tuscl

I don't think this will work as California hoped...

deogol
Michigan
Friday, December 30, 2016 4:51 PM
[view link] Beginning on Jan. 1, prostitution by minors will be legal in California. Yes, you read that right. SB 1322 bars law enforcement from arresting sex workers who are under the age of 18 for soliciting or engaging in prostitution, or loitering with the intent to do so. So teenage girls (and boys) in California will soon be free to have sex in exchange for money without fear of arrest or prosecution.

34 comments

  • mikeya02
    •
    8 years ago
    Sounds like something SJG is all for
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    8 years ago
    This is news to me. But I think it just means that LE can't bust minors for prostituting. But if you are out there trying to set up a session with a minor, I think they will send 20 officers with guns drawn. So no I can't see how this would legalize underage prostitution, it just means that the minor is not going to be the one who gets jailed. Where as you will be charged with a felony and will need to be looking to see how you can make bail. LE is real strong on protecting children from sexual abuse. I helped put one such abuser into San Quentin, a guy molesting his daughters with his entire Pentecostal church behind him, blaming it on the eldest daughter. And then this, passed by 80%, highest in the state's history of initiatives. Even if it is unconstitutional and replicates existing laws, you do not want to mess with it, as LE has a huge mandate. [view link] SJG Anthony Bourdain slams ‘privileged’ liberals for ‘utter contempt’ of working class [view link] Problem with compromising with the God Fearers is that their entire world view depends upon familial child abuse. 1964 - John Coltrane - A Love Supreme [view link]
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    8 years ago
    The rationale for this, and I agree with it for the most part, is that the cops won't arrest the underage prostitutes, they'll take them to shelters. Hopefully, it will make them more willing to come forward in cases of trafficking if they know they won't be arrested. They're still gonna prosecute the fucktards who are hiring them though.
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    8 years ago
    It's a decent first step, though they should have included *all* prostitutes.
  • crazyjoe
    •
    8 years ago
    Disgusting
  • crazyjoe
    •
    8 years ago
    Whoever wrote that law should be hung. I will donate the rope
  • crazyjoe
    •
    8 years ago
    I will still donate the rope
  • jackslash
    •
    7 years ago
    The point of this law is to protect minors who are being trafficked for sex. In the past the children forced into prostitution would be arrested and jailed. Now these children do not have to fear going to the police and exposing the pimps who prey on them. This does not legalized child prostitution. It will still be illegal to have sex with children or to force children into prostitution, but the child victims will no longer be treated as criminals.
  • Dominic77
    •
    7 years ago
    Like George and jack and SJG mention, it helps then underage prostitutes be able to turn to the police for help. It's bad enough that she's running from home and she's running from her pimp. Don't make her run from the police!
  • mikeya02
    •
    8 years ago
    I disagree, The girls already have little desire to rat out their pimp. Let them off the hook and there's no incentive
  • 3LeggedMan
    •
    7 years ago
    Libtards Gone Wild!!!
  • Dominic77
    •
    7 years ago
    Yeah, conservadudes. Why let her exit the system (as a minor). More fresh meat once she turns 18. Thinking like that is deranged.
  • JohnSmith69
    •
    7 years ago
    More insanity from the land of fruits and nuts. But I'll still go there to buy weed and see Yosemite.
  • gammanu95
    •
    7 years ago
    Doesn't sound like it will change a damned thing. The intent is good, but the cops and AGs always had the option to decline prosecution. The children will still be controlled with drugs and intimidation. Noble intent, but typical stupid, reckless, bleeding heart, liberal execution.
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    7 years ago
    Except that no prosecutor in his right mind will fail to take the opportunity to buff his or her "tough on crime" stats at the expense of those least able to defend themselves, i.e. minors. If a prosecutor thinks he or she can get a conviction or a plea deal, they'll do it. Declining to prosecute makes them look weak.
  • rockstar666
    •
    7 years ago
    This article is inflammatory and obvious politicized. I think not arresting the victims is a good thing; it doesn't mean if I try to have sex with a 12 year old I'm not going to jail for many,many years.
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    7 years ago
    mikeya02 wrote, "I disagree, The girls already have little desire to rat out their pimp. Let them off the hook and there's no incentive" The idea here is to protect minors. Talking like mikeya02 does, its like your still seeing the minor as a criminal conspirator. The whole idea here is to protect the minor. So even though police won't be arresting a minor, there is still a great deal they can do to intercede. They aren't just going to let things continue. So if she won't produce id and they think she is a minor, they can still hand her over to social services. They can also talk with any hotel management and put a stop to her use of it. Police know how to turn confederates against each other. Police can still disrupt the operation. And most of all, they let the minor know that she can turn to them at any time Long long ago they used send runaways back to their parents. Now, they are extremely careful before they do this. So I think this is a big step forward. No reason to give a minor a criminal record. And so important to let them know that they can go to LE. This gives the minor a great deal more power in the situation. Remember, Amnesty International has said that there are risks that sex workers face. But the best way of reducing this is full decriminalization. So here, letting minors know that they won't be busted is giving them a great deal of added strength in getting away from abusers. Now we all know that any pimping and trafficking of minors is wrong. But if you are going to have P4P with adults, someone is going to be running the selections venue, the delivery venue, and providing a supply chain. It just works like that. So once on NPR they were talking about this, a brothel strip club in Spain. And one of the women was returning home to her village in Africa. They put on a big festival for her because after a couple decades, she was the richest person in the village. And they talked to the club owner. He says he has others to do the recruiting, but he used to do it himself. No on is complaining about trafficking and abuse there. With AAMPs, most of the women are just here to make money. And the best recruiters are the women who have just finished a stint. They can talk to their coworkers at AMPs, or once at a Karaoke Hostess Club, and some will even show them their bank book. They are often recruiting friends they have known for a long time. In once case, since childhood. So the recruiting is very effective. But to get them through customs, the bosses have to coach them, and lend them flash money to show to customs to back up their tourism story. It is tough. And there are costs. But it is a non-violent industry. The main problem the bosses face is that over any tiff, the girl will run off to another shop. So I agree, that we must protect juveniles, but then with everyone else, the best thing is to follow Amnesty Internationals recommendation and legalize it, bring it to the light of day. Moralistic Feminists used to crusade against porn. But now, with the Internet making porn just about unavoidable, they instead crusade against trafficking. But even there, I think most people know that only when it pertains to minors is there a high prevalence of problems. And for the rest, just legalize it, as that provides the best protection. SJG Jon Hassell - The Surgeon of the Nightsky Restores Dead Things by the Power of Sound [view link] Can women really dance in high heels? Most belly dance people frown on them. Is the use of high heels and extreme high heels the reason that strippers want poles? Coffee talk: belly dancing with high heels [view link] "Thrills in High Heels - Stiletto Dance Nightclub Style" [view link] [view link] Arabian Spices High Heels [view link] DANCING IN HEELS - KPOP DANCING [TIPS AND TRICKS | DO'S AND DONT'S] [view link] How to Walk in Heels like a pro and minimize the pain [view link] How to: Walk in 6 inch heels [view link] HOW TO WALK IN HEELS FOR FAT GIRLS! HEEL WALKING LESSON [view link] WALKING IN 26CM PLEASER HEELS [view link] Impossible Platform Shoes [view link]
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    7 years ago
    Yeah, let's not overlook the fact that it's only the underage prostitutes that this law shields. The adult solicitors and pimps will still be subject to arrest and prosecution.
  • mikeya02
    •
    7 years ago
    This law just makes it easier for the pimps. They are afraid of jail. but few are locked up. Put the young girls in safe custody and get them to rat the creeps out. It's the only way
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    7 years ago
    No, this encourages the minor hookers to rat out their pimps if there is any problem. And this is what we want to do, protect minors. And then Amnesty International says that decriminalization is the best way to protect all sex workers. SJG belly dance of a sexy blonde at her high heels stiletoes ....live of dubai [view link] Here heels are quite high and she is good, but I think the high heels really do limit it. barefoot belly dancing Maria Shashkova - "Shik Shak Shok" (over 10 million views!!!!) [view link] Latifa Nejim - belly dance - SHIK SHAK SHOK - 2012 [view link] I do think that barefoot they cover much more surface area and can make much sharper movements. The high heels makes them more inclined to stay in one place, and you can see how this could be the reason that strippers use poles.
  • Dominic77
    •
    7 years ago
    Isn't this law just to get the girls out of the system? Ideally we'll like to prosecute and punish the pimps and the rest of the predatory industry (scum bag strip club owners that knowing hire underage girls, clean dances or extras or OTC). #1. I'd like to get the girls out of the system. #2. Get the pimps, if I can, but #1 is still the main objective. I'm willing to disregard them or ignore them (for now) -- let them walk -- if that means we can save some underage girls. I'm trying to pick my battles. The girls are far more important. How is this bad liberal execution? What is better? The status quo? Maybe my problem is progressivism? (like skibum609 and dallas702 keep reminding me) Yes/no? Conservatives & LIbertarians - what wrong with? --> Let's try something. It is doesn't work, let's tweak it / modify it. Are the Conservatives and Libertarians really saying, since the progressives have poor execution, so, let's do nothing? Do nothing? That seems cruel (to the girls). -- Serious question -- no wrong answer -- I want o hear your points of view on this -- I respect the conservative / libertarian stance the government involvement in things is generally misguided and/or introduces side effects or wreck the incentive system -- and that can make the situation worse. That's the downside of Progressivism. However, each time I try reconcile the various "do nothing" plans in my head, basically libertarian personal accountability, do the crime pay the crime, learn from your own mistakes, work hard & diligently & protestant work ethic, no matter what mental gymnastics I do to try to rationalize the libertarian mindset for these underage prostitutes/runaways I keep coming to the conclusion that *do nothing* is needlessly cruel for the girls. I know conservatism & libertarianism respect the process as sacred and the process itself needs to be fair -whereas- liberals & progressives want to make outcomes fair. But my mind keeps saying the outcome here, is needlessly cruel to the girls. So, no wrong answers, conservatives, I ask, can you make this all okay? ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ I think the pain of the young girls is clouding my thought processes. But can you make it okay? To understand the form of the answer I looking, refer to Q&A from Mike Rowe (it's not propaganda nor liberal drivel -- It's a clip from the Show "Dirty Jobs" where they perform a whale shark autopsy). It's a short 3 minute clip, at 1:39 to 1:50 he asks the question to the supervisor. Pretend, in a non-judgemental way, answer the question: "Can you make this all okay?" I'm serious and curious. I want to understand how you think since I can't (yet) make the leap you guys do. I want to. "GLIER on Dirty Jobs" (2 minutes, 49 seconds) , posted bySteve Perrault [view link] Thanks!
  • Dominic77
    •
    7 years ago
    From SW (and out of context) but I think it proves your guys' point on girls: --> "lol! So not a dancer but I love it, when random post pop up w/so called customers and their empathy for dancers. I'm dying to see which dancer is going to tell you the truth first James.. hope you can take it. " It makes it seem for me that caring for them, as I often do to a fault, is misguided or naive? I know emma's quote is out of context here. But, wow. -- [view link]
  • Dominic77
    •
    7 years ago
    I am not seeing where this is a gift for pimps or where pimps will prosper. Maybe it shifts too much risk away from the prostitutes? Or maybe this is one of those "pursuit of happiness" & tyranny things that you guys see but I don't yet see.
  • mikeya02
    •
    7 years ago
    It is an absolute plus for pimps and does nothing to keep the young girls off the street
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    7 years ago
    It might not do much to *keep* them off the street, but at least, hopefully, they'll be less likely to victimized by the system that is supposed to be helping them. Not having to grant immunity in order to get them to testify against the pimps and johns will be a plus. And being minors, the standards are slightly different, less confrontational, for face to face interrogators and cross examination.
  • mikeya02
    •
    7 years ago
    Under this law there is no incentive for the girls to rat out pimps or seek help. You telling me when a 14 y/o that is pimped, beaten, and on drugs is stopped for prostitution, you just let her go to fend for herself?
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    7 years ago
    No, they don't just let them go. They take them somewhere they can get help, with*out* arresting them.
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    7 years ago
    LE is not just going to stand there and watch kiddie prostitution going on. They will put a stop to it, and do whatever it takes to find out who is behind it. All this new law does, is let minors know that they can go to LE for protection. And that is a huge improvement!!! SJG
  • Dominic77
    •
    7 years ago
    There would be a separate support system to help the minors get off the streets. 1. She could be returned home to her family (if possible). 2. Found a guardian. 3. Foster care. 4. Rehab. 5. A women's shelter or some other charity. 6. Taken in by a Catholic charity or the church. 7. Emancipated and give job training, a place to live, some mentoring. But I think there are already pieces in place for that. This law seeks to get her out of the system and perhaps a leg up to teach her that there are ways for her to exist without prostituting herself out. I don't know what she was running away from at home, but surviving with these pimps is no good. No conservative in this thread was able to answer my question to my satisfaction of how the status quo is preferable to the addition of his law.
  • Dominic77
    •
    7 years ago
    I fail see why you'd want a law to punish the kiddos for prostitution. Why hold that over their heads like a Sword of Damocles? Decline prosecution? Why have it in the first place! Let's try to remove the obstacles and see if it helps to get a few more of the kiddos out of the system. It sounds like we're just legislating the status quo anyways. I do agree that the real work to be done here will be to show the minors how to survive off of the streets. But that is step 2.
  • gammanu95
    •
    7 years ago
    Trying something to see if it works is completely idiotic. That is no way to govern, and it is a pathetic excuse to push liberal agendas. That was peoples argument to vote for Obama, which did more damage to this country than can be recounted. You need to consider all the consequences.
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    7 years ago
    Without this law, cops and prosecutors have the option to arrest and prosecute minors. And they will do so the vast majority of the time, because they get credit for doing so. With this law, they don't have that option, which is a good thing. This doesn't exonerate the johns for fucking them, nor the pimps for enslaving them. It only prevents the victim from being further victimized by asshole cops and ambitious prosecutors. This is *good*.
  • gammanu95
    •
    7 years ago
    Honest cops and AGs will not prosecute victims of human trafficking, especially minors. They've already had several stings where they determined some of the perps were victims of human trafficking and turned them over to social services.
  • san_jose_guy
    •
    7 years ago
    ^^^^ Agreed, but this explicit law just ties it down and lets everyone know so that the minor will feel safer. Yes, this is *good*. SJG
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion