Ron Paul On Babies, Prostitution, Marijuana and Chocolate Chip Cookies

That's part of the point, isn't it Ferret? That the secondary crimes still remain, so you haven't actually done anything to reduce the crime rate. You've just substituted it with something else. and you could easily argue that the substitute is far worse than the original situation.

I've done slightly more. I've actually been interested in the situation for a while. So this article really doesn't go into the whole situation. Here's a little summation for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_the_Netherlands#Human_trafficking

Let's look at the numbers:

so between 5% and 33% of prostitutes are working there because of human trafficking. Do you find this acceptable? Efforts have been ongoing for years to attempt to reduce this, but apparently it hasn't worked too well, so this is the result.

So, instead of a few prostitutes getting minor punishments for the crimes; we have many people caught up in a forced situation that is nearly impossible to get out of, combined with money laundering, human trafficking, mob involvement, etc.

That you'd argue that is a better situation than keeping prostitution is kinda silly.

 

its a different type of crime and it should be addressed by whatever their version of the FBI is.

Las Vegas casinos used to used by organized crime the same way and it was cleaned up.

I don't think white collar crimes are worse then pimps and customers beating and killing prostitutes, do you?

and when prostitution is illegal, I will bet the percentage of them forced into it are way higher. When things are legal and regulated weeding out the slavery stuff should be way easier.

 

you are agreeing with me again that legalization doesn't actually reduce any crime. Substituting one evil for another isn't a fix, in my opinion.

You could make a very good case, that while the casinos are "cleaned up" - the problem has simply changed to having more people addicted to gambling, going broke my losing money at casinos, etc. One evil just replaces another. And that's the point. You aren't "fixing" anything, you are just shifting the problem to something else.

no, the guys who drag women and kids from 3rd world countries and forcing them into the life is a ton better. I agree.

Should maybe but seems that it does not. based upon this experience.

When you can come up with numbers beyond your supposition, I'll pay attention here.

 

The Libertarian view is that you shift the problem to personal responsibility. It's hard enough raising a family, are any of us prepared to pay for, and appoint bureaucrats to handle personal responsibility for all Americans?

 

see here is the thing you think the freedom to gamble is evil, and you probably think the freedom to buy and sell sex is evil

whereas I think people should be able to make up their own mind about these things, and engage in them in a safe legal manner if they wish.

You see even if everything was equal, legal prostitution and gambling are better then illegal because they allow more freedom for people to do what they choose to do, instead the government telling them what they can or can not do.

 

And as Ferret said, it shifts personal responsibility to the citizen. While you may seek to police values and morals and rights for citizens, many people have the belief, backed by the Constitution, that people should have rights to do as they please, being responsible for themselves. We don't want a babysitter deciding for free adults, what is right and what is wrong.

 

good/evil is irrelevant - im not interested in the moral argument, I'm looking at it from a crime standpoint. We have direct evidence showing that it does not lower crime and attracts other (some worse) crimes instead. And your retort is "oh well, it happens anyways". I'm glad the mayor whatever of amsterdam shows more interest in its citizens than that.

And personal choice does apply with gambling - I was simply making the point that the negative effects of the mob were replaced with others. Whereas prostitution you have people (remember up to 33%) of people who are prostitutes - in a legal situation, not in an area where its illegal - are forced into it.

Don't throw the constitution into this. It's silly and shows how little you understand it. The constitution only would really speak to the rights of states to make it legal or illegal. It'd end there. It wouldnt' speak to the right to prostitute yourself. If you believe it does; then your understanding of the issue is very sad.

 

Decriminalizing or legalizing always helps. I can't think of a single case where it hasn't. Does it attract other behaviours? Of course but thats the case whether its legal or not, it just is magnified when its pushed underground.

Nowhere in that article does it say legalizing increased crime, mob prescence or human traffiicking. They simply want to crack down on the crime kingpins that are causing problems.

In fact it seems the city has no problem with the system:

It seems they want to deal with the bad guys attempting to control the situation, not change the system. Thats something that would be a much more difficult task if were underground.

The fact it is legal makes it more transparent and easier to deal with.