Ron Rosenbaum, a talk radio host in Minneapolis, wrote this. He makes great points, especially all the money wasted in the year-long investigation.

====================


Ron's Rants
Wednesday 06-10-2009 11:05am CT

Who's the Victim?

Sunday's Star Tribune's above-the-fold screaming headline, "Cops bust 'Nice Guys' Ring" said it all. As the story breathlessly announces, the Minneapolis Police Department's Violent Offender Task Force has apparently spent more than a year (and God knows how many tax dollars) building a federal case against the organization.


And just what is the organization they've been building a case against? Basically a group of high-end hookers brought to town by a handicapped ex-assistant Hennepin County attorney who, according to the story, made no money from the deal! And who were the johns? A group of some 30 well-to-do gentlemen who share one thing in common: "a love of expensive prostitutes."


And one more thing: They're called "Nice Guys" for a reason. According to the article they share a common bond: They have clean backgrounds and don't believe in mistreating women. The women, by the way, charge somewhere in the neighborhood of $500 an hour and sometimes turn four tricks a day. $2000 a day--not bad when you consider that the vast majority of Americans don't make that kind of dough in a week.


And how many of these hookers have been physically abused by the "nice guys?"  None, according to the article. My question: What's the problem?


Consenting adults having sex with other consenting adults for money. And the whole criminal enterprise masterminded by a handicapped guy who doesn't make a dime off the operation.


Is this the best use of the Violent Task Forces's time? With gang bangers, rapists and drug dealers coming out of the woodwork, wouldn't you rather the task force focus on actual violent crime? I would, but then as a libertarian at heart, I'd prefer prostitution--along with gambling and marijuana--be legalized, taxed and controlled.


I wasn't born yesterday and I understand that all prostitutes don't have it as good as this group. But I've felt for years if we legalized the world's oldest profession it would be a win-win. The women (or men) would be registered, medically examined and regulated. No more pimps and dangerous liaisons. It would all be out in the open. Likewise gambling. Since the state is already heavily involved in various gambling enterprises, why not legalize and tax the one form that has better odds than the Powerball, scratch tickets, horse racing etc.--sports betting?


Like prostitution, people will do it whether it's legal or not but with my proposal, the activities will be regulated and, equally important during a time of huge deficits, taxed.


It's time for the Ron Paul libertarian wing of the Republican Party to rise up and seize the reins. The public is ready and if the pols in the legislature aren't, then in time-honored tradition, we should throw the bums out.

I'd be curious to see how the letter to the editor follow up this.

Most of the civilized world has some legal sex-work allowed.

When will the US join it?

LE spent hundred of thousands, maybe more, when they busted the Desert Diva agency. They enforced the RICO laws, photographed the multi million $ home in PV, all the luxury cars, (Ferarris, Hummers, MB etc). LE implied that the assets were worth millions, guess what, everything was leased, and the few homes owned by the operators of DD, were under water. Bottom line the yield from RICO will be very small. Tax payers foot the bill, all for what? Then LE goes after guys who wrote reviews. Talk about LE running wild.

i just want them to apply common sense when enforcing them.

use the laws to do what they were created to do.. protecting women from being trafficked, protecting minors,  and keeping hookers off the street.

instead of using the laws to get a cheap thrill.

they get to investigate us (just doing the homework guys)... they get to see us naked and talk dirty (fun fun) and then they get to handcuff us. (bdsm fantasy fulfilled)

and they are the ones getting paid for it.
the taxpayers are the ones who pay them to fullfill their perverted fantasies.

no wonder they make up so much negative bullshit about us to justify "doing their job" ... i bet they're working overtime whenever its available too.

read the arrest reports... they always have the girl get naked.

OF COURSE we are a priority.

theres all kinds of laws that arent enforced but just stay on the books in case they're needed. ..

theres actually a federal law that limits the # of dildos in a residence to 4. .. arizona only allows 2 per residence.... but is there any task force setting up stings to catch all the violators ?  NO

THAT WOULD BE SILLY WOULDNT IT

tell the hillbilly swine to pay for their own goddamn sessions when they are off duty and get back to doing their job while on the clock.... they are supposed to protect society not punish it.

Agreed mrfisher...

Oddly it is legal its called a Girlfriend or even worse marriage ! --- dinner out, shopping and then back for bedroom fun...

Oddly whats the difference !

You are the kind of woman who I would like to see representing us providers.  Or at least me.  I know of one woman who 'thought' she represented us all, and she was a disgrace to women and the business, and she runs a large site that is supposed to be helping us and keeping us safe?
You know the laws apparently, and you state things really well.
I hadn't heard about le indicting the reviewers, I haven't kept up lately on the whole DD bust?

good point about the naked girl & remember LE are getting away with more & more like consuming alcohol & eating fancy lunches and carry on courting a lady over pertsonal choice rather that cleaning up crime, I bet if you look at LE reports & match them up with the officer , you will see a pattern of a type like (blond with big boobs) or (exotic types)  (tall thin)( (petite & curvey) & "pretty" being a common denominator.  You will not find a lady with no teeth & dirty with sores being targeted  & elaboratly set up

also busting lonely men is just plain evil

to bad you are not taking responsibility for your own actions.  You need someone to stand in front of you to protect you?  I think you lost something in translation of being an independent provider.

Who are you referring to as REPRESENTING YOU?  You and only you are responsible for your own safety.  I highly doubt Anna wants to be responsible for you or anyone else.