Former ADA Comes Out For Legalization Of Prostitution
Robin L. Barton, a Brooklyn-based legal journalist and a former assistant district attorney in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office blogs at The Crime Report about why she believes in legalizing prostitution:
Although banning prostitution hasn't eliminated the activity, it has made working conditions for those engaged in the profession unnecessarily dangerous. That's why some countries as noted above have taken steps to try to improve their safety.If we really care about the well-being of the women who support themselves as sex workers, legalize prostitution and regulate it like certain cities in Nevada and other jurisdictions currently do.
By doing so, the government could permit prostitutes to work indoors in safer locations than street corners and to take other measures to protect themselves, such as by hiring bodyguards. In short, they could take control over their lives.
Prostitutes would still be vulnerable to violence to some extent. But if their conduct is legal, they may be more willing to come forward if they're victimized by clients or pimps.
The government could require sex workers to be over a certain age and to be licensed. In addition, it could also address health issues by requiring them to get regular physicals and use condoms.
And if prostitution is a legal profession, it could be taxed!
But I believe that the argument for legalizing prostitution goes beyond safety.
Women are entitled to control over their bodies. Just as they should have the right to decide whether they want to remain pregnant, women should be able to decide for themselves whether they want to engage in sexual acts in exchange for money.
If we're honest, the line between having sex with someone for cash or in exchange for dinner or jewelry is a thin one.
And participants in other occupations trade the use of their bodies for money, most notably professional athletes. Is being a hooker really that different?
Via @ScottGreenfield
I dont really see a discernible difference between prostitution and marriage, aside from prostitution being far cheaper in the long run and probably far more sex
lujlp at February 21, 2014 12:18 AM
How has this worked out in Nevada?
Radwaste at February 21, 2014 2:44 AM
Are laws against prostitution even enforced?
Or, like most drug laws, are they are convenient statutes under which the police can roust someone when there is a complaint?
doombuggy at February 21, 2014 3:56 AM
Actually pretty good according to this guy.
But be careful Rad. He's talking about liberty, which might make your head explode.
Jim P. at February 21, 2014 6:00 AM
Rad all about liberty, except for when it comes to drugs in general and especially drugs less harmful than booze
lujlp at February 21, 2014 6:47 AM
>>Rad all about liberty, except for when it comes to drugs in general and especially drugs less harmful than booze
Liar! You took sudafed without permission from our government overlords! You CANNOT be trusted! Ever! About anything! You irresponsible person you!
Bradwaste at February 21, 2014 8:22 AM
No, luj.
Do not lie about my position.
I insist that if you wish to legalize a drug, name it, and show the return on investment. Then, provide an objective measure of impairment, so that when the local chemical company poisons your neighborhood and you try to sue them out of existence, you can show that their operator was not impaired.
Radwaste at February 21, 2014 5:52 PM
I insist that any substance that has been in existence must prove it's worth in order for it to pass our government overlord's requirements for personal use! All prior experience with any substance is null and void without proof substantiated by our government overlord's research and propaganda departments.
Bradwaste at February 21, 2014 8:22 PM
A hooker I used to know - a gorgeous young gal, blonde hair, striking blue eyes, 22 years old (and a sociopath, which is a good thing not to forget) - told me whenever she did business with cops of city officials they always paid her with expensive jewelry, handbags, perfumes, shoes, etc., instead of cash. I wonder if it does make a difference legally.
Ken R at February 21, 2014 10:11 PM
"...cops or city officials..."
Ken R at February 21, 2014 10:13 PM
told me whenever she did business with cops of city officials they always paid her with expensive jewelry, handbags, perfumes, shoes, etc., instead of cash. I wonder if it does make a difference legally.
Depends on the jurisdiction, in some yes, in some no.
lujlp at February 22, 2014 12:34 PM
I must have "won" something, because all that's here is mockery - and the refusal to engage the idea that impairment standards are necessary to legalize a drug.
It's just so much easier to sit on Mom's couch than think, you know, about that hard stuff, whatever. Pass the joint, huh?
Radwaste at February 28, 2014 6:51 AM
Leave a comment