Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

The War on Sex Trafficking Is the New War on Drugs

And the results will be just as disastrous, for "perpetrators" and "victims" alike.

(Page 4 of 4)

INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF A MORAL CRUSADE

Polaris Project/FacebookPolaris Project/FacebookIn a 2012 paper published in Politics & Society, Ronald Weitzer suggested that the 1990s anti-prostitution crusade has become fully "institutionalized" in the 21st century. "Institutionalization by the state may be limited or extensive—ranging from consultation with activists, inclusion of leaders in the policy process, material support for crusade organizations, official endorsement of crusade ideology, resource mobilization, and the creation of legislation and new agencies to address the problem," Weitzer wrote. Sound familiar?

"Some moral crusades are so successful that they see their ideology fully incorporated in government policy and vigorous efforts by state agencies to combat the problem on their own," he noted. In other words, "the movement's central goals become a project of the government."

It's hard to think of a better representative of this institutionalization than the Polaris Project, one of America's biggest anti-trafficking groups. Founded by a man who now runs the website Everyday Feminism and a woman who now works for the federal government, Polaris has drafted multi-pronged model legislation for the taking. Compare Polaris' recommendations with state trafficking laws, and you'll find near verbatim language in some, and shared assumptions and goals in almost all.

How did Polaris gain such influence? One way is through state "report cards." Advertised as a measure of states' commitment to fighting human trafficking, it's basically a measure of how closely their laws hew to the Polaris policy wishlist. Among the must-haves: a law requiring the display of the national human trafficking hotline number, which Polaris runs with funding from Health and Human Services. States that fail to enact all of the Polaris-endorsed policies wind up with bad grades, which the organization then publicizes extensively.

Another driver of state trafficking policies is the Uniform Law Commission (ULC), a nonpartisan organization that drafts model state legislation in a variety of areas. In 2010, ULC was asked by the American Bar Association to prepare a plan for tackling human trafficking. The result was drafted in collaboration with Polaris, Shared Hope International, the National Association of Attorneys General, and the U.S. State Department, then approved by the bar association in 2013.

In the first half of 2015, two states enacted laws based on ULC's model legislation and four others introduced them. Four states enacted ULC-based trafficking laws in 2014 with 10 more attempting to. Among the model legislation's main tenets are court-ordered forfeiture of real and personal property for traffickers, providing "immunity to minors who are human trafficking victims and commit prostitution or nonviolent offenses," and imposing "felony-level punishment when the defendant offers anything of value to engage in commercial sexual activity."

That last bit is part of what's known as the "end-demand" strategy, or the "Nordic model," which focuses heavier penalties on sex buyers than sex sellers. Popularized by Nordic feminists, it's since become the law of the land in Canada and is rapidly influencing American policy, with many religious-based anti-trafficking groups also adopting its rallying cry. As a result, cities and states around the country have begun increasing penalties for prostitution clients and rebranding them as sexual predators. In Seattle, for instance, the crime of "patronizing a prostitute" was recently rechristened "sexual exploitation."

The theory behind "end demand" is that if only we arrest enough patrons or make the punishments for them severe enough, people will stop trying to purchase sex. Voila! No more prostitution, no more sex trafficking. If that sounds familiar, perhaps you're old enough to remember the '80s, when a similar approach was supposed to bring down the drug trade.

"Ending the demand for drugs is how, in the end, we will win," President Ronald Reagan declared in 1988. Indeed, it was how we were already winning: "The tide of the battle has turned, and we're beginning to win the crusade for a drug-free America," Reagan claimed.

In reality, the number of illicit drug users in America has only risen since then, despite the billions of dollars spent and hundreds of thousands of people locked away. In 1990, for instance, 7.1 percent of Americans had used some sort of illegal drug in the past month, according to the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse. By 2002 it had risen to 8.3 percent, and by 2013 to 9.4 percent.

The utter failure to "end demand" for drugs hasn't dented optimism that we can accomplish the trick with prostitution. During the "National Day of John Arrests" each year, police pose as sex workers online and then arrest would-be clients. Each year, hundreds of men are booked in these stings and charged with offenses ranging from public indecency and solicitation to pimping and sex trafficking. If these anti-trafficking efforts sound a lot like old vice policing, that's because the tactics, and results, are nearly identical.

In a study released last year by Shared Hope International and Arizona State University, researchers examined end-demand efforts in four metro areas over a four-month period. Between 50 and 60 percent of these efforts involved police decoys pretending to be teens, and no actual victims. A typical tactic is for police to post an ad pretending to be a young adult sex worker, and once a man agrees to meet, the "girl" indicates that she's actually only 16 or 17.

Shared Hope is candid about the fact that most of the men soliciting sex here are not pedophiles and not necessarily seeking out someone underage. But "distinguishing between demand for commercial sex acts with an adult and demand for commercial sex acts with a minor is often an artificial construct," its report asserted. So to save the children, we need to prosecute men who have no demonstrated interest in children, because in the future they may seek sex with adults who could actually turn out to be old-looking teens—got that?

"One shortcoming of the reverse sting approach is that no live victims are rescued from trafficking," Shared Hope admitted. "But it does take intended perpetrators of child sex trafficking off the Internet and off the streets."

Bipartisan Paranoia

A federal war on prostitution doesn't play well with large segments of Americans. Fighting human trafficking, on the other hand, is a feel-good cause. At a 2012 Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) speech, President Barack Obama insisted that we must call human trafficking "by its true name—modern slavery." And what kind of monster would be against ending slavery? Which brings us to another factor driving all this trafficking action: It makes politicians look good.

At a time when Republicans and Democrats can barely agree on anything, human trafficking bills have attracted huge bipartisan support. Here is an area where enterprising legislators can attach their names to something likely to pass. And if it doesn't pass, for whatever reason, it's ripe for demagoguery: "My opponent voted against a bill to fight modern slavery!" Tough-on-crime policies, particularly tough-on-drugs policies, used this tactic for decades, until mass incarceration finally lost its luster.

Undoubtedly, many lawmakers do legitimately want to help trafficking victims and hold bad guys accountable; political point-scoring is just a happy side effect. But a less happy side effect is a slew of bad laws, violated rights, and squandered money. The federal government has given away scores of millions in grant dollars for this quixotic crusade.

The resources spent on prostitution stings and public awareness campaigns are resources diverted from mundane but more effective strategies for helping at-risk youth, such as adding more beds at emergency shelters. The State Department's latest Trafficking in Persons report notes that "shelter and housing for all trafficking victims, especially male and labor trafficking victims, continue to be insufficient." Advocates routinely say the biggest barrier to escape for many trafficking victims is simply a lack of places to go.

"Studies focused on New York City consistently report that homeless youth often trade sex for a place to stay each night because of the absence of available shelter beds," noted the Urban Institute in a report last year. "These figures are even more striking for LGBTQ youth...According to a survey of nearly 1,000 homeless youth in New York City, young men were three times more likely than young women to have traded sex for a place to stay, and LGBTQ youth were seven times more likely than heterosexual youth to have done so. Transgender youth in New York City have been found eight times more likely than non-transgender youth to trade sex for a safe place to stay."

What's more, many of the policies in place to fight trafficking actively work against their own stated mission. The criminalization of prostitution keeps sex workers from reporting abuse and keeps clients from coming forward if they suspect someone is being trafficked. Victims themselves are afraid to go to police for fear they'll be arrested for prostitution—and indeed, they often are.

In 2012, 579 minors were reported to the federal government as having been arrested for prostitution and commercialized vice. Prosecutors say they need this as a "bargaining chip" to make the victims testify against their perpetrators. We're just using state violence and the threat of incarceration against children in order to save them!

Another misguided government target is the classified advertising website Backpage, home to many an "escort" ad. Lawmakers accuse the site of "profiting off of child exploitation," even though only a miniscule percentage of Backpage ads—which anyone can put up—are posted by traffickers rather than adult sex workers. Both legislators and anti-trafficking groups have long been intent on shutting the site down. Yet "street-based sex workers, across studies, face much higher rates of violence than indoor sex workers," says Serpent Libertine, a Sex Workers Outreach Project (SWOP)-Chicago board member. "It's hard to understand how eliminating a low-barrier way to work indoors would promote safety."

Vera Lamarr, also with SWOP-Chicago, pointed out that Backpage cooperates with law enforcement in the U.S. more than many other sites do. "It's hard to understand the desire to take down a website that voluntarily supports efforts against trafficking and willingly cooperates with law enforcement," Lamarr says. "If Backpage closes, their user base could easily migrate to a less cooperative site" or be forced back out on the streets, where traffickers don't leave digital records.

But at least we're getting the really bad guys, right? That's also up for debate. Peruse trafficking arrest records and you'll find many folks like Amber Batt, an Alaska woman who faces 10 to 25 years in federal prison (plus a lifetime on the sex-offender registry) for running an escort service featuring adult women who freely elected to work there. Or Julie Haner, a 19-year-old Oregon sex worker who was charged with trafficking after taking her 17-year-old friend with her to meet clients. Or Aimee Hart, 42, who served seven months in prison and faces 15 years on the sex-offender registry for driving her adult friend to a prostitution job. Or Hortencia Medeles-Arguello, a 71-year-old Houston bar owner arrested as the leader of a "sex trafficking conspiracy" because she allowed prostitution upstairs.

There's Trenton McLemore, 29, who faces federal sex trafficking charges for "facilitating" the sex work of his 16-year-old girlfriend by purchasing the girl a cellphone and sometimes texting clients for her. He faces a mandatory minimum of 10 years and possible life in prison, thanks to a joint effort of Irving, Texas, police; Homeland Security; and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. And Alfonso Kee Peterson, 28, arrested in July for telling a 17-year-old on Facebook that he could help her earn a lot of money from prostitution. The "teen" turned out to be a police decoy. Despite the absence of any real victim or any activity beyond speech, Peterson was charged with one felony count of human trafficking of a minor, one felony count of pandering, and one felony count of attempted pimping; he faces up to 12 years in prison. This important sting apparently warranted the work of several local police departments, the California Highway Patrol, and the FBI.

Even if we grant that some of this activity is unsavory, is it really the sort of behavior that warrants lengthy prison sentences and attention from federal agents? Since when is what adults—or even teenagers—willingly do with their genitalia a matter of homeland security? Is this really what President Obama had in mind at the CGI conference when he compared anti-trafficking laws to the Emancipation Proclamation?

"To be sure, linking trafficking and slavery could, in theory, surface important similarities between political economies of chattel slavery (largely) of the past, and modern-day trafficking," the American University law professor Janie Chuang wrote in a paper published in the American Journal of International Law last year. "Drawing out such nuanced comparisons is not, however, the current trajectory of slavery creep. Instead, this version promotes an understanding of trafficking as a problem created and sustained by individual deviant actors, and thus best addressed through aggressive crime control measures."

For a fraction of the money spent on these measures, state governments or private foundations could fund more beds at emergency shelters. The resources that churches, charities, and radical feminists use trying to convince people that all sex workers are victims (and their clients predators) could go toward helping that minority of sex workers who do feel trapped in prostitution with job placement or getting an education. For the vast majority of vulnerable sex workers, the greatest barriers to exit aren't ankle-cuffs, isolation, and shadowy kidnappers with guns, but a lack of money, transportation, identification, or other practical things. Is helping with this stuff not sexy enough? As it stands, many of those "rescued" by police or abolitionist groups find that their self-appointed saviors can't actually offer them housing, food, a job, or anything else of urgent value in starting a life outside the sex trade. Awareness doesn't pay the bills.

Kamylla's story typifies this rescue paradox. A Texas mother who had fallen on hard times after an injury ended her construction career, she started working in prostitution last year. One day, producers from the A&E television series 8 Minutes contacted her, having seen her ad on Backpage. Though 8 Minutes was marketed as a reality show where a rogue pastor found and "saved" sex trafficking victims in real time, Kamylla and others (who were selling sexual services willingly, even if their situation wasn't optimal) actually talked with producers several times beforehand. The show promised to help with her overdue rent and finding a job, she says. After filming, they gave her $150 and told her they'd be in touch soon about further assistance.

They never called. When Kamylla followed up, the producers referred her to the same unhelpful social services she'd already tried on her own. Eventually Kamylla returned to Backpage, posting an ad using the same phone number that the producers had used to contact her. The first call she received was from an undercover cop, who arranged to meet her and another sex worker at a motel. Once the women agreed to oral sex for money, "he opened the door and nine police officers came inside the room," she says. Both women were taken to jail and booked on prostitution charges.

In a world with no gray areas—one where traffickers are always evil predators and victims always utterly helpless, where sex workers are never ambivalently engaged with their work, and the bright line between teendom and adulthood is always apparent and meaningful—in this world, the raid-and-rescue model of addressing sex trafficking may make some sense. You don't give a girl chained to a bed a condom and call it a day.

But in the world as it exists, sometimes a 17-year-old runaway chooses prostitution because it's better than living in an abusive foster home. Sometimes a sex worker gives all her money to a man because she loves him or thinks she needs him, or that he needs her. Sometimes a struggling mother doesn't love the sex trade, but finds it the best option to feed her kids. Sometimes an immigrant would rather give hand jobs to strangers than face whatever drove her to leave her own country. Harm reduction strategies like handing out condoms in popular prostitution areas, offering STD tests, or even just facilitating online advertising (rather than street work) could prove lifesaving to these women.

Yet when it comes to the way we talk about commercial sex, you have to be a victim or a predator. We've created a narrative with no room for nuance. We traffic not in facts but in melodrama. In TV broadcasts, campus panels, and congressional hearings, the most lurid and sensational stories are held up as representative. Legislators assure us that their intent is noble and pure.

But remember: Tough-on-drugs legislation was never crafted or advertised as a means to send poor people to prison for life over a few grams of weed. It was a way to crack down on drug kingpins, violent gang leaders, evil crack fiends, and all those who would lure innocent children into addiction, doom, and death. Yet in mandating more police attention for drug crimes, giving law enforcement new technological tools and military gear with which to fight it, and adding ever-stricter prison sentences and punishments for drug offenders, we unleashed a corrupt, authoritarian, biased, and fiscally untenable mess on American cities without any success in decreasing drug rates or the violence and danger surrounding an activity that human beings stubbornly refuse to give up.

Unless we can learn the lessons of our past failed crusades, the war on sex trafficking could result in every bit as much misery as its panicky predecessors. Here's hoping it won't take us another four decades to realize that this prohibition doesn't work either.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    Sex trafficking is human trafficking is the old, long discredited White Slavery panic that came and went from the late Victorian era into the 1920's. It is grant-pimps, political parasites, and buttinskis who are paniced by the idea that sex-work might become legitimate. At least one of its Bright Lights, Somaly Mam, has proven to be a Con Artist. If somebody approaches you looking for support, either monetary or political, connected to this scare you should pit one hand on your wallet and the other on your groin, and head for the hills.

  • jrom||

    This is just another power grab by the federal and state governments. It is now a life felony at the federal level and a capital crime in the state of Florida, for any adult to solicit sex from another adult. It also eliminates the First Amendment, by banning websites from advertising any form of adult entertainment. It evens bans strip clubs from advertising at the state and federal level. It is true, that the only things politicians from both parties can agree on is expanding government police powers. These new laws; however, do exempt all government workers from facing any charges at both the state and federal level on sex crime offenses. And it is now a felony under both federal and state law to use dating sites like Match, to meet anyone, if they eventually have sex with their new date. Again, the government assholes want to curtail the First Amendment. Expect all forms of dating to be labeled human sex trafficking in the near future. With only government scum bags being allowed to do what ever they want.

  • jrom||

    In Florida, two adults having sex is a capital crime. However, it is legal in Florida, for a government employee, to have sex with even a child. All government people including police, prosecutors, judges, and politicians are exempt from facing any criminal or civil charges under Florida law for any type of crime. That's how fucked up the Florida asshole state legislature is. Florida, has the largest prison population of any state. And its Republican controlled state legislature passed a law requiring a 10 year minimum prison sentence for fleeing the scene of a car wreck resulting in more than 100 dollars worth of damage. The state also requires any one arrested for a joint, to spend at least 15 years in prison. Jeb Bush, as governor supported these policies.

  • jrom||

    I should also point out that Florida's AG, is a pro police state nut job. This fools name is Pam Bondi. I urge the residents of Florida, to question her on her out of control agenda and demand that she be held accountable for her actions.

  • EndTheGOP||

    The only way we're going to get this shit under control is to have a MASSIVE World War with all countries participating. Eliminate half the world's population, okay let's go for three quarters of the population, and the world will be right with itself. Too damn many fuckin' people and everybody wants to be boss.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Did you know that 99% of all children who go online are raped?

    Also, did you know that 99.99% of all men are pedophiles?

    That's the facts!

  • ||

    Shit, that channel is gold. Thanks for sharing.

  • jrom||

    Heroic Mulatto,

    You are full of shit!

  • DenverJ||

    Woosh

  • jrom||

    Woosh? Where have I seen this stupid comment posted on this site by you before? I think you supported those two people that post under the names John Tittor and Mike Hihn.

  • DenverJ||

    LOL. Dude you missed Heroic M's sarcasm by a mile.
    And yes, anyone here will tell you of my deep respect for Hihn, the uber libertarian.
    And since you appear to be... special... I guess I need to add the sarcasm tag:

    /sarc

  • jrom||

    Hihn, is a jackass. And apparently, so are you! For example, Hihn implies, all Americans should give up English and learn Spanish, just to make Latinos' happy.

  • jrom||

    I guess I have not read enough of Heroic M's posts to have realized that he was just being sarcastic. You know these days, most people agree with governments propaganda. However, you don't have to be a jerk about it!

  • MSimon||

    you don't have to be a jerk about it!

    I believe you are on the wrong message board.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    As far as I can tell "sex trafficking" is just the new feminist face of prostitution laws. Rather then deride the prostitutes as hussies or "ladies of the night", the authorities assign them much-desired victim status and prosecute the customers.

  • gaijin||

    Is sex a supply or demand driven economic activity I wonder?

  • MoreProgressiveThanYou||

    .... yes

  • Scarecrow & WoodChipper Repair||

    It's a market, therefore yes.

  • biljay||

    Yes, and women don't want prostitution to be legal because it would increase the supply, thus lowering the cost.

  • jrom||

    Exactly, the feminists and religious nuts want everyone in jail. No wonder why those two assholes Bush and Obama support the criminalization of all sex acts. Obama supports the feminist nuts and Bush supported the religious cooks! And police and prosecutors just love to fuck with people anyway. They could care less, what the reason. We have been living in a police state for decades.

  • DenverJ||

    I support religious cooks, too, and bakers.

  • jrom||

    Thanks for catching my spelling error! It should have been crooks.

  • jrom||

    It should read: Bush supported the religious crooks.

  • MSimon||

    It reads itself? The wonders of modern technology.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    As far as I can tell "sex trafficking" is just the new feminist face of prostitution laws. Rather then deride the prostitutes as hussies or "ladies of the night", the authorities assign them much-desired victim status and prosecute the customers.

  • gordo53||

    The really sad thing about this is that it's almost always the poor street walkers that get pinched. The big dollar uptown girls get a pass. Maybe it has something to do with their clientele. It helps when you're servicing the rich, the famous and the influential. As for law enforcement, it isn't about justice or the safety of the public, it's all about the money and justifying their existence. Not as much money as the illicit drug rackets, but relatively easy pickings.

  • Bradley Strider||

    Maybe it has something to do with their clientele. It helps when you're servicing the rich, the famous and the influential.

    It's also easier to bust prostitutes in the street than it is to set up a sting to catch call girls.

  • jrom||

    Law enforcement only cares about money and having the power to fuck with other people. They would love to be able to lock up jay walkers for decades at a time. And prosecutors and judges just love seeing people fucked over on trumped up charges. That is what they all live for! Now even the personal injury asshole lawyers will be suing johns for soliciting sex with undercover police officers, and winning multi million dollar verdicts, to enrich themselves. Our legal system is fucked up!

  • Chrxtoph3r||

    The problem isn't sex. The problem is the 'ownership' of sex-workers by others...who are certainly involved in other enterprises other than sex. Legalizing sex-work might create a free enterprise type system for women, however, it will require something that none of them, including their clients, will want to participate in...taxes.

    Imagine having to provide a receipt and a 1099 for sex-work...

    WHO in GOD"S GREEN HELL is going to go along with that???

  • MoreProgressiveThanYou||

    Hello. It is my Human ass and it is my Human right to do with it as I wish. I can sell it, rent it, and share any proceeds with whom-so-ever I choose. Otherwise ... bite me.

  • ApocalypseNOW||

    "Otherwise... bite me."

    Your ass? Do we have to pay extra for that?

    Asking for a friend....

  • ApocalypseNOW||

    (Especially if it's that ass in the photo....)

  • ApocalypseNOW||

    (Especially if it's that ass in the photo....)

  • ApocalypseNOW||

    (Reason's comment section needs an edit/delete button.... *sigh*)

  • ||

    Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do...... ✹✹✹✹✹✹ www.buzznews99.com

  • Enough About Woodchippers||

    DON'T YOU REALIZE YOU'RE BEING TRAFFICKED????????///??/?/?/////

  • Brian||

    Hyper-Christians and feminists agree: you're a dick!

    The true spirit of bipartisanship.

  • ace_m82||

    Not sure they are "hyper-Christian", if indeed such a thing exists.

    Christ hung out with "sinners" such as these. Again, he told them things like "go and sin no more" but didn't call in the authorities to persecute them.

    If anyone is doing this to be "Christian", they are doing it out of ignorance... which is sadly typical.

  • jrom||

    The religious nuts are almost as bad as the feminists.

  • MSimon||

    Worse.

  • WillMG||

    And of course those pushing this junk never think that legalizing prostitution would fix all of this far more than any of their ideas.

  • Christophe||

    Fixing these things would end the "crisis" and thus the source of their power. Fixing anything is the furthest thing from their minds.

  • B. Woodrow Chippenhaus||

    IF IT SAVES EVEN ONE VAGINA IT'S WORTH IT!!!

  • Enough About Woodchippers||

    I save them in the freezer.

  • DenverJ||

    I like to salt ' em

  • Animal||

  • Animal||

    I'm trying not to make a salted fish joke here.

  • biljay||

    The more laws on the books the more power the enforcers have. The more laws on the books the more enforcers required, and funding for their careers and promotions, and for the prison guard unions, and more jobs for the American Bar Association members.

  • jrom||

    Exactly. It is about more government jobs and more lawsuits for the personal injury lawyers.

  • Tucci78||

    Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy: "in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people:

    "First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.

    "Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.

    "The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization."

    So be it with this latest grant-money-grabbing frenzy over "sex trafficking."

  • mockmock||

    This is the first salvo in the banning of porn.

  • Vulgar Madman||

    "This is the first salvo in the banning of porn."

    So, you say you want a revolution.

  • jrom||

    Just looking at porn will soon be a capital crime under both state and federal law. With government employees exempt from any criminal or civil liability, of course.

  • DenverJ||

    Well, you know, we all want to change the world.

  • jrom||

    What do you know about change?

  • DenverJ||

    I know that 3 quarters, 2 dimes, and a nickle can be exchanged for one crisp fiat dollar. I also know it's considered rude to ask your "date" for change.

  • jrom||

    Can't we have a serious conversation about this issue that threatens to lock up millions of people over the coming years on bullshit charges?

  • DenverJ||

    Sure. We both agree it's a problem. We agree that DA's only care about convictions for their career advancement rather than about justice. We both agree that the police in this country are out of control.
    So, what do you want to discus? Do you have any solutions?
    No? Me neither, so I'm going back to making lame jokes, cause otherwise I'll go insane.

  • jrom||

    Denver J

    I guess we agree on all of this. I just get so angry when I hear about all of this bullshit that our government idiots are doing to our society. I thought about moving to Florida for the warm weather. However, after reading about all of their draconian laws, I may have to think twice. It is depressing indeed, that it is not easier for us to effect positive change.

  • DenverJ||

    Which is why most here resort to humor and sarcasm. Otherwise, the sense of helplessness can bring you down.
    Fight the good fight, but don't let it consume you.

  • DenverJ||

    Also, friend, what is your source for all this stuff about Florida law? I'm sure some of it might be true, but alot of what you posted about Florida law is simply not possible in American Jurisprudence.
    I suspect you are reading... sensationalized... sites.
    Just because it's on the internet, and just because it validates your preconceived biases, doesn't mean it's true.

  • DenverJ||

    But the childrunz! Why don't you want people to love the childrunz?

  • jrom||

    I know what you mean. The politicians could care less about the children. They just want more power to micromanage people.

  • DenverJ||

    While that might be true, i doubt you know what I mean. It's a play on a running joke around here.
    The appropriate response would have been something about roadz.

    Also, you know who else wanted more power?

  • jrom||

    I guess you have been around this site much longer than I.

  • MSimon||

    No kidding.

  • jrom||

    Who wants more power besides all of the aforementioned people?

  • ||

    I know that Penn and Teller have done stories related to this issue, and John Stossel, but does anyone know of any other sources that have covered this issue?

  • Jay Dubya||

    i dont know but I like the Pogues.

  • hookstrapped||

    [Prohibitionists] typically portray sex workers as powerless victims and, of course, every story of victimization must have villains. Men who patronize sex workers are invariably portrayed as abusive and demeaning in order to fit that narrative. And I have no doubt that many are. But caricatures only get you so far in developing sound public policy.

    Diary of a Sex Tourist
    http://tinyurl.com/phzgthf

  • Aardvark||

    Not just evangelical abolitionists and feminists. Don't forget self righteous progressives and other Liberty hating busy bodies.

  • carlpolizzi||

    This does not address the foster families who move from State to State to avoid tracking: they then feed the children into the black market as exposed by DynCorp and the Franklin cover up. Speaker Hastert was deeply involved in molesting boys for decades but his case will go nowhere because there are another dozen high ranking reps who would be outed.
    There are thousands of Satanic ritual sacrifices in the US yearly, some involving infants, so whores don't get me excited.

  • HenryC||

    The war on sex trafficing is much much older than the war on drugs.

  • Austrian Anarchy||

    That gal is pretty cute from the front too.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online