Does the LA Times compete with People and Entertainment Tonight?

Well, I think you can certainly tell that we live in a one-newspaper town.

And actually, they never have any fun gossip or Hollywood stuff. For that you have to read Page Six of The New York Post.

Kevin Roderick of LA Observed.com had an entry about how they didn't even have the Bear Sterns news on the front page when other papers did.

I love how the cops justify trolling for porn as "Fighting Crime"

Yes, let's go after all those consenting adults who want to have sex with each other for money. Safer than chasing down guys who rob 7-Eleven.

So the hookers are off the street, with no need for madam or brothel (or pimp), so what's the issue? Seems like it's time to legalize, regulate, and tax so as to get rid of the remaining issues: fraud, violence, disease.

Yeah I'm sorry, but has anyone ever looked at the back of a copy of the Village Voice!

I know this story is from LA, but if you're ever in NYC pick up a paper copy of the Village Voice, look at the back 10 pages of full color ads that feature only barely clothed women and phone numbers. Yeah, I'm sure all those hot asian chicks are there becasue they just want me to buy a professional "massage."

If you don't think those women are hookers, next time you're in NY there's a great bridge I own that I'd love to sell you . . .

This is the same in almost every alt weekly across the country, and has been for the 15 years I've been writing for them, and then some. As soon as a few people started getting on the net, people started using it to meet up for sex. Internet personals, hookers, etc.

It's amazing what out-of-touch fogies major papers have writing for them.

The sting operation is just disgusting. We need more cops on the streets, not more cops preventing consenting adults from commercial transactions for sex. If they hear that Thai girls are being imprisoned as sex slaves, that's one thing. But, some college chick who wants to pay off her student loans on her back? Stay out of it.

Two things: The cops are right to pursue prostitution. It's a broken-window crime that frequently leads to something bigger and far more harmful, particularly the sexual exploitation of minors.

But forget that for now, and concentrate on the bigger crime: THAT COLUMN IS NEARLY 1,200 WORDS. That's about twice what most section-front columnists write, and even more than the NYT op-ed show ponies. Twelve hundred words to say you can buy sex on the internet? Someone needs to learn how to edit.

...complete with photos no mother or child should ever see.

BwaaHaHa! The major difference between momma and I, when it comes to the porn, is that she prefers it a bit raunchier than I care for. And I like raunchy porn BTW. That, and she's into dom porn, which really isn't my thing. I'll also let you guess which of us watches more porn. A hint, it 'taint me.

Nance -

A much better idea, than letting the police pursue prostitution in general, is to legalize it so that they can focus on exploitative, slave based minor based sexual assaults.

It's a broken-window crime

When a broken window is a crime, it's because the owner of the window didn't consent to have it broken.

See the difference?

Also, couldn't they get Thomas Friedman? I guess it's ok, though, since this guy seems to have mastered the style and threw in the bonus of patronizing women.

Got to love the fundies 'The cops are right to pursue prostitution. It's a broken-window crime that frequently leads to something bigger and far more harmful, particularly the sexual exploitation of minors.
- Nance'
(lujlp is claping and says the following with biting sarcasm)
Prostitution equals pedophillia, way to go religious right, hey why dont we start cutting off women clits so they cant enjoy sex at all?

I am so fucking sick of religious nutters trying to justify legislationg sex cause the chruch says its icky.

The church also says give money to the poor - so I'll make you religous nut jobs a deal; pass a law requiring everyone in america to give all their savings and property to charity and I'll stop pointing you your fucking, arrogant, bible cherry picking hypocracy. Deal?

You want to live in a hell of your own shame and guilt and religous fervor go right a head, but how about you leave us rational people alone?

I'm a religious nut job?

I'm...religious?

That's a new one.

"Broken-window crime" isn't literal; is an idiom. Some background.

Sorry but I was focusing on your assertion that prostitution leads doewn the path to pedophillia

Also did you bother reading the article you linked to?

You said cops need to go after 'broken window' crimes as a derterent to more serious crimes. But the artilce you linked highlighted that San Fransico didnt persue 'broken window' crimes and saw a bigger decrease than cites such as New York which did crack down.

So which is it?

And yes peole who try and legislate certian aspects of morality are nut jobs. Not only for trying to miro manage everyone elses lives, but also their hypocracy in ignoring other aspects of morality which they dont want to codify into law because it would affect them. Like welfare for instance.

Odd how some thing god told us to do are laws, but the ones that affect the wallets of politicans and business men - those ones we'll leave to free will.

I think eventually craigslist might no longer allow these type adds, the same way some yellow pages no longer list escort services. I guess it's mainly face-saving behaviour by them, although there could also be some discreet pressure from law enforcement or the government.

The journalist was probably looking for a hooker on craigslist..someone to flog him with wet newspapers.

Prostitution does not lead to pedophilia. But prostitution involves minors often enough that it's worth rousting once in a while.

Poor choice of links for the reference to "broken windows," but it's clear the previous poster thought I was speaking literally. The b.w. theory boils down to: All crime should be taken seriously, even small ones. It's what Giuliani credits with his NYC cleanup, and it makes at least some sense. Is turnstile jumping a city-stopping problem? No, but when you start arresting turnstile jumpers you find a lot of them have outstanding felony warrants, and get those folks off the street, and crime goes down. Prostitutes aren't all college-educated, postfeminist "sex workers" who are all about the empowerment and money. Some are drug addicts, some are victims of ongoing abuse, etc. Bust one for turning tricks, and you might get her into a rehab program. That's all I meant.

Norman L -

Craigslist already tries to deal with it. It is prohibited and CL users can flag down prohibited postings. The "problem" is that CL is user moderated and most folks just don't care. Or they're people like me, who don't use that part of CL.

Nance -

Way to substantively respond to arguments. Color me totally unimpressed.

Broken window crime is an idiom, but one that infers a victim. While it is true that some prostitution has a victim, such victimization is far more of a crime than the prostitution. And most prostitution is an interaction between two consenting adults.

So let me put it this way; Who the fuck are you, to tell me that I can't fuck for cash?

Heres a question, why is it reprehenible to give a girl cash for sex but it isnt to buy her gifts and food and spend time to get it?

Go ahead, DuWayne. Be my guest. But please, if I may be the fuck allowed to say so: Practice safe sex.

Heres a question, why is it reprehenible to give a girl cash for sex but it isnt to buy her gifts and food and spend time to get it?

"Is turnstile jumping a city-stopping problem? No, but when you start arresting turnstile jumpers you find a lot of them have outstanding felony warrants, and get those folks off the street, and crime goes down"

That outlook shows an incredibly distorted sense of justice. It's Orwellian.

The legal system use similar logic when determining who will be put on death row. "It's okay to execute some innocent guys, to get the bad ones."

lujlp,

see my recent comment posted under the Spitzer thread.

Heres a question, why is it reprehenible to give a girl cash for sex but it isnt to buy her gifts and food and spend time to get it?

lujlp,
That's just the old contract question, isn't it?

You know, did she offer you endless use of her body for a burger and a bouquet or were no such terms reasonably agreed in advance?

Nance -

It was more of a hypothetical, I am not actually interested in selling my dick. I am duly partnered with two children and I like sex without the whole condom thing getting in the way. But even back when I was a rather more active, slutty slut, I was a condom nazi. Years of monogamy haven't changed that. (nor have the changed the fact that I am a slut, even if I'm non-practicing)

My point is (the same point I am making when I ask who the fuck are you to tell me not to smoke crack?), who are you to tell me that I should go to jail for it, should I choose to do it?

Oy, and way to still avoid a substantive response Nance.

Broken window crime is an idiom, but one that infers a victim.

DuWayne,
Not trying to drive you bonkers here - but I don't see that inference in the idiom except in a very, very distant sense?

The literal basis for it - as I recall - was broken windows in usually abandoned buildings, which encouraged vandal potshots for idle kicks at any remaining glass.

I suppose you could argue that the "victim" was some nameless, nominal landlord who had - more than likely - defaulted on property taxes and any responsibility long before anyway.

But I recall seeing still totally abandoned buildings in the outer NYC with newly bricked up windows - and the brick now painted cheerfully with fake curtains and even fake window flower pots.

Obviously it was purely a cheap, cosmetic touch - no one was now living behind the painted brick but the cosmetic effect did actually deter further idle vandalism.

Jody -

The basis for it, is that breaking windows is a gateway crime, that lends itself to escalation. The notion is that someone who breaks a window (or otherwise commits acts of vandalism) is going to be more inclined to commit other, more nefarious crimes. Indeed, the victim comes into this, in part, because the victim may be distant. Really, it's based on the notion that the crime doesn't result in serious problems for the victim, but will lead to crimes that will.

But yes, the victim is implied. That the crime causes them little trouble and may be a distant crime is irrelevant.

Got it, DuWayne. Thanks.