California Penal Code 653.23 PC
Every state has similar laws....but...Penal Code 653.23 PC makes it a crime to supervise or assist someone else who either
Engages in prostitution or
Loiters for the purpose of engaging in prostitution.
Meaning, those of you answering question relating to prostitution, enabling prostitution, advising others on prostitution, can keep going right ahead. But keep in mind screen shots and website server evidence may be downloaded and given to the proper authorities. You're not actually as anonymous as you think.
Now you can get a slap on the wrist or 6 months in CA but the same charges will bring you 7 years in NV.
A smart trick would make it so they could argue having made a mistake of fact, but your egos are too big for that and frankly you're too stupid to get it.
Comments
last commentActions are demonstrative enough to denote agreement. Easy to prove in any state.
Log in to vote
I have never hired an escort or picked up a hooker on a street corner. I just do ITC in the VIP of a SC. Thankfully never got caught fucking a stripper in an vip room I've been in
Log in to vote
Penis Codes Suck.
Log in to vote
Such laws would be declared unconstitutional in that they're vague if we had a proper SC; not saying the current court would rule otherwise but I think these days politics supersede actual law.
If I take a prostitute home, am I committing an illegal act? What if I drop her off at a customer's house? Is he even a customer before she's paid? This is a very slippery slope; I'm sure TUSCL members can imagine very vague circumstances that are subject to interpretation, and the Constitution says laws must be clear.
Log in to vote
Not really, I take it some of you are stupid and or don't understand what the law says.
It basically says that giving people advice about fucking hookers constitutes aiding prostitution.
Prostitution laws are not a slippery slope. They're not under the constitutional right to intimate conduct between consensual adults. They fall under illegal employment. ....which has no constitutional protections.
Log in to vote
The interesting thing about sex work is there is a big chunk of the population who doesn't want to see streetwalkers but doesn't mind what goes on behind closed doors. It's why the trafficking argument is beaten so hard.
Everything posted on this site is fiction btw.
Log in to vote
And please explain PC 647.
Log in to vote
The problem with "sex itrafficking" is that too many laws simply allow a hooker to say she was trafficked and she gets off....that drastically skews the figures for human trafficking and takes away from the plight of those who are actual victims.
PC 647 is kind of a mash up. It makes it illegal to solicit prostitution, covers voyeurism and drugging/date rape. Basically things that can get a charge of gross and open lewdness.
Log in to vote
Perfectly lawful to pick up on a woman, no matter where she is.
I for one never talk to them in any manner which is anything other than entirely civilian.
Learned that in AMPs.
SJG
Log in to vote
picking up on a woman is legal, solicitation isn't. Police can actually arrest someone for picking someone up at a place known for prostitution whether its a club or a street corner.
One good thing some cops do is identify hookers with HIV/AIDS or STDs to tricks when they know they lack enough evidence to press actual charges.
Log in to vote
Most all prostitution busts start by shredding the Constitution. These busts are a direct threat to the freedoms and civil liberties we all depend on.
Talk about Trafficking is how LE and Moral Crusaders get people to think of Prostitution as something akin to Terrorism.
SJG
Log in to vote
So if I told TrapBaby304 to go fuck herself, is that covered under Penis Code 653.23 or does it only count if I also tell her how much she should charge for fucking herself?
Log in to vote
Jeff, you seem a little triggered
Log in to vote