I still dont understand why prostitution is still illegal...

i still dont understand why prostitution is still illegal. doesnt it go directly against the constituion for female rights? if a woman wants to sell her body then why not allow that FREEDOM? its not like cops even give a shit anyway. if someone gets "caught" nowadays they just get a ticket and thats that. rarely does anyone actually go to jail for it anymore, including the hookers, unless its in some HEAVY moralfag state.

so why not just make it legal like weed? there has to be something in the constitution that allows a woman to sell her body for sex if she so chooses, but im not a law fag so i cant pin point it.

Other urls found in this thread:

reason.com/blog/2018/01/25/the-internet-makes-life-for-sex-workers
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

every other roast will be for sale, your sister and your mom would be on some app where strangers can fuck them for money.

?

People make a lot of money trafficking the vulnerable. If it were legal, these people could have a legal leg to stand on and the insane profits to the cartels would crash. It would totally cut them out of the business.

That's the real reason - follow the dollars and you find the answer

ruining the cartels business is a bad thing? besides, it wouldnt matter. human trafficking is still going to be an issue regardless. if it were legal it would be easier to crack down on because it wouldnt be forced.

in other words human traffickers will still stay underground while all of the legit independant hookers will move to the survace opening there own legit businesses. cops will simply need to look for the ones that are trying there hardest to hide slaves, which will be easy because they will mostly be Chinese.

>Something in the constitution

The constitution was written by rich white men who could own slaves and had to present the appearance of being religiously moral - remember, our country existed largely as a dumping ground for those whose sects were out of favor at the time. If they had written anything in about it it would be the exact opposite of freedom, they expected to own white women nearly as thoroughly as they owned their slaves. And they didn’t need prostitution, why pay for it once when you can buy a sex slave for...until you get bored and decide to replace her/him.

There’s a reason the elephants are trying to drag the country back to those times, and it has nothing to do with the religious idiots they are happy to take advantage of.

The problem is the illegal sex trade. That prostitution and sex trade make it hard to tell the difference between the two, and a lot of prostitutes like 99% of them are not actually happy and in a good place with the job itself.

So the fact it's hard to tell who wants to be and enjoys being a prostitute and who is forced into it by one means or another either slavery or desperation, is why it's still illegal.

IT'S NOT REALLY ILLEGAL NOW EITHER, SINCE IF YOU FILM IT IT'S PORN, WHICH IS LEGAL.

>and a lot of prostitutes like 99% of them are not actually happy and in a good place with the job itself.

false

reason.com/blog/2018/01/25/the-internet-makes-life-for-sex-workers

Nearly half—48 percent—said they're satisfied with their working conditions and 34 percent were "very satisfied." Slightly over half said they're "enthusiastic" about their work most of the time, and another 21 percent said they were enthusiastic some of the time.

most people dont like their jobs

>in other words human traffickers will still stay underground while all of the legit independant hookers will move to the survace opening there own legit businesses. cops will simply need to look for the ones that are trying there hardest to hide slaves, which will be easy because they will mostly be Chinese.
"Oh hi girl, you want to prostitute on your own? How about you get in the van or something could happen to you. Road accidents are very common this year."

what is a brothel

Would legal prostitution lower prices by solving the distribution problem?

using laws to define morals... land of the free :)

it would have regulations and taxes it would be $150-300 a pop at least

because every other country dosnt do it and usually the state is the one making the more religious law for a country made by christians you can sure do a lot of immoral crap as long as it dosnt infringe on an other

Morals aside, where do I pay for this in burgerland?

>only women are prostitutes
kek

>ruining the cartels business is a bad thing
I think you're missing the point. The cartels are powerful and it's likely THEY are trying to keep the whole thing as a criminal enterprise.

You're not thinking about it in a real-world way, only a "wouldn't it be nice if" kind of way.

Well, naturally. Where would you find a male who had the sex drive for that sort of work?

i dont follow. if america wants to make prostitution legal across the US what the fuck does that have to do with the cartel? they cant stop that if the US wants it.

Clearly somebody’s not aware that we have the best government money can buy.

i really hope ur not talking about the mexican government. even NK is better.

the point is is to hurt it

Was referring to the US. And “money can buy” was the phrase to notice there. I really wouldn’t be surprised if some of the religious-oriented orgs out there that donate to politicians are partly funded by the cartels - after all, who benefits most from the drug and prostitution bans?

>online survey of 641 sex workers based in and/or working in the UK, who use the
internet in their work

This is the truth.

same people who benefited from weed being legalized.

no one except the casuals who sold weed and smoked it. aka the stoners. if prostitution is legal the ones that will benefit most is the government because taxes and the hookers themselves because they can now open up a shop and make, quite literally, thousands of dollars a day.

trafficking is an issue, but its honestly not that bad in america. we crack down on it fairly hard and regularly. pimps haven been going out of style for a long time now, almost everyone is independent. even in Asian massage parlor the masseuses are independent hookers of the parlor. they only pay a rental fee to live in the parlor if its a 24/7 joint.

which represents the bulk of prostitution in the first world today. street walkers arent too common

of course not. why pick up trash off the street when you can order one online straight to your home like a pizza?

it’s not prostitution if you pick up a girl, have sex with her, then buy something from her (maybe an article of clothing, or a nice painting i. her house) because you’re not paying for sex, you’re paying for whatever else you bought.

Not true, sex in exchange for items is also prostitution. to not get charged just always buy their time, never a sex act

what would they be hurting? honestly if its legal then those same people will just forced the girls they own to operate legally and just take the money themselves.

besides, its a minority. you have to go fairly deep underground to get someone that is being trafficked for sex, and why would you when you can just get someone independant from backpage anyway?

the real issue here is not the trafficking of adult women, its the trafficking of children, which is actually more profitable.

There is nothing in the Constitution regarding hookers in any way at all. Lots was left out because a federal government is like holding a pissed off cocaine soaked cobra. You don't give it more opportunities than you have to.
That being said, those men were a hell of a lot smarter than you. They valued books very highly. They could build a complex house, speak multiple languages, and survey with precision matched by very few people today.
They understood tanks (SPGs if you want to be technical) and automatic wepons as well , they existed but were too expensive.

I meant would prostitutes earn less? Or come out ahead with more reliable volume?

Sure, users and dealers are better off - I think we’re agreeing here. Pretty sure the cartels are the ones taking the hit if just anyone can go and open (uncle bob’s family brothel & arcade/weed emporium/opium den). Hence my idle thoughts on who might be funding the fight to keep things illegal that probably ought not be.

Of course, I left off the other side of that, which is the massive funding cut it would be if the police can’t seize every dollar that’s ever been within a mile of an illegal substance (up to and including female lubricant secreted for money)

they would probably come out less because they would be forced to pay a stupidly large amount of self employment tax. right now hookers dont have to pay taxes. if they make 100k a year as a independent they keep 100% of that 100k for themselves.

the only "trafficking" that happens in the US with "children" is runaway teenagers being exploited over their drug habits. there's no commercial market for actual children, and those teenagers rarely can't pass for the age they're pretending to be (18).

but you've also failed to notice the now expansive definition of trafficking. it includes women from the 3rd world who agreed to work as prostitutes to pay a debt.

Careful with those assumptions, there. You’re pointing at least a couple of them in the wrong direction.

Of course they didn’t include a lot of things, and in no small part it’s because they simply couldn’t agree. But nothing I said is likely untrue - Jefferson in particular was known to fuck his slaves, had children with at least one of them. And with slavery on the books they couldn’t very well outlaw vagina rentals. But they also had to present themselves as moral or their Puritan/Protestant bade wouldn’t have chosen them to represent, so they couldn’t very well add selling your crotch to the Bill of Rights either.

well the thing is those dealers would be forced to pay tax as well. and its not like they can go shoot up the American government either in order to not pay a tax as it would be an act of treason.

America could make ALOT of money off illegal shit dealers and gang members do, but they choose not to because of public image and morals from soceity.

so in reality dealers and users would be worse of money wise because of that taxing. refer to the main reason illegal trade is so profitable is BECAUSE they dont need to pay tax on anything. that hooker who was making 100k a year is not making only 40-50k a year because of tax.

That's why anything not mentioned was a states issue. Even slavery was a state issue (mostly). Remember that they barely tolerated it for political purposes at a time the England pulled "no slaves in England lol land of the free" yet kept slaves in colonies as a form of economic and political warfare; we couldn't compete at the time without them and we needed cash badly.

Eh, that’s where we disagree, then. Yes, no question, taxes would lower what they make, though I’m assuming a lot of that goes back to the cartels supplying product (or in the case of prostitution, to those who advertise what’s for sale and to the place that provides safe haven for their activities, since it IS illegal activity).

From the user’s perspective, no matter if it’s drugs or prostitution, supply would massively increase, and price would probably come down somewhat.

>the massive funding cut it would be if the police can’t seize every dollar that’s ever been within a mile of an illegal substance (up to and including female lubricant secreted for money)
This is the main reason why cops are for the continuing and expansion of the Drug War, and this is why I believe they are ultimately complicit in it. The best way to end the war on drugs is to make the foot soldiers who enforce the laws afraid for their lives and the lives of their family if they continue enforcement.

im still under the impression that most money comes from child trafficking because most women do not want pimps and can sell themselves independently pretty easily online. the only time its an issue for adults is if they are street walkers trying to sell themselves on gang territory.

i know its sounds pretty damn dark, but people doing illegal human trafficking would make more money off of selling children than adults. so thats why i think that prostitution being legal wont really effect human trafficking at all because for them it will always be illegal if most of their profits come from that darker side.

Barely tolerated? As I recall the 3/5s of a vote per slave was accepted in the original document - yes, the northern colonies were against it, but not so much they refused to compromise (and that says something, when you look at today’s politics).

And I don’t really see anything you’ve said that disagrees with my initial statement - they couldn’t outlaw buying, selling, or renting flesh, but they also couldn’t be seen to accept what was and is seen by religion as “evil/dirty”. So I’d say it still stands as answer to OP’s comment about the constitution ought to allow prostitution. Unless he/she counts slave ownership, in which case the South failing to make their case with extreme force is why OP can’t have nice things.

i’m not talking about sex in exchange for items. for example, i’m saying that if a guy and girl fuck, and the guy stays over after they fuck and the girl brings up a topic about how she has a TV she’s been trying to sell, and the guy agrees to pay 200 dollars for the TV, that is completely irrelevant of the sex. you can make this about any object other than a TV too. it could be a shirt or some stupid shit. the cops can’t say you paid for sex when you clearly both agreed on her selling you an object out of her home and you buying it.

Sure, but it's just easier to buy her time, you can be upfront about it without worrying if you are talking to a cop. Most women aren't going to fuck you on hopes you will have a tv conversation and pay later.

Because it is another way that poor can get rich, like drugdealing.