What did everyone think about the ABC News national Nightline broadcast?
Seems the crackdown will be forthcoming: State Attorney Generals, Local PD, Congress getting into the act
Eliminating the use of gift credit cards to pedigree the users and ad placement personnel.
What does everyone think of the broadcast and the crackdown.
This crackdown seems harsher than the Craigslist crackdown.
All together, how is this harsher?
BP is always been like CL used to be, and is often cited in hobby related LE activity in the media. Although I did not catch the Nightline piece in question, a similar campaign against them would not surprise. OTOH, BP is affiliated at some level with the same organization/company the produces the Village Voice, so I would expect them to fight back harder against government encroachment. It may take a "BP Killer" for them t back down. Also, if their servers and company are located and based offshore, it will be difficult for LE and AG's to threaten them legally.
Since I missed the Nightline piece, it's probable that my suppositions may be off the mark to some extent. Feel free to PM me to enlighten and expound.
lol they should be REALLY investigating the good ole boy way of the government... SS and how long has that been going on.........LONG LONG TIME!
they have been fighting long and hard about "freedom of press & speech"..Time will tell. Sooner or later they will be pressured to shut down the parts deemed unsuitable..
"Law enforcement devotes significant resources towards combating these crimes. Specially-trained Vice Squad officers frequently pose as prostitutes or johns in an effort to arrest individuals suspected of committing these crimes. They have been known to frequent internet websites and chat-rooms while posing as prostitutes or johns. They also frequently pursue classified ads in “adult sections” of newspapers like the Village Voice. If/when the undercover officer meets the suspect in person, they are almost always wearing a recording device. In those situations, the undercover officer is typically trying to get the prostitute or john to make the offer for sexual services explicitly and clearly so that it can be used in a trial, if necessary. The undercover officer may otherwise attempt to get the prostitute or john to make the offer in a text message or email. Sometimes, when prostitutes travel across state lines or are part of large scale organizations, the cases can even be prosecuted by federal law enforcement officers, as well."
They next time you are annoyed at being screened, its for your benifit as well. Remember, be weary of no reviews, or for that matter limited reviews..
Its a shame that when a provider is of legal age and has a right to do with her own body as she pleases, why the governemnt has so much to say about it.
I think the main reason they want it to stay "illegal", is because they have yet to figure out a way they can take their share. Such as taxes. So, in my eyes, the governemnt is nothing more then a wannabe pimp..
I have only been doing this business a few years and have never felt more free and unihibited. Its my choice. Noone forces me to do it and when I am no longer having the time of my life and fulfilling my fantasies as well as others, I will walk away. I am not pleased with a governement that has so many issues they seem to think they have a right to tell me what to do with my body.
Sooner or later, there will be a "total" control of ones life.
Slowly our "Ammendments" are being taken away. Soon there will be one "dollar" and it will be replaced by the "euro". There will no longer be one president, there will be a "group" or "committee" running our lives.
I understand about child endangerment and child prostitution, I agree to prosecute to the fullest..but there are ways to stop it and let the others be. There have been several presidents in the past who partook in "payforplay".
Ok Ill shut up now lol..
I get passionate about certain topics.. Gets its the old debate team in school comming back to haunt me..
You all know how passionate redheads are!
I totally agree about the hypocrisy of keeping prostitution illegal, although I doubt it is because the government hasn't determined a way to profit from it. Instead, anti-prostitution attitudes are ingrained in American culture, all the way back to the puritanical roots planted in Massachusetts Bay colony in 1630. The New England blue laws are of similar vintage. Since many of our political leaders have been "caught" indulging in the "hobby," you would surmise that they would want to legalize it to rid themselves of the stigma of some journalist or vice squad operative outing them. That they don't speaks volumes. Without addressing the erosion of our civil liberties, which would require a book, you do raise an interesting point. Why isn't prostitution protected under the Supreme Court's general understanding of privacy? Regarding abortion and contraception, the Court has affirmed that privacy is part of the "penumbra" of rights afforded citizens of the US, vaguely outlined in the 4th, 9th, and 10th Amendments. Isn't control of one's body for sex similarly protected? Just a thought.
I don't think the constitutional protection of privacy can ever be extended to prostitution because it not a private act. It is a commercial act. Localities can regulate commerce. They can do so through zoning, taxation and outright banning. Prostitution doesn't have to be illegal -- see certain counties in Nevada -- but it can be. I think the reason it is illegal in most places is not because of political hypocrisy, but public hypocrisy. In most states or counties, it would be political suicide to advocate for legalizing prostitution. It would be mighty hard to get elected on that platform. Don't get me wrong. I think it should be legal. I just don't see widespread public acceptance of the idea anytime soon. Same with drugs.
The problem is not with the government. It's with the voters.
I expect the ladies will do this as part of their due diligence, as they should. As a hobbyist, I have my own form of screening...attending M&G's. This allows me the opportunity to meet prospective ladies I may interested in seeing whom have been screened by the party hosts. Result: A surplus of eligible ladies, and a long established circle of friends whom I trust, mostly.
As for your comments about governance, I have never trusted them. Be they Marxist Dems, Bible thumping Repubs, or bust happy LE, government is the least trustworthy segment in our society. Like him or not, Ronald Reagan was right: "Government is not the solution - government is the problem". That is as true today as it was 30 years ago. ALL of the problems we suffer as a society can be traced back to government mismanagement and overkill at least partially for longer than I can remember, and I was born in the early '60's.
Not to get too nitpicky here but wasn't Ronald Reagan part of the government himself? Wouldn't that make him a) untrustworthy and b) part of the problem? Just asking.
I love all the Reagan worshiping...maybe if people were aware that after his career tanked he became a Union president and before he got into politics was anti-nukes. He eventually sold out many of the union members as he colluded with the studios to cut salaries in Hollywood. Not so heroic!