San Fran's next step: Legalized prostitution?

lumbingmi

lumbingmi

Active Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
4,370
Reaction score
6
Petitioners have succeeded in moving a measure that would effectively decriminalize prostitution in the city of San Francisco to the Nov. 4 ballot.

While prostitution is unlawful under the California Penal Code, the measure – if passed by voters – would ban the San Francisco Police Department from allocating any financial resources for the investigation and prosecution of sex workers on prostitution charges.

Section four of the ballot measure – under the heading "Prostitution Shall Be Decriminalized" – further states that the city, county, and district attorney "shall not subject sex-workers to life long economic discrimination associated with having a criminal record."

San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris criticized the measure, unofficially titled "Enforcement of Laws Related to Prostitution and Sex Workers." Harris told the San Francisco Chronicle, "This measure is nothing more than a welcome mat for prostitutes and pimps to come and hang out in San Francisco."

Proponents of the measure are claiming it is needed to give sex-industry workers equal protection under the law and to counter an alleged long-standing cronyism between dance club owners and key decision makers that has resulted in police cracking down on some prostitution outlets but looking the other way from popular nightclubs, even when the clubs were accused of sexual abuses by workers.

Maxine Doogan, founder of the Erotic Service Provider's Union, wrote in an email reported by the Chronicle, "Workers would like it if crimes like rape, robbery, theft and coercion were vigorously investigated and prosecuted. We want the right to make reports of crimes against us without being retaliated against by the police department."

According to the ESPU, the petition to have the measure put on the ballot received 12,763 signatures, 5,000 more than are required. The Chronicle reported that three of the signatures came from sitting members of San Francisco's Board of Supervisors.

(Story continues below)






The ballot measure also takes aim at two programs currently used by San Francisco authorities to combat sex industry crime.

The first is the use of federal and state funds to reduce human trafficking, particularly of illegal immigrants, into the sex trade. The ballot measure states, "San Francisco's law enforcement agencies shall not apply, nor receive federal and state monies that institute racial profiling as a means of targeting alleged trafficked victims under the guise of enforcing the abatement of prostitution laws."

District Attorney Harris dodged the measure's thinly veiled implication of racism in explaining why the funds and program are valuable. The ballot measure's changes "would make it very challenging to investigate and prosecute human trafficking," she told the Chronicle. "We need to use police resources to investigate where there is a suspicion that women and children, in particular immigrants, are being exploited."

The second program targeted by the measure is San Francisco's First Offender Prostitution Program, which allows men arrested for soliciting a prostitute to pay $1,000 fine and attend a class on prostitution in exchange for having the misdemeanor charge against them dropped. In April, an audit by the U.S. Department of Justice found that men who participated in the program were 30 percent less likely to be arrested for soliciting a prostitute than men who did not.

The ballot measure specifically names the First Offender Prostitution Program and would end it.

The ballot measure quotes and draws credibility from an official task force on prostitution established by San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors in 1994. According to a release from the San Francisco City Attorney's Office in February, "The Task Force included representatives from the Mayor’s Office, neighborhood groups, law enforcement agencies, public health agencies, social service agencies, various other City departments, women’s rights advocates and immigrant and prostitute rights groups."

In 1996, the task force released a report recommending, "City departments stop enforcing and prosecuting prostitution crimes. … [and] that the departments instead focus on the quality of life infractions about which neighborhoods complain and redirect funds from prosecution, public defense, court time, legal system overhead and incarceration towards services and alternatives for needy constituencies."

Since 1996, the city has acted on some of the task force's recommendations, but has refrained from following through on its final conclusion – a reallocation of all funds from prostitution enforcement to neighborhood improvement. The ballot measure seeks to see the task force's full recommendation enacted.

If passed, the ballot measure states that it would take effect Jan. 1, 2009.
Click to expand...

It would do wonderful good for mankind if this get throughl :cheers:
 
Interesting....

(BTW....welcome back!)

I think it's good in a way to assist those individuals that being forced into the sex-slave industry and yet I wonder about the health of the sex workers as STDS/HIV is common and what their plan is in combating and regulating it?
 
Hmm, that's really weird. Is there a city in the US that have legalized prostitution?
 
George Carlin quote: Selling is legal. Screwing is legal. How come selling screwing is illegal?

If prostitution is legal, then it can be regulated. It can be zoned. The hookers can be licensed. (Which allows health inspections. And verification of age.)

Thus it would be better off for us to have less worries about sex diseases and underage postitution.
 
lumbingmi said:
George Carlin quote: Selling is legal. Screwing is legal. How come selling screwing is illegal?

If prostitution is legal, then it can be regulated. It can be zoned. The hookers can be licensed. (Which allows health inspections. And verification of age.)

Thus it would be better off for us to have less worries about sex diseases and underage postitution.
Click to expand...

:hmm:
 
sequoias said:
Las Vegas, didn't they illegalize that few years ago?
Click to expand...

Actually only counties that have under 400,000 population are able to legal or illegal the prostitution whatever the county government decide.
 
Amsterdam's model is admired by many. STD/HIV incident rates are lower with legal prostitutes than with illegal. I find it odd that many who finds this morrally reprehnsible would find nothing wrong with widespread and, even, state-sponsored gambling.
 
I think it's a good idea because it frees up resources for police to concentrate on prosecuting actual criminals and it makes it so that they cannot retaliate against sex workers for being sex workers, even if they report legitimate crimes against them.

Yes, no one likes prostitution. However, if there's an union for sex workers, I would assume that they have the same protections as any other employee in an union and that they have rigorous STD/HIV testing and other safety procedures in place.
 
Sex workers vs. crimes against humanity . . . let us see . . . what would you think I'd choose to be the enemy?

Seriously, they are there to satisfy a need (we LOVE sex!). Because of prostitution's underground status, prostitutes are coupled with those who have the talent of providing the service. What gives? In legalizing (and, therefore, regulating) the service, the government and society stands to win.

What can we lose? A model that's expected all to follow?
 
Wokamuka said:
Sex workers vs. crimes against humanity . . . let us see . . . what would you think I'd choose to be the enemy?

Seriously, they are there to satisfy a need (we LOVE sex!). Because of prostitution's underground status, prostitutes are coupled with those who have the talent of providing the service. What gives? In legalizing (and, therefore, regulating) the service, the government and society stands to win.

What can we lose? A model that's expected all to follow?
Click to expand...

Glad we agree here.

Carlin said it best as well. There are also Libertarians that support legalization of prostitution.

I'm all for it for the reason alone of protecting the well being of sex workers. They are often dehumanized and forgotten after they are murdered.
 
Legalize prostitution..

Legalize marijuana...

The country would be a happier and more peaceful place to live!

Seriously...would it reduce crime rates? I think it would..
 
shel90 said:
Legalize prostitution..

Legalize marijuana...

The country would be a happier and more peaceful place to live!

Seriously...would it reduce crime rates? I think it would..
Click to expand...

Yupp I think it will, but that still depends. Sometimes legalize the prostitution will not do good with the crime because it might affect the customers trying to take advantage of the prostitution, or trying to rape the prostitution for free, or something like that.

Marijuana might be hardly compared to the prostitution ;)
 
shel90 said:
Legalize prostitution..

Legalize marijuana...

The country would be a happier and more peaceful place to live!

Seriously...would it reduce crime rates? I think it would..
Click to expand...

Marijuana + Sex Workers = a match in heaven. yup I agree :)
 
shel90 said:
Legalize prostitution..

Legalize marijuana...

The country would be a happier and more peaceful place to live!

Seriously...would it reduce crime rates? I think it would..
Click to expand...

It's a gamble that unfortunately, no one is willing to take, mainly thanks to organized religion.

Eh well. There's always Amsterdam!
 
Back
Top