Originally posted by Dragoon
Yeah, that's so much better. Are we going to have "brothel police" that are going to check? Most prostitutes these days are aware they should be using condoms.
Why does this sound so absurd to you? I'm talking about simple things that go along with any legitimate business here. On a construction site a Forman will probably bitch you out about not wearing a hard hat, and similarly employers (brothel owners/management) would reprimand customers or employees who do not live up to the standards of business that they have set forth, IE using protection every time.
Originally posted by Dragoon
Am I to assume that no one will ever make "fake" licences? Or what about getting someone else to take the blood test? That would never happen. (And I don't think we're going to have enough resources to put into a prostitute DNA registery). The whole thing will turn into a big ol' Gong Show - wasting money that could be better spent on drug rehabilitation programs, councilling, teaching life skills.
Well you present a few interesting ideas in this paragraph that I hadn’t talked about. Issuing licenses for instance. I'm not sure how well that would work, I had more of a hands off idea in mind at first, but of course more regulation wouldn't necessarily hurt. We're not constructing a complete model for legalization here, so I won't go into the pros and cons of that idea.
As for getting someone else to take the blood test that'd be kind of difficult seeing how as you've got to be there at the time, but anyway I don't see any reason why faking would occur more often than with any business. Maybe you're not out there in the working world but a large number of employers have mandatory random drug tests which can consist of urine and blood tests, and failure of these is grounds for termination. If you have an idea of why faking would be more prevelant within this particular profession feel free to give us your theory.
Also, you say that it's a waste of money, but who's money, exactly? I don't get it, are you trying to imply that public money would have to be spent on such a thing? All the government needs to do is legalize it, and a free market economy takes care of the rest, it's not your or my money that's going into building big brothels, it's private entrepreneurs, investors, and big businesses and corporations (you know that holiday in would try to get in on some of that action). So I'm not entirely sure what you mean by money that would be better spent on social programs, as these are organizations which wouldn't have been spending money on those things anyway. Also if you think that a brothel industry would not make money you are just kidding yourself.
Originally posted by Dragoon
So how does making something legal suddenly make it less bad? Legal or illegal, the potential for abuse and exploitation is still there. Maybe I'm wrong and prostitutes will form unions and be able to enforce industry standards, but I just don't see this happening.
I've already outlined a few points for how legalizing it would make it "less bad". It makes the situation so much easier. It's just the same as if we legalized pot, all of a sudden Marlboro and Philip Morris would be manufacturing joints and selling them on supermarkets. Users will buy their stuff from reputable legal venders with federally enforced standards so they don't have to worry about their stash having been sprayed with something, or getting their head blown off by warring drug dealers or something. As people turn away from street dealers that profession simply won't be able to make enough money anymore and suddenly we've got a lot less of the old traditional drug dealers on hand and the situation basically just fixes it's own damn self.
Originally posted by Dragoon
Incidents of sexual assault in dormitories occur at a surprisingly frequent rate. And that's when the survivors have friends right next door, security patroling the buildings, dormitory staff to supervise parties and education programs in place to protect the students.
So you are saying that if a man sexually assaulted a woman in a place of business full of other whores, staff, and probably security, that somehow that would be much easier to get away with than assaulting a random street walker who would have to implicate herself in illegal activities if she wanted to report the crime? You're nuts.
Originally posted by Dragoon
I don't see legal brothels as "business offices" opening up in the mini-mall right next to the dentist. My guess is that they would end up like strip joints - run by organised crime syndicates and where anyone who "abuses" a prostitue ends up getting physically assaulted - in which case the police now have both the sexual assault, and the secondary assault to worry about.
Well, being that prostitution is illegal that is really sort of the situation as it stands now. The best bet a hooker has is to tell her pimp and then he'll make sure that the john gets slashed up or something. If there were leangle and legitimate brothels in operation then it would take the market force away from street walkers or these underground syndicates as you put it, simply because an open honest regulated business with certain professional standards is always a better choice for a consumer than risking such other sources.
Originally posted by Dragoon
Even if there are legal brothels - it won't stop unlicensed workers from working.
Again you come to the idea of licensing them, I never mentioned any such program. But you are right, it wouldn't completely stop independent street walkers completely, but it would cut down on them drastically. After all, what guy is going to pick up some skuzzy street walker, when just down the street there is a legally owned brothel which has it's own standards of conduct and safety?
Originally posted by Dragoon
The degree of control over traded sexual activity would be minimal, simply because we don't have the resources to commit. In most situations, the best way to control the sex trade is to keep it illegal.
It's illegal now and we haven't got a bit of control over it. Legalizing it is the only way to gain control over it and essentially declaw it. If it's legal it's really not such a problem. As for the problem of not having enough resources to commit to it, I'm afraid that I simply don't understand what you mean. Who doesn't have enough resources to commit to it? Are you implying again that public funds should be spent on such a venture? That sounds to me like a very stupid idea no matter the case, the problem would work itself out, we don't need government intervention.
