Printable View
[QUOTE=MrHobbyist;5070913]Just sayin. It took a while, but drugs won the war on drugs, sex will win the war on sex.[/QUOTE]Hope you're right, we need the libertarians to be more influential in politics to push us in that direction. I also don't understand how people can't see that decriminalizing an activity will eliminate the violent crime that accompanies it.
Did we still have gang land slayings over bath tub gin once prohibition ended?
[QUOTE=TooHotForYou;5035991]Might be more to this than what we are told. I'm sure the local cops didn't care about this but had to participate when this became a federal issue. Why is the government involved with this? Who is wanted by them that the lady arrested is refusing to give up if we are to speculate?[/QUOTE]Gross dog I think.
[QUOTE=YeOldHornDawg;5070951]Hope you're right, we need the libertarians to be more influential in politics to push us in that direction. I also don't understand how people can't see that decriminalizing an activity will eliminate the violent crime that accompanies it.
Did we still have gang land slayings over bath tub gin once prohibition ended?[/QUOTE]I used to be a fully committed Reagan loving Republican indoctrinated into the war on drugs rhetoric through high school. Then I went to college and saw highly functional recreational users of "hard" drugs graduate and go on to successful careers and establish nuclear families. Then I traveled Europe and saw "normal people" mostly college girls engaged in independent commercial sex business. Then I found USASG. Mostly everything I was told or read in the "news" on these topics was a lie.
Make no mistake, junkies, pimps and traffickers exist, and the drug and sex business often run together with drugs and addiction leveraged to control others. However, from what I have seen, that scenario is a small part of the whole. What I don't understand is why 10% of something makes up 90% of the narrative.
The article about the war on sex becoming the next war on drugs with a similar failed outcome in the end is spot on. I just wish that narrative could go mainstream. It will take some serious cash flow to get representatives in power to allow and or support this message.
[QUOTE=JunkSecond;5071893]I used to be a fully committed Reagan loving Republican indoctrinated into the war on drugs rhetoric through high school. Then I went to college and saw highly functional recreational users of "hard" drugs graduate and go on to successful careers and establish nuclear families. Then I traveled Europe and saw "normal people" mostly college girls engaged in independent commercial sex business. Then I found USASG. Mostly everything I was told or read in the "news" on these topics was a lie.
Make no mistake, junkies, pimps and traffickers exist, and the drug and sex business often run together with drugs and addiction leveraged to control others. However, from what I have seen, that scenario is a small part of the whole. What I don't understand is why 10% of something makes up 90% of the narrative.
The article about the war on sex becoming the next war on drugs with a similar failed outcome in the end is spot on. I just wish that narrative could go mainstream. It will take some serious cash flow to get representatives in power to allow and or support this message.[/QUOTE]The war on drugs is very, very far from "ending" or "being won". No matter how the states go, it will remain a Federal crime for a very, very long time.
I got some insight into this last year. A large Asian public-private tobacco company hired my research firm to look into whether they should explore a pivot into cannabis, so we began exploring the potential global marketplace and legal and regulatory environment, sent agents to sit on the ministerial sessions of the UN's drug discussions (a big global effort to get cannabis rescheduled so it can at least be researched for dosage data), talked to UNODC (strongly opposed to cannabis) and the WHO (strongly in favor of cannabis), etc.
What we found was a veritable tangle of treaty arrangements which keep drugs illegal, and a few countries who are kind of the real forces behind criminalizing drugs (the main one being Russia, which is *dead set* against any kind of relaxation of the law.).
Pretty much every "strongman" nation is very opposed to decriminalization, because keeping drug criminalized is one of their main weapons against organized crime. Mexico, for example, fights cannabis decriminalization because they would lose a legal weapon against the cartels.
(Surprisingly, Jamaica is strongly against decriminalization, because they benefit from the financial support of a US-based coalition of churches which considers drugs bad.).
Basically, though, as long as there's organized crime, there will be a resistance to decriminalizing drugs, and this is all codified in a network of treaty agreements between UN members.
And now that pay-for-play is HUMAN TRAFFICKING (tun tun TUN! ) You can bet that a scaffolding of interconnected treaty arrangements is being built, AND that member governments see this as an awesome new tool to fight organized crime, rebel movements, opposition parties, etc.
I would not expect prostitution in the USA to be decriminalized, well. Ever. Not going to happen.
O.
[QUOTE=Ozymandias;5072849]I would not expect prostitution in the USA to be decriminalized, well. Ever. Not going to happen.
O.[/QUOTE]Just think how long prostitution has been legal in certain parts of Nevada and nowhere else in America. For a politician to show up at a meeting of his peers and say, "Hey, we should decriminalize prostitution," would be introducing political roadkill. If prostitution is ever tolerated in this country, I'm guessing the liberal states would allow it first and any Bible Belt states would be dead last.
[QUOTE=Ozymandias;5072849]I would not expect prostitution in the USA to be decriminalized, well. Ever. Not going to happen.[/QUOTE]Not to pick nits, but it's legal in a couple of counties in Nevada. And it was legal in Rhode Island from 1980 - 2009. And yes, the feds can prosecute some elements of prostitution but prostitution is a states thing here. And probably 20% of men have outright paid for sex in the USA.
A $14 B industry in the underground, not getting taxed. At least AMPs are getting taxed.
O is right: there is very little momentum to change drug or prostitution laws. And another reason is that polarizing issues are great fund raising tools for BOTH sides of the aisle.
[QUOTE=TheWiseacre;5073660]Not to pick nits, but it's legal in a couple of counties in Nevada. And it was legal in Rhode Island from 1980 - 2009. And yes, the feds can prosecute some elements of prostitution but prostitution is a states thing here. And probably 20% of men have outright paid for sex in the USA.
A $14 B industry in the underground, not getting taxed. At least AMPs are getting taxed.
O is right: there is very little momentum to change drug or prostitution laws. And another reason is that polarizing issues are great fund raising tools for BOTH sides of the aisle.[/QUOTE]Really? Everybody's familiar with Nevada but I had no idea it was legal in Rhode Island so recently.
I will say that Ozy raises some good points about the entanglement of international relations impacting decriminalization or legalization of "vice" activities but my unscientific observations seem to indicate that as opposed to drug use, prostitution is more widely tolerated in places like Canada and multiple areas of Europe, Asia, and South America.
Regardless, in the current climate of the "trafficking" narrative, I don't expect this to reach any kind of forward movement anytime soon. Currently, it seems there are strong objections to it on both sides of the aisle, although for very different reasons.
[QUOTE=YeOldHornDawg;5075221]Really? Everybody's familiar with Nevada but I had no idea it was legal in Rhode Island so recently.
I will say that Ozy raises some good points about the entanglement of international relations impacting decriminalization or legalization of "vice" activities but my unscientific observations seem to indicate that as opposed to drug use, prostitution is more widely tolerated in places like Canada and multiple areas of Europe, Asia, and South America.
Regardless, in the current climate of the "trafficking" narrative, I don't expect this to reach any kind of forward movement anytime soon. Currently, it seems there are strong objections to it on both sides of the aisle, although for very different reasons.[/QUOTE]Canada? How well is sport fucking tolerated in Canada?
[QUOTE=Niteluvr;5075514]Canada? How well is sport fucking tolerated in Canada?[/QUOTE]Not as well as it used to be admittedly, laws changed in 2014 which made it illegal to purchase sex although the sale of sex and the operation of their numerous brothels remained legal. Regarding how well it's tolerated in practice, I guess we'd have to consult our Hoser neighbors to the north.
[QUOTE=Niteluvr;5075514]Canada? How well is sport fucking tolerated in Canada?[/QUOTE]I worked I Calgary, Montreal and Toronto a few years back. Calgary during Stampede is as good as it gets. Calgary normal times has many 35 to 45 year old.
Friendly ladies. Not hookers. Toronto was nothing special. Montreal had a lot of beautiful ladies if the liked you the would speak in English, if not all you got was.
Was babbling in French. That was my experience.
[QUOTE=Niteluvr;5073595]Just think how long prostitution has been legal in certain parts of Nevada and nowhere else in America. For a politician to show up at a meeting of his peers and say, "Hey, we should decriminalize prostitution," would be introducing political roadkill. If prostitution is ever tolerated in this country, I'm guessing the liberal states would allow it first and any Bible Belt states would be dead last.[/QUOTE]My liberal friends are actually opposed to it as they jump straight to the "human trafficking" victim narrative cause nobody just enjoys sex and sees you can make money from it. The government needs to protect those people. And deliver equality.
My conservative non religious friends were more or less ok with the idea of it once a rational discussion took place.
My baptist friends don't like dancing as it could lead to impure thoughts.
Try it with your circle of friends. “So I read another article about Robert Kraft. I think we should be spending tax dollars to keep people safe not dicks dry. What do you think?”
[QUOTE=ComTech42;5076183] Toronto was nothing special. Montreal had a lot of beautiful ladies if the liked you the would speak in English, if not all you got was.Was babbling in French. That was my experience.[/QUOTE]Yep, Montreal, QC has a preponderance of beautiful women, probably the most beautiful women in N. America.
Depends on how you define fed but White House and congress are the epitome of it.
[URL]https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/trump-administration-committed-combating-human-trafficking-protecting-innocent/[/URL]
Trump passed a lot of legislation included the biggest budget for anti-human trafficking.
[QUOTE=TheWiseacre;5073660]Not to pick nits, but it's legal in a couple of counties in Nevada. And it was legal in Rhode Island from 1980 - 2009. And yes, the feds can prosecute some elements of prostitution but prostitution is a states thing here. And probably 20% of men have outright paid for sex in the USA.
A $14 B industry in the underground, not getting taxed. At least AMPs are getting taxed.
O is right: there is very little momentum to change drug or prostitution laws. And another reason is that polarizing issues are great fund raising tools for BOTH sides of the aisle.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=SgtSoros;5076286]Yep, Montreal, QC has a preponderance of beautiful women, probably the most beautiful women in N. America.[/QUOTE]I totally agree with you. The girls there are gorgeous, friendly and reasonable. I have not found a US city to provide the same level of quality, quantity and totally reasonable price. The Canadian exchange is also very favorable for US mongers. I had a few girls there and most are close to 10 quality. I can possibly find similar quality in the USA, but then you may have to pay 1 k and up. Just imagine the best looking girl in Cheetah, Pink Pony, Oasis available for 200 or less.
[QUOTE=HaneDales;5076354]Depends on how you define fed but White House and congress are the epitome of it.
[URL]https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/trump-administration-committed-combating-human-trafficking-protecting-innocent/[/URL]
Trump passed a lot of legislation included the biggest budget for anti-human trafficking.[/QUOTE]I'm saying the Federal Government does not currently prohibit prostitution. But like many things that are not explicitly part of Federal Code, the various agencies in the federal government can (and do) codify many things that are not challengeable until litigated. Similarly, the Executive Branch (the president) has wide latitude to create Executive Orders that are, again, the law of the land unless challenged successfully in court. Finally, federal attorney generals can decide what to and not to prosecute so there is a lot of latitude there as well (this is obviously how marijuana is "legal".
The point being, as you noted, rather than take on a polarizing issue head on (like the legality of prostitution at a federal level), they just use legislative or executive authority to regulate / influence.