Legal prostitution policy idea of Lib Dems, why its a bad idea.

[Allezfan]

In retrospect you must be popcorning but there are people who think that way so my points hold for them.

I'm not popcorning, for the record. I honestly do believe that when something has a demostrated and significant negative effect on society (such as hard drugs and prostituion) it should be banned.

Otherwise why do we have laws if not to protect ourselves? I don't believe in making it easy for people to take advantage of people and by legalising methods of doing that, you are.

 

[njligernj]

Okay benefit of the doubt on popcorning so I'll continue (it's gonna be a long one) ...

I'm not popcorning, for the record. I honestly do believe that when something has a demostrated and significant negative effect on society (such as hard drugs and prostituion) it should be banned. Otherwise why do we have laws if not to protect ourselves? I don't believe in making it easy for people to take advantage of people and by legalising methods of doing that, you are.

Fair enough but by that logic alcohol should be banned: http://www.ncadd.org/index.php/in-the-news/155-25-million-alcohol-related-deaths-worldwide-annually http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8118475.stm

So if you agree alcohol should be banned then great. We disagree but it's a consistent viewpoint. If you don't think it should be banned and if your argument is that its too difficult to prohibit alcohol ... well it's too difficult to prohibit drugs too (the US had a massive war on drugs starting in the 70's and drug use rates are essentially identical 40 years later despite the fact that they have the population of Wales in jail).

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/10/chart-says-war-drugs-isnt-working/57913/ http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324374004578217682305605070.html

Portugal has shown that by legalizing you make it far, far easier to help people and get them into treatment. They have way less people dependant on hard drugs now because they can address the problem openly instead of it all being underground. You treat people as sick rather than criminals. Locking people up is utterly pointless. You can get drugs in jail. Not to mention if you can get drugs in jail then how can prohibition ever succeed if the most secure facilities we can possibly build can't be kept drug free? Putting people in jail doesn't work -- they are MORE likely to go back to drugs when they are released.

As an aside: If the war on drugs is a real "war" then what the US and Mexico did in their attempt to boost the war on drugs in 2006 (which most people estimate has caused around 50,000 deaths) should be considered a war crime. It's an absolute disgrace and its supported by people who just have attitudes like "drugs are bad m'kay" and don't actually consider the real world impact of policies which that viewpoint allows governments to pursue.

I don't know how people can play the "morality" card on one hand and then turn a blind eye to the sickening damage which prohibition actually does to people around the world. Latin America is starting to fight back as well -- they are sick of having their people die because people in the US, England etc. still support prohibition and are happy to turn a blind eye to the deaths they cause thousands of miles away.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/latin-american-leaders-question-war-on-drugs-in-u-n-speeches/

Escobar was supposedly the ninth richest person in the world at one point and head of a massive organization. When they finally killed him it barely put a dent in the illegal drug trade because there was still demand. Others just replaced him. If you eliminated the demand by making it legal then when you kill these people (or put them in jail) there is nobody left to replace them because all of a sudden the bottom has fallen out of the illegal drug market. Then you can address the addicts with treatment options people feel safe to pursue because they know they won't be locked up for admitting they are addicts. You can also funnel some of the massive cost of policing drugs into treatment. It works. It has worked.

Prohibition doesn't help people get better (actually makes them more likely to stay addicted) and it doesn't stop the flow of the product. So what's the point? We've been doing it for decades now ... why would it suddenly work now? What new ideas are there on the pro-prohibition side? Sell me on prohibition 2013 ... what new ideas are there to replace the ones which have ravaged South America, cost hundreds of thousands of lives, imprisoned millions of people, failed to stop the flow of drugs and failed to lower drug addiction rates? What's new?

Same deal for prostitution by the way even though I got sidetracked by drugs and booze. Legality means you can shine a light on human trafficking, STDs, pimps etc.

I honestly believe ending prohibition is the only moral choice -- those who oppose it are putting their personal feelings over the real world evidence of what will truly help the problem and end the suffering for a lot of people. It will save us money and it will save lives.

 

[EFCNIK]

I think everyone should read my above post and realise that it is the only 100% correct one in here.

 

[Brennan]

It's all the fault of the Romanians really.

 

[bignev23]

As an aside something that should be introduced to these shores is the porno cabins you see on the continent. What with the High Street in meltdown a few handily placed sex shops could be just the thing for the local economy

Get on Dragons den lad.

 

[Bluenose1995]

by legalising drugs you will only get more people trying it keep it illegal.

 

[Deleted member 28206]

We all pay for sex, in one way or another.

 

[Caveo]

Ok , who wants to be my Pimp ??

 

[carlos21]

We all pay for sex, in one way or another.

hi bryan how are you today mate.

 

[Allezfan]

Fair enough but by that logic alcohol should be banned: http://www.ncadd.org/index.php/in-the-news/155-25-million-alcohol-related-deaths-worldwide-annually http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8118475.stm

So if you agree alcohol should be banned then great. We disagree but it's a consistent viewpoint. If you don't think it should be banned and if your argument is that its too difficult to prohibit alcohol ... well it's too difficult to prohibit drugs too (the US had a massive war on drugs starting in the 70's and drug use rates are essentially identical 40 years later despite the fact that they have the population of Wales in jail).

I don't think we should ban alcohol. For the same basic reason I don't think we should ban cars. I think there are massive downsides to both but they're so popular and useful that the econmic and societal benefits of each outweighs those (one of those benefits being that a ban would be so incredibly unpopular that not banning it prevents uprest). I don't think the same can be said about drugs and prostitution, though admittedly I have a load of personal biases involved in that. (I drink for one.)

Portugal has shown that by legalizing you make it far, far easier to help people and get them into treatment. They have way less people dependant on hard drugs now because they can address the problem openly instead of it all being underground. You treat people as sick rather than criminals. Locking people up is utterly pointless. You can get drugs in jail. Not to mention if you can get drugs in jail then how can prohibition ever succeed if the most secure facilities we can possibly build can't be kept drug free? Putting people in jail doesn't work -- they are MORE likely to go back to drugs when they are released.

As an aside: If the war on drugs is a real "war" then what the US and Mexico did in their attempt to boost the war on drugs in 2006 (which most people estimate has caused around 50,000 deaths) should be considered a war crime. It's an absolute disgrace and its supported by people who just have attitudes like "drugs are bad m'kay" and don't actually consider the real world impact of policies which that viewpoint allows governments to pursue.

I don't know how people can play the "morality" card on one hand and then turn a blind eye to the sickening damage which prohibition actually does to people around the world. Latin America is starting to fight back as well -- they are sick of having their people die because people in the US, England etc. still support prohibition and are happy to turn a blind eye to the deaths they cause thousands of miles away.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/latin-american-leaders-question-war-on-drugs-in-u-n-speeches/

Escobar was supposedly the ninth richest person in the world at one point and head of a massive organization. When they finally killed him it barely put a dent in the illegal drug trade because there was still demand. Others just replaced him. If you eliminated the demand by making it legal then when you kill these people (or put them in jail) there is nobody left to replace them because all of a sudden the bottom has fallen out of the illegal drug market. Then you can address the addicts with treatment options people feel safe to pursue because they know they won't be locked up for admitting they are addicts. You can also funnel some of the massive cost of policing drugs into treatment. It works. It has worked.

Prohibition doesn't help people get better (actually makes them more likely to stay addicted) and it doesn't stop the flow of the product. So what's the point? We've been doing it for decades now ... why would it suddenly work now? What new ideas are there on the pro-prohibition side? Sell me on prohibition 2013 ... what new ideas are there to replace the ones which have ravaged South America, cost hundreds of thousands of lives, imprisoned millions of people, failed to stop the flow of drugs and failed to lower drug addiction rates? What's new?

Same deal for prostitution by the way even though I got sidetracked by drugs and booze. Legality means you can shine a light on human trafficking, STDs, pimps etc.

I honestly believe ending prohibition is the only moral choice -- those who oppose it are putting their personal feelings over the real world evidence of what will truly help the problem and end the suffering for a lot of people. It will save us money and it will save lives.

This is all real interesting and you've probably thought about this more than I have so I'll think about it and I might ultimately decide that you're right. And it's just my own prejudices from the drug users and prostitues I've known getting in my way.

Having said that, I have a very hard time believing that everyone who would use drugs or prostitutes if they were legal does so now and that those figures wouldn't increase massively if they were made legal.

And likewise I have difficulity to believe the multimillion criminal gangs who deal in woman and drugs would disapear if it became legal or that the shady sides of it would disapear. My instinct is that legalising it would simply mean those gangs had an easier time of it and more consumers and their cruelties would still continue.

 

[njligernj]

I don't think we should ban alcohol. For the same basic reason I don't think we should ban cars. I think there are massive downsides to both but they're so popular and useful that the econmic and societal benefits of each outweighs those (one of those benefits being that a ban would be so incredibly unpopular that not banning it prevents uprest). I don't think the same can be said about drugs and prostitution, though admittedly I have a load of personal biases involved in that. (I drink for one.)

I think we're used to alcohol and we overlook a lot of its negatives. If alcohol and marijuana were both illegal and you wanted to legalize one I'm not sure how anyone would legalize alcohol over marijuana based on the facts of what those two drugs do to people. Harder drugs are a different issue and you'd be legalizing for different reasons.

This is all real interesting and you've probably thought about this more than I have so I'll think about it and I might ultimately decide that you're right.

If so it might be the first time anyone on the internet has ever changed their mind.

Having said that, I have a very hard time believing that everyone who would use drugs or prostitutes if they were legal does so now and that those figures wouldn't increase massively if they were made legal.

But they haven't in places where it has been made legal. Would you smoke crack tomorrow if it was legal? Sometimes it actually lowers rates for a variety of reasons.

And likewise I have difficulity to believe the multimillion criminal gangs who deal in woman and drugs would disapear if it became legal or that the shady sides of it would disapear. My instinct is that legalising it would simply mean those gangs had an easier time of it and more consumers and their cruelties would still continue.

Human slavery is a trickier issue on this side than drugs. With drugs the prices are massively inflated due to the difficulties in production and distribution. If a drug crop (or chemical lab) gets busted they pass the cost onto the consumer. If a shipment or stash gets busted then the cost gets passed on again. So the price is way higher on the black market than it would be on the legal market. If you can buy drugs from a store for 10 pounds why would you drive to a horrible area and risk interacting with criminals to pay 100 pounds? Organized crime got out of alcohol in the US as soon as prohibition was lifted -- they could not compete on price. So I am 100% confident that you'd get the gangs out of drugs based on simple market forces -- they couldn't afford to stay in business.

Sex trade is trickier but the problem has developed (primarily) while prostitution has been illegal (in many places) or the quasi-legal grey area of the UK. So illegality doesn't prevent it. Personally I feel like a regulated business (which would be inspected for STD as well as worker safety) would have a harder time hiding sex trafficking than the current completely blind status (in terms of health and safety). I don't think it would be 100% (as I think they've had some problems in Australia) but it would be out in the open and you'd be able to address it as you would with sweat shops etc. now.

 

[evilwebby]

You cannot legislate something out of existence; and if you try to, you will drive it onto the black market, and/or people will substitute it with something else for kicks. Quite what that will be I shudder to think. Maybe incest.

 

[Allezfan]

I agree with you that illegality doesn't prevent the human traficking, beatings, forced adictions, rapes and other nasty sides of the sex trade, the question is does it limit it? As in would it happen ten times as often if we didn't prohibit the trade.

I guess if the figures prove it doesn't and that trade won't increase drastically if legalised, then there's no reason to oppose legalisation.

And the same goes for hard drugs.

If the facts are that less people would buy them if it was legal then however counter intuitave that is to me it should be leagalised. I just have a hard time believing that's the case.

I meane the OP here is about how countries where prostitution is legal experience larger reported inflows of human trafficking.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

So long as it's appropriately regulated, I honestly don't see a problem with legal prostitution. I think that so long as measures are put in place to ensure the safety of the women or men that want to take part in it, people should be treated as adults and allowed to make their own choices. If someone will pay a woman x amount of pounds for sex, then so long as there is no threat to her personal safety, I say let the two people come to a deal and make it happen

 

[Slavan]

do sex workers pay tax and national insurance?

how would they explain away their income to the inland revenue?