You do the same thing every time where you just claim to talk to important people in the legal system in Tijuana who supposedly assure you that prostitution is legal.  All just conjecture until you can demonstrate otherwise.  Show me in the penal code where there is an exception to prostitution.  In fact, post the actual code and tell me which part of that code allows prostitution.

And talking to someone who is the equivalent of a US district attorney would be rather foolish to get clarification on state law, since a US attorney is a federal attorney and the penal code I cite is the state law, not the federal law.  You are correct, prostitution is not illegal per federal law.  It is also not illegal per city ordinance that I know of.  It is illegal per state law.

Bars with curtains on the doors are public places.  It is actually a special type of public place which is referred to as "private property with public access", in this case it being restricted public access where minors are not permitted.  This means you would not be guilty of trespassing by entering as you would if you jumped the fence into someone else's front lawn without being invited.

Your argument about public prostitution vs private prostitution is quite ridiculous as well.  "It's legal if the police don't find out about it."  Well doesn't that go for any law?  Until you post some actual substance, I'm afraid all we'll get is hearsay and conjecture from you.  I've posted the penal code several times and it speaks for itself.  You going on and on about "But this guy told me, I swear!  He's an attorney!" is worthless.

Kadjevic...IF, AS YOU CLAIM, PROSTITUTION IS ILLEGAL IN TIJUANA THEN WHY DOES THE GOV'T ISSUE LICENSES (A/K/A HEALTH CARDS) TO PROSTITUTES?

In case you didn't know, a health card means a woman can legally work as a prostitute in Tijuana. You are aware aren't you that the gov't regularly checks to see if women working as prostitutes--on the streets in the Zone of Tolerance, as well as in the bars and MPs located both inside and outside the Zone of Tolerance--have a health card.  Those without a health card are arrested; those with a health card are allowed to continue working as prostitutes.    

You wanted substance, you just got it.  At a level even you should be able to understand.

-------------------------

In Tijuana, there are laws that say a person under XX can't drive, that a person has to drive on the right side of the road, that a person must stop at a red light, the a person can't go over X mph, etc.

This doesn't mean that driving is illegal.  As witness the fact the gov't issues driver's licenses.

In Tijuana, there are laws that say a person under 18 can't be a prostitute, that prostitutes can't solicit customers in public places, that a person with a STD can't work as a prostitute, that a person can't operate a brothel, etc.

This doesn't mean that prostitution is illegal.  As witness the fact the gov't issues licenses (health cards) to women working as prostitutes.

----------

You obviously don't understand the law as it does not outlaw prostitution, it only governs how prostitutes operate.  By your line of reasoning--that because solicitation in public, etc is illegal--then driving a car is illegal because there are things motorist can't do.

If, like me, you'd discussed these laws with an attorney you'd understand they govern what prostitutes can and cannot do.  And that prostitution is legal in Tijuana (just as driving a car is legal) although there are thing a prostitute can't do just as there are things a motorist can't do.

ONCE MORE:  WHY DOES THE GOV'T ISSUE HEALTH CARDS TO PROSTITUTES?  

The answer is because prostitution in Tijuana is a legal activity--like driving a car--when conducted within the boundaries established by law.  


-- Modified on 2/26/2012 12:12:50 AM

You don't have to ask it 3 times.  I can read and have an attention span longer than 15 seconds.

Comparing being a hooker to driving a car is ridiculous at best.  If you want to have an even comparison, you could say that having sex is not illegal, but having sex for money is.  Driving a car is not illegal.  But driving under the influence, or using your car to hurt someone is.

The health department is not the police.  The authorities who check health cards are not state police.  I addressed that in the other post.  State monies for drug addicts are used to treat drug addiction even though narcotics use is illegal.  The funding of a program to curb the dangers of illegal activity doesn't make the illegal activity somehow legal.  That is a fallacious argument.

So I answered your's.  Now, here's my question:  What part of article 268 do you not understand?

CAPITULO III CODIGO PENAL DE BC
ULTRAJES A LA MORAL PUBLICA

ARTICULO 268.- Tipo y punibilidad.- Se aplicará prisión de uno a siete años y de veinte a cien días multa:

I.- Al que fabrique, reproduzca o publique libros, escritos, imágenes u objetos obscenos y al que los exponga, distribuya o haga circular;

II.- Al que publique por cualquier medio, ejecute o haga ejecutar por otro exhibiciones obscenas;

[b]III.- Al que de un modo escandaloso invite a otro al comercio carnal.[/b]

That doesn't say it's ok if it's not in public, it doesn't say it's legal in certain areas.  It is illegal per state law.  Your argument of selective enforcement is only valid in a practical sense, but not in a legal sense.  Like I've always said, you can say the chances of getting charged with this are slim, but you can't tell me this doesn't exist in the penal code because I'm reading it right here.

Try and refute what's in the penal code.  I want to see this.

I can't comment on Google Translate.  

Comercio carnal is a nice way of describing the exchange of sex for items of monetary value, mainly money and money equivalents.  Inviting in this sense describes the person who propositions the other.  If you solicit a prostitute, then that would be you, or if a prostitute propositions you, then that would be her.  Keep in mind these are crimes in the state penal code, so I can't comment on enforcement by city traffic cops or health department officials.  These crimes are investigated by state police detectives and prosecuted by attorneys who work for the PGJE.

Article 266 concerns lenocinio which has broad terms within the same article.

If you look it up, it's pretty self explanatory.  Living off of the earnings of a prostitute or anyone connected with that business is illegal.  Assisting in any way such as driving a vehicle or helping book appointments for her would be illegal as well.

An interesting portion of Article 266 states that "IV.- El que promueva, publicite, invite, facilite o propicie por cualquier medio para que una persona o personas tengan relaciones o actos sexuales con menores de edad, incapaces y/o inimputables."

Inimputables is an interesting one.  Legally this can be defined as someone that is not in their right frame of mind.  This can be someone high on narcotics, intoxicated from alcohol, or in such dire financial straits that she is not fully capable of understanding the consequences of her actions.  A small toddler at home needing formula could be considered enough of an emotional and mental strain to render an otherwise legal adult to be labeled inimputable, thus driving her to prostitution as a way to support her children.  Notice how this is in the same subsection as having sex with a minor, so the penalty range outlined is the same.  Obviously having sex with a minor is more serious, so you would get the max in the range if you for some reason decided to do this, but even the lower end is a pretty hefty sentence to be in Mexican prison.

Keep this in mind if legal trouble were to arise and someone were to try and claim innocence to keep herself out of jail.

The existence of these laws cannot be disputed, as I've just cited them.  You can debate enforcement and how you would or wouldn't be caught all day, but I'm sick of people flat out saying these laws don't exist and giving bad information to people otherwise ignorant of Mexican law in the state of Baja California.

Are you not the same person who has blatantly asked the readers to flaunt the guideline of the State Dept for the US citizens to travel with US passport when travelling to Mexico? I have also heard some pimps, south of San Diego, are also saying the same thing to get more clients.  Do you have any connection with them?

Sorry for the confusion.  The person I was referring to is BURT2010.

Yes they are all women.But the bottom line is they are whores and we are giving them money for sex.This bullshit of hobbest and provider is funny.Call it like it is. What does being called a provider make you feel better about taking cock for money? Does calling your self a hobbest make you sleep better when you go home to the wife.Your a monger and she is a whore hence the term whoremonger.

I was enjoying the conversation and curious to know your arguments until I got to this one.

Your understanding and explanation of the term "inimputables" is utter nonsense.

The word means that a person does not have the mental capacity to know what he or she is doing.

http://mx.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070823140831AAMg1hJ

It is another way of saying insane.

To claim that having sex with someone who has a child at home and needs the money is unlawful because that person is inimputable is like saying someone who needs to earn a living is mentally incompetent because they are compelled to work. You are either intentionally BSing or you dont know what you are talking about.

Having sex with someone who is under the legal age or insane is a form of rape in MX just as it is in the US. That is what the law you cite means. Article 266, Part IV, from what you quote, is not even about prostitution. It is about statutory rape.

Hahaha you go off Yahoo Answers Mexico for legal interpretation huh?  Mental capacity is a very broad term that is interpreted differently depending on the application.  Your attorney would argue that it only applies to mentally handicapped people and the State would argue that someone hard-pressed for funds on the verge of utter poverty would not make rational decisions.  It would be up to your lawyer and the courts to fight it out, but your lawyer would obviously charge you by the hour.  Want to risk it?  I wouldn't.

The Supreme Court of Mexico has said that it is not the State's job to interpret charges and case circumstances.  It has also said that it is the State's job to interpret charges.  Which one is correct?  It's a dice roll.  Every country's legal system is like this.  You saying anything otherwise shows your naivety and the citation of Yahoo Answers Mexico really shows it clear.

Either your Spanish is completely sub-standard or you're looking at a completely different penal code than I am.  Section IV does mention minors, but also mentions incapacity.  However, you don't need to meet all subsection requirements to be charged.  You only need to meet 1.  Section I, II, or III is good enough for any State attorney to levy a charge against you if he or she feels it necessary.

You're confusing law theory with law practice.  One is taught in the classroom and one is argued over in court.  The latter is never certain.  But they don't address that in Yahoo Answers, do they?

I'm a lawyer, you dumb shit.
I gave anyone who happened to read your nonsense and wanted a meaningful explanation of why you dont know what you're talking about, a simple one.

Nothing you wrote has any legal meaning or value. Period.
All you do is invent terms that do not exist and twist them to support an absurd argument.
You cite a law that is not even relevant to the issue you raised.
Statutory rape is not about prostitution; it is unlawful however it is practiced, whether money is involved or not. The law you cite is about statutory rape.

I waste enough of my professional life dealing with attorneys who either invent facts or misrepresent the law and dont want to waste any of my private life on it - especially not in the case of someone who so clearly has no idea what the hell he is talking about. You quoted a Spanish word and pretended the phrase means something it clearly does not. So I quoted a simple translation of the word and then explained what it means within the context of the quoted sentence.

The comments made above this one about the Health Card were a great explanation and should have ended the issue.

The fact that providers openly work in TJ makes this conversation essentially worthless, except to those who are curious about how and why and what the limitations on those rules are.

What got me is that your comments about the law are such utter nonsense I figured I should not leave them unaddressed since it was so obvious how and why they are.

You are either a moron or for some reason hoping to worry people over nothing. Either way, you are a waste of time to bother about other than to explain why for someone who might not see it so easily.

But if you personally fear that prostitution in TJ is unlawful, I recommend that you not take part in it, and respect the laws of a sister nation.  

Haha.  A lawyer who cites Yahoo Answers Mexico.  You obviously have a problem reading the penal code in Spanish.  You ignore sections 1-3 completely.  Wherever you practice law, it's definitely not in any state in Mexico and it's also obvious that you haven't gone to University anywhere Spanish is the common language.

The health card question is a moot point.  Health measures taken do not make a behavior legal.  That's like saying using heroin is legal because clinics will take used needles to discard them to stop the spread of HIV.  They know the needles are used for heroin and other narcotics.  It's a different function.  Can you refute this?  Do health measures make all associated behavior legal?

Can you, without using Yahoo or Wikipedia (Burt's favorite), show me where in the penal code that Article 266 Subsections 1-3 are not valid?  Because the law says what it says, and you saying "No, you're wrong, I'm a lawyer" doesn't make it disappear.  Subsection 1 says that "comercio carnal" is illegal.  Tell me how it's actually really legal and the penal code is wrong.  Anything else is your opinion or point of view.  Show me something legal to refute the penal code.  Going to need something concrete instead of just "take my word for it, i'm an attorney who doesn't speak Spanish to any educated degree" reasoning.

Like I said, I dont have the time or interest to play this game with someone who either is a moron or intentionally trying to confuse people.

I do not know you so I will not make guesses about which of the two fits you. You apparently now either agree with me that your use of the word inimputable was misleading and that the section you used to conjure up concerns is not even about prostitution; or you simply do not understand the sentence you quoted and cannot respond to my explanation about why it deals with statutory rape and not prostitution.

Anyway, if you really are convinced that prostitution in all its forms, wherever and however practiced, is illegal in TJ, and a risk to Americans taking part in it, then you should ignore the reviews of TER; not visit the zone; stay away from escorts...and keep yourself safe. You get to make that decision for yourself. That kind of freedom exists in both nations and you get to enjoy it in whichever nation you are able to visit.

My knowledge and experiences tell me that prostitution in TJ - in the places I visit and the ways I take part in it - is legal and relatively safe, as well as fun and generally worth the absurd hassle of crossing the border back to the US.  

-- Modified on 7/22/2012 5:45:28 PM

"It's legal because I said so."  Not going to work on anyone with more than minimal intelligence.

Here's an answer to your question.  I've always answered it before, but since you stop at the first few sentences to respond, you keep missing it: Article 266 Subsection 4 deals with statutory rape.  Subsections 1-3 do not.  Subsection 2 actually spells out "prostitucion" clearly.  Subsection 3 spells out again "prostitucion".  But I doubt you read that far.  Article 268 deals with "comercio carnal" just like Article 266 Subsection 1.  Same thing.

I keep telling you, but you have this attachment to Subsection 4 that is almost morbid.  Anyone with common sense can read this and see I'm quoting the Penal Code of Baja California and you're quoting yourself with the "It's legal because I said so.  Trust me, I'm at attorney, even though I don't speak Spanish."  That will not work in front of a judge, unfortunately.  Won't keep you out of the papers if you get caught.  It's not even a valid defense to be used in court.

Makes me think you don't really want an answer to the questions you ask because I keep answering them and you keep saying the same thing.  Do Subsections 1-3 of 266 even exist in your mind?  I mean we all know they're there.  Is it a thing where you're unable to read more than 2-3 sentences in a post, or are you intentionally trying to make me laugh?  By the way, I'd bet my life that you're not a criminal attorney and I'd bet all my money that you're not even a lawyer.  It's so obvious.

That's true why pay 130.00 doller. I would not. that paying to much. learn the art of making the deal. with 130 you can get layed all nigth, have more than a few beer and dinner too. it's all part of the adventure of going down south. make plans with a few friends or just a wing man for safty.

From a guy that has paid $400 I would think you could appreciate, better service, better chicas, better price.