|
LadyPact -> RE: Prostitution laws (3/28/2011 9:20:28 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Palliata
<disclaimer> I don't actually believe in the illegality of prostitutes, drugs, etc. Just to put my remarks in context.</disclaimer>
Not sure how you mean the word "better" but to me it seems like it would be very similar to the drug trade - one prostitute is servicing many clients the same way one dealer sells to many buyers. Hence, removing the dealer/hooker eliminates a larger swath of the trade than eliminating a single buyer/john. By the same token, removing the pimp would be analogous to removing the higher-ups in a given distribution scheme, and would cause disorder and disruption of supply to all below him. Hence, the higher up the supply chain you can go the more impact you have on the trade.
Do you disagree with the efficiency of that model of drug enforcement, or is there a distinction I'm missing?
Part of what drives prostitution in the first place is supply and demand. While the demand is similar to the drug trade, supply is not. Literally, if you bust the prostitute without dealing with the customers, you're not doing the same thing as nailing the source for the drugs. All that needs to happen is the John goes and gets the next woman willing to sell sex for money.
What was happening for far too long was that only the prostitutes were the ones that were busted, even though the law was being broken by both parties. Very much like you describe in the model above. Since she was the 'seller' they were only arresting her and the 'buyer' was getting off scott-free. A very unfair application of the law, in My opinion. The attitude was that it was the prostitute's fault, but that's not entirely true. Especially when it's the John's that create the market in the first place.
I hope that explains Me position on the matter a bit better.
|
|
|
|
