basically, you're fucked if you get caught! Which is why a lot of us seniors have been trying to find UTR girls so we're not surfing the sites too often.

They are really trying to get full access to protect who? The government hates competition and wants to be the only one fucking anyone for money. LOL.

[QUOTE=ProfessorVan;7044843][URL]https://www.ncleg.gov/Sessions/2023/Bills/House/PDF/H971v6.pdf[/URL]

Section 4 amends the charge of solicitation of a person for purposes of prostitution from a misdemeanor to a felony, noting there will be no prayer of judgement allowed for first time offenders which means automatic jail time if convicted.

Goes into effect Dec 1 of this year.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=MrSmithwick;7045671]They are really trying to get full access to protect who? The government hates competition and wants to be the only one fucking anyone for money. LOL.[/QUOTE]This is how the lawmakers tighten the screw! Slowly and painfully until everyone is fucked! First they hit the girls arresting them left and right! That didn't work, so they focused on Johns! That kinda worked but not quite because the punishment was not harsh enough! Then they focused on human trafficking! Well! That didn't go anywhere because majority of them were the crooks themselves!! Now they are focused on anyone that aids, abets or willfully gets sexual favors in return for anything! That includes Motel owners who rent rooms, landlords who rent property and private people who provide transportation. You cannot exchange money or any other forms of reward for sexual favors! So! Is buying a drink or dinner to hook up with a girl considered breaking the law? The way the legislation is written is pretty scary! How did it even pass into a law is a deeper mystery! Will have to wait and see how it is going to be implemented!! Better give Tommy a holiday in December folks!

Mk.

[QUOTE=MarkKern;7045760]This is how the lawmakers tighten the screw! Slowly and painfully until everyone is fucked! First they hit the girls arresting them left and right! That didn't work, so they focused on Johns! That kinda worked but not quite because the punishment was not harsh enough! Then they focused on human trafficking! Well! That didn't go anywhere because majority of them were the crooks themselves!! Now they are focused on anyone that aids, abets or willfully gets sexual favors in return for anything! That includes Motel owners who rent rooms, landlords who rent property and private people who provide transportation. You cannot exchange money or any other forms of reward for sexual favors! So! Is buying a drink or dinner to hook up with a girl considered breaking the law? The way the legislation is written is pretty scary! How did it even pass into a law is a deeper mystery! Will have to wait and see how it is going to be implemented!! Better give Tommy a holiday in December folks![/QUOTE]I can understand trying to put an end to human trafficking. OK, I might be one of the few guys on here who thinks that importing in girls for sex acts who don't even know where they are and don't have the freedom to just up and leave or go where they want is a bad, bad thing. But other than that, if both adults agree on a consensual agreement of service, I don't understand the problem. You can talk about the moral issue of it, but in a legal sense, it's just like locking people up who smoke pot in the privacy of their homes. If they are not bothering anybody then they should have the freedom to do whatever they want to do so as long as it doesn't infringe on someone else's freedoms.

This is what happens when you put people in office who try to build government.

[QUOTE=MarkKern;7045760]This is how the lawmakers tighten the screw! Slowly and painfully until everyone is fucked! First they hit the girls arresting them left and right! That didn't work, so they focused on Johns! That kinda worked but not quite because the punishment was not harsh enough! Then they focused on human trafficking! Well! That didn't go anywhere because majority of them were the crooks themselves!! Now they are focused on anyone that aids, abets or willfully gets sexual favors in return for anything! That includes Motel owners who rent rooms, landlords who rent property and private people who provide transportation. You cannot exchange money or any other forms of reward for sexual favors! So! Is buying a drink or dinner to hook up with a girl considered breaking the law? The way the legislation is written is pretty scary! How did it even pass into a law is a deeper mystery! Will have to wait and see how it is going to be implemented!! Better give Tommy a holiday in December folks!

Mk.[/QUOTE]Any politician in a conservative controlled state against 'Human Trafficking' legislation won't be in office for very long. It will be interesting to see how many state legislators get busted. My detective friend has said the stings are about to get really really creative, so watch out after 12/1. See only providers you know and 'trust' - and don't respond to an ad with a new phone # for that provider. He already told me that's going to be a tactic. They're even adding 'counselors' to the Vice teams to convince the girls to flip on the johns during busts. The counselors will be telling them they are victims, and can't be charged for prostitution any longer and convincing them that if they help convict us they can receive victim compensation funds and then sue us civilly (for benefitting from their plight) after we're convicted. The part I can't get over is that these girls make their living doing this every single day, while some of us might partake once per year. Imagine if they allowed the drug dealer who makes his living that way to have immunity so they could bust a recreational buyer?

[QUOTE=MmceStep;7046321]Any politician in a conservative controlled state against 'Human Trafficking' legislation won't be in office for very long. It will be interesting to see how many state legislators get busted. My detective friend has said the stings are about to get really really creative, so watch out after 12/1. See only providers you know and 'trust' - and don't respond to an ad with a new phone # for that provider. He already told me that's going to be a tactic. They're even adding 'counselors' to the Vice teams to convince the girls to flip on the johns during busts. The counselors will be telling them they are victims, and can't be charged for prostitution any longer and convincing them that if they help convict us they can receive victim compensation funds and then sue us civilly (for benefitting from their plight) after we're convicted. The part I can't get over is that these girls make their living doing this every single day, while some of us might partake once per year. Imagine if they allowed the drug dealer who makes his living that way to have immunity so they could bust a recreational buyer?[/QUOTE]Yes Sir, there will be a lot more pressure on the girls to set us up. Even if they get picked up for probation violations, if the PO knows she's an escort they will be trying to flip her to bust us. That's going to really change the game a lot.

I also agree that the girls and agencies that have the heavy screening processes are going to have to stop asking for personal info. Either that, or find a new line of work.

[QUOTE=MmceStep;7046321]Any politician in a conservative controlled state against 'Human Trafficking' legislation won't be in office for very long. It will be interesting to see how many state legislators get busted. My detective friend has said the stings are about to get really really creative, so watch out after 12/1. See only providers you know and 'trust' - and don't respond to an ad with a new phone # for that provider. He already told me that's going to be a tactic. They're even adding 'counselors' to the Vice teams to convince the girls to flip on the johns during busts. The counselors will be telling them they are victims, and can't be charged for prostitution any longer and convincing them that if they help convict us they can receive victim compensation funds and then sue us civilly (for benefitting from their plight) after we're convicted. The part I can't get over is that these girls make their living doing this every single day, while some of us might partake once per year. Imagine if they allowed the drug dealer who makes his living that way to have immunity so they could bust a recreational buyer?[/QUOTE]This is straight up from the Kamala Harris playbook. Read this article. It isn't about being in a conservative state as much as it's really about what the individual politician is going to push. These tactics were born out of the ideas from Harris in San Francisco.

[URL]https://reason.com/2024/09/25/a-history-of-harris-positions-on-sex-work/[/URL]

[QUOTE=CoopDawg;7046347]Yes Sir, there will be a lot more pressure on the girls to set us up. Even if they get picked up for probation violations, if the PO knows she's an escort they will be trying to flip her to bust us. That's going to really change the game a lot.

I also agree that the girls and agencies that have the heavy screening processes are going to have to stop asking for personal info. Either that, or find a new line of work.[/QUOTE]Not sure why my other post hasn't been posted yet (about the article of Kamala Harris and her crackdown on sex work), but this is what Harris was trying to get pushed out in San Francisco:

1. Convince the SWer that she's having to do this job because of the clients. They are the real criminals.

2. Provide mental health services for providers while putting the clients in jail.

3. Providing monetary help to the providers if they turn in their client list.

4. There was already a situation in SF where corrupt police were busted for notifying providers of potential stings and raids, because these police officers were partaking themselves. They were also busted for partaking with underage girls.

The same concept that Harris applied to San Francisco when she was the district attorney there is the same concept being applied here come December 1st. Providers are victims, clients are criminals. Clients provide the funding for purchase of their bodies (even though it was a consensual agreement between two adults), which they deem to be human trafficking, providers use it to pay for drugs, and to keep the high, they have to prostitute more. And then by a certain time, the providers are selling their bodies while being under the influence. This is how the politicians connect the dots and wind up prosecuting the clients.

Here's my opinion: You shouldn't police morality. Unless someone's freedom has been infringed upon, people should have the right to do whatever they want. Whether if it is deemed immoral or not. Free will. What should be policed is murder, theft, rape of an individual who did not consent, property damage, protect the underage. In no particular order mind you. Some people find smoking and drinking immoral. Some people find girls wearing short shorts and showing a lot of cleavage is immoral. Yet it's legal. The politicians seem to be OK with allowing guys into girls locker rooms and bathrooms, but if a guy wants to pay a willing girl for sex, that's a no-no. I just don't get it.

I do totally get stopping actual human trafficking, but I think anything sex work related, the politicians are trying to put that blanket definition on it, and that is not correct.

[QUOTE=GMan7547;7046391]This is straight up from the Kamala Harris playbook. Read this article. It isn't about being in a conservative state as much as it's really about what the individual politician is going to push. These tactics were born out of the ideas from Harris in San Francisco.

[URL]https://reason.com/2024/09/25/a-history-of-harris-positions-on-sex-work/[/URL][/QUOTE]All 4 authors of the Bill were Republicans: Crutchfield, Reeder, Arp and Sasser. Of course this had to be the case, with the current mix of legislators. The Republicans control both chambers and the Democrats aren't able to introduce legislation. The NC GOP is taking the first majority in 100 years in both chambers to legislate morality (and they've publicly said so), with this Bill / Law and their Anti-Porn Bill / Law. There's more coming unless they lose their majority. The authorship of the bill is publicly available information. You shouldn't call someone out unless you've researched first. My job is focused on politics in this state, and I know what's going on in the background. The federal govt has no control over state politics, especially right now. I'm not a democrat, but I hate what's going on with the GOP in this state right now.