If you haven't seen it already check out this mornings strib on the 3rd page of the metro section.  1/4 page article on Mpls LE's new prostitution website and planned extensive crackdown on prostitution.

This is a great opportunity to fight for decrim!  Anyone that can should write a letter to the editor of the strib or pioneer press.  Letters should be respectfull.  They can be very direct and forceful, but should not be rude.  I'm in Washington with a very full plate and likely won't have time to get one off myself, but here's a quickie that you can modify for your own use.

JTH

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

I agree wholeheartedly with the need to rid neighborhoods of street prostitution.  I disagree with the way we're going about it.  What we're doing will only serve to push it somewhere else.  Prostitution will exist, and at about the same levels, no matter what we do.  A crackdown in one neighborhood will simply push it to another.  We've seen this throughout history and throughout the world.  We've seen it in Minnesota since prostitution was first outlawed nearly 80 years ago and we've still not learned.

Recognition of this will serve us better than ignoring it.  Only about 15% of the industry is street prostitution.  The rest is done in private in client's homes, hotels, or massage businesses.  Decriminalizing prostitution and allowing it in private between consenting adults will not only reduce street prostitution by allowing a non-offensive alternative, but will also save us over $7 million annually in law enforcement and judicial costs.  If decriminalized, the private portion of the industry would generate an estimated $32 million annually in taxes to the state.

I'd much rather see our police resources used to fight crimes rather than enforce morals.  Decriminalization certainly won't get rid of all street prostitution, but it will go a long way towards it.

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

Here are some talking points you can use in editorials.  This is rough and unedited.

--------------
Talking Points - Decriminalization

-         Overview

o       Prostitution has always existed and always will due to the physiological need for sexual release.

o       Laws have little to no impact on reduction of prostitution nor can they at any reasonable cost.

o       Legalization will save an estimated $1.9b annually in enforcement costs for cities, counties, and states in the US.

o       Legalization will generate an estimated $4.2b annually in income taxes to US, state, county, and city governments.

o       Providing a legal alternative of prostitution for sexual release is likely to reduce violent crimes including child prostitution and rape.

o       Legalization will likely reduce violent crimes surrounding prostitution.

o       Legalization will likely reduce violent crimes in general by allowing law enforcement to focus on real crimes without being distracted by enforcing prostitution laws that have no positive benefit.





-         Some basic facts that are often overlooked

o       Sex and the need for sexual release is a basic human need.  This is a physiological part of our design and cannot be changed, nor would we want to change it.

o       The strength of our sex drive varies greatly by individual from no sex drive at all to a very strong drive that seemingly dominates a person’s life.

§         Approximately 35% of the adult male population and 7% of females has a ‘strong’ sex drive.  For these individuals the need for sexual release on a regular basis may not be optional.

§         Approx 20% of the adult male and 35% of the adult female population has a ‘weak’ sex drive and may feel little need for sexual release of any kind.

o       Some percentage of adults are only able to meet their sexual needs through paid services.  While some adults are able to fulfill their sexual needs through dating and marital relationships, others are not able to do so for a variety of reasons including shyness, time to devote to dating relationships, physical appearance, lack of interest or physical ability from their spouse, etc.

o       There are a greater number of people in society today with a need for sexual release with no natural outlet than perhaps any time in history.

§         Today the time between the onset of a sex drive (13yo) and marriage (28yo), the traditional time when sexual release is routinely available, is greater than at anytime in history.  Historically this has been about a 3 year or less period, today it is approximately 13 years.

§         Until about 75 years ago divorce was almost unheard of, today over 50% of marriages will end in divorce.

o       We’ve allowed the amount of sexual stimulation in society to increase exponentially, but are forcing closed the only safety valve many men (and some women) have.  We are constantly bombarded with sexual images including TV shows, TV ads, print ads, internet ads and sites, and the dress and actions of young people, particularly females.  This has created a dangerous imbalance of sexual stimulation over options for sexual release.  [see Kathryn Kersten’s articles on this subject.]

o       A significant segment of the adult male population needs an avenue for sexual release.  Legalization will provide an alternative to Rape, Child Molestation, Date Rape, and what we’ll call Date Force (The guy convinces the girl, against her will, to agree to have sex.  This is legally consensual, but morally and ethically wrong.  Women don’t need to be put in this situation.)

o       Prostitution has always existed and likely always will.  It is only in the recent 110 years (out of all of history) that there have been any laws prohibiting it in the US.  It is legal throughout all other industrialized nations.

o       St Augustine and Thomas Aquinas both accepted that prostitution was necessary, if not ideal, for an orderly society.  Both stated that without it, society would decrease to chaos of promiscuity and rape.  (A comparison of sex offenses in the US and Europe certainly seems to prove their point.)

o       We can ignore realities or accept them.  By ignoring realities we do more harm to society than by accepting realities and aligning our actions with our philosophy.





-         Why is it illegal in the US today?

o       History.  

§         It was legal in the US (and under English common law) until the late 1800’s when Anthony Comstock initiated his morals crusade.  His crusade was initially against birth-control and some books and was later extended to include consumption of alcohol and prostitution.  All of the original Comstock laws have since been repealed except for prostitution.  The most recent was the SCOTUS decision in Griswold vs CT in 1965 that overturned numerous state laws banning the sale and use of contraceptives.

§         Prostitution is often called the ‘worlds oldest profession’, and for good reason – aside from farming, it is.  It has always existed, it has existed in every society, and likely always will.

§         Consider that through all history, until just the past 90 years, it was either somewhat acceptable or completely acceptable for a man to visit a prostitute.  Women’s attitudes were often that it was OK as long as it was just sex and not an affair.  [what does the Bible say about this?]

o       Why is it illegal now?

§         Morally wrong – Many believe it is morally wrong.  However, do they a right to impose their belief on others when it doesn’t impact them?  Only where it infringes on their own personal liberties.

§         Causes a spread of STD’s – This is possible, especially if you look at the spread of AIDS through many African nations.  However, there is also strong evidence that is may actually reduce the spread.  Surveys of prostitutes in several foreign countries including Germany and Netherlands as well as a recent study of prostitutes in San Francisco indicate that prostitutes have a lower incidence of STD’s and AIDS than of the population in general.  The San Francisco study included age to age comparisons.

§         Causes other crimes – This is because of it’s own illegality.

§         Prostitutes are victims:

·        Of Pimps/Slavery – True.  However, driving the industry underground only makes it easier for slave mongers to ply their trade.  Legalization is likely to significantly reduce the number of people who become victims in this way.

·        Of their clients – True.  Again, this is significantly enhanced because of the legal situation.

·        Of their choice – True.  There are a number of people who enter this industry of their own choice and become victims of the industry.  Legalization however will make it easier for these people to get appropriate counseling.

§         Degrades Neighborhoods – Open street solicitation should continue to be illegal except in designated ‘tolerance’ or red-light zones.  Today only about 7% of prostitutes are ‘street hookers’.

-         Reduce crimes and improve public welfare.

o       Assist in reducing and/or eliminating child prostitution.

§         Potential clients of child prostitutes will, in some cases, choose a legal alternative that meets their needs over an illegal alternative.

§         Prostitution as an industry will become more open thus helping to expose child prostitution rings.

§         Prostitutes and clients, who are in a better position than most to have knowledge of the existence of child prostitution organizations will be more likely to speak up if they don’t have to fear their own prosecution.

o       Reduce the amount of street prostitution, enslaved prostitution and pimping by providing a legal and more acceptable alternative.

§         All of the above issues with child prostitution apply here.

§         Pimping will no longer be necessary, as profitable, or as easy to conduct if prostitution is legalized.

o       Reduce the incidents of serious crimes against prostitutes and customers that currently go unreported.

§         Prostitutes and customers will no longer need to fear reporting crimes related to their own prostitution activities.  People who might commit these crimes will know this.

§         Police will hopefully have a better attitude towards those involved in prostitution if they are no longer considered criminals (enemy) for what they do.

§         An estimated 4% - 13% of women will at some point in their lives be involved in prostitution whether it’s legal or not.  Each one is someone’s daughter.  They need our protection, not our ignorance.

§         There is a danger to customers due to the number of providers and massage outfits that operate underground.

§         An amnesty type program where people are guaranteed not to be prosecuted for prostitution if they are reporting another crime will not work unless that amnesty is for life (in which case the first thing every prostitute and client will do is report a crime in order to get immunity.)  Immunity for a single incident still does not deal with the fear of talking to the police (effectively the enemy) or the fear that the police will then know who they are and will get them again later.

o       Reduce the general incidents of rape and related activities by providing a legal alternative for sexual release.  An estimated 8% of rapes are violence based (vs purely sexual) and would not be impacted by this.  

§         NOW has promulgated the ‘fact’ that all or most rapes are violence based.  While violence is often an element, it is a means not a cause.  The root cause still appears to be sexual release in over 80% of instances.

o       Reduce the spread of STI’s –Prostitutes are more knowledgeable of and more cautious with regard to protection from STI’s and therefore help reduce the spread of STI’s.

§         There have been zero reports of infection among legal prostitutes in Nevada brothels.

§         Though no hard data appear to exist, it is believed that incidents of STI’s among independent prostitutes throughout the US and of all non-street prostitutes in Europe is significantly below that of the general population.

o       Reduce the spread of STI’s II – Many prostitutes do not carry (and therefore do not use) condoms because the police have used the possession of a condom as the basis for a suspicion of prostitution and therefore an arrest.  Similarly, many prostitutes have said that they are fearful of seeing a doctor or getting tested for fear of being turned over to law enforcement.

o       Because of it’s own illegality, Prostitution is a heaven for gang and other illegal activity – Legalization will help to push this portion out into the open where it will in some cases cease to exist on it’s own and in other cases be more easily dealt with by law enforcement.

o       The US law enforcement system was intended and designed to combat crimes, not personal vice –  Using this system to enforce personal morality or vice issues is inefficient, ineffective, and expensive.

o       Make law enforcement the compatriots of, rather than the enemies of, a significant percent of the population.  An estimated 41% of US citizens will be involved in prostitution at some point in their lives.  That’s a large percentage of the population to effectively make enemies with for no good reason.

o       Allow law enforcement to focus on crimes where a victim exists rather than be distracted by enforcing vice (prostitution) laws where no victim exists.

o       Reduce problems for non-sexual massage professionals who are often expected by clients to perform sexual favors.  Since the sexual side of the industry has to operate in a clandestine manner it is difficult or impossible for clients to distinguish between the two.  Non-sexual massage providers are often put in a position of clients doing-the-dance to let them know that they want/expect a sexual release.

o       Reduce incidents of divorce –  A high percentage of divorces are caused by affairs.  Two recent surveys have indicated that spouses are significantly less likely to divorce if their spouse has seen a prostitute to have their physical needs met versus having a non-paid affair that includes an emotional element.  In many societies, such as Italy, it is commonly accepted for spouses to have a ‘paramour’, often paid, to meet their physical needs for sex.

o       Improve the ability for prostitutes to successfully leave the industry –  An estimated 50% of prostitutes have lasting emotional and other issues after leaving the industry.  If they are going to do it anyway, legalization is likely to make it easier for them to receive the counseling they need to manage their lives better.  Primary is handling the emotional issues both during their involvement and after.  Other counseling might include financial management and safety issues.





-         Financial:

o       Reduce taxpayer costs of investigation, prosecution, defense (public defender), judication, incarceration, and rehab.  In 2002 approx $6.9 million was spent in Minnesota (the average state) on enforcement of prostitution laws, enough to fund 69 full-time officers including cars and equipment.

o       Allow law enforcement to focus on victim-based crimes without the distraction of non-victim crimes.  How many violent crimes might be been solved, or better yet, prevented, with 69 additional officers on the street?

o       Does average taxpayer want their taxes used finding out what’s going on in some hotel room that’s having no negative impact on anyone?

o       Religious and morals based organizations such as The Union Gospel Missions are both more effective and more cost effective in reducing incidents of prostitution.  

o       Moral issues cannot be effectively dealt with through legal means.

o       Provide additional tax revenue (estimated $24 million per year).

o       Increase convention and similar business in states where it’s legal.

-         Civil Liberties/Rights.

o       Current laws unreasonably impose some individual’s moral beliefs on others.

o       Violates the privacy rights of consenting adults.

o       Current laws make criminals out of people who have victimized none.  This criminal record makes it difficult for former prostitutes to obtain jobs outside of prostitution in the future causes employment problems for clients who are arrested.

o       There are more women who are, will be, or have been, prostitutes than there are people of numerous minorities including…  As well, there are more prostitutes than there are Gays or Lesbians.  And this doesn’t even include the number of customers.

o       For better or worse, most of the women who work as providers have chosen to do so.  Some because they enjoy it, but most because of the earning potential.  If they are not harming anyone in the pursuit of this profession should we make it illegal for them to do so?

o       Allow better relationship between advocacy services and providers.  Advocacy services include those that help prostitutes leave the industry as well as those that help with financial planning, emotional counseling, and career planning (eg, what do I do after this career?).  A significant number of prostitutes report ongoing emotional issues after leaving the industry, however many learned numerous ways to eliminate or significantly reduce current and future emotional issues by better managing various aspects of their business such as the types of clients they see, services they perform, and possibly most important, limiting the number of clients they see over a given period.  Those that limited themselves to 1 or 2 customers per day generally had far fewer problems than those who regularly or occasionally saw more.

o       Reduce the incidents of serious crimes against prostitutes and customers that currently go unreported.  The illegality of prostitution in many ways denies prostitutes their rights of police protection.

o       Provide for a safer and better environment for prostitutes including allowing them to obtain medical insurance and other typical employment benefits that currently must be covered by state and federal agencies.

o       Allow LE to focus on real crimes where real victims exist.

o       In most instances it’s a victimless crime and therefore not a crime, but a vice.

o       Government has no compelling reason to control prostitution other than where it becomes a public nuisance or where a victim is involved.  An estimated 90% of instances of prostitution do not meet either of these causes.  

§         Street prostitution, outside of a designated tolerance or redlight zone, would meet the definition of a public nuisance, but this comprises less than 7% of all prostitution.

§         A provider meeting a client in a hotel room involves no other parties than the consenting adults involved.





-         Other Points

o       Continue to prosecute pimps, child prostitution, and street solicitation (except in designated tolerance zones).

o       Current laws are more of a moral placebo than anything that actually accomplishes a goal.

o       This is a moral issue (for some portion of the population), with no legal foundation for criminalization, and should be fought as a moral issue, not as a legal one.  The Union Gospel Missions (private non-profit) have had a significantly higher success rate in successfully removing people from the drug and prostitution industry over the past 15 years than all local and state law enforcement combined and have done so with less than 1% of the financial cost.

o       Reduce Police Corruption.  Some (possibly a majority) in law enforcement do not agree with their being used to enforce moral/vice laws that have no victims or valid negative impact on society.  In some cases this leads to simple non-enforcement of the laws, but in others opens the door to their acceptance of bribes (money or sex) to allow prostitutes to continue working.  Would moral increase amongst law enforcement if they got out of the vice business?





-         Not included points/verbages

o       At it’s core it’s a moral issue, not a legal issue, and is best dealt with through religious and other morals based organizations rather than through government.

o       As one provider stated.  There are worse ways to prostitute yourself than with your body – such as an attorney or corporate officer lying or misleading people.

§         What are legal ways people prostitute themselves?

·        Models

·        Athletes

·        Loading trucks at UPS

·        Admin Assistant to a jerk

·        

o       If we want to reduce prostitution we need to try a different approach.  Is there an acceptable trade-off of rapes for prostitution?  EG, as a society would we prefer to have 2 incidents of prostitution if it will eliminate one incident of rape?  What about 20 incidents of mutually consented prostitution to eliminate one rape?  Is there a realistic expectation that this would happen if legalized?  What do worldbank stats show for countries where prostitution is legalized?

§         Doesn’t appear to have worked in Canada or Australia who have a rape incidence twice the US.  Possibly good theory, but needs to be proved.  Australia may still be considered 2nd world to some extent.  Does Canada have similar sexually repressed/puritanical culture as US which accounts for the major difference between US/Canada and European rates?  Thus, legalization has provided no benefits in Canada?  What would happen if Canada made prostitution illegal?

o       Is our society too sexually repressed in some ways (eg, too puritanical), particularly vs Europeans?  Does this cause more problems than it solves?  Does Europe truly have a lower incidence of Rape and is this because of their more open/accepting attitude towards sexual issues?

o       Is there a sexual imbalance?  EG, gobs of stimulation, but repressed options for release.

o       What about people who cannot have sex with a partner?  Either because their partner doesn’t want to or in many cases can’t because of physical and/or psychological limitations.  Is sex a need or simply a desire?  Is masturbation adequate relief or is intercourse with another human the only real option?

o       By making it illegal we have actually promulgated that which we intended to prevent.  EG, the drugs and abuse that go along with prostitution and the visible elements of prostitution such as streetwalkers, johns in cars, condoms laying on the sidewalk, etc.

JTH,  yo have obviuosly put a "little" time and effort into your thoughts on this topic.  I agree with your position whole heartedly.

'Godfather

I aggree . And wouldn't it cut on drugs  ecause street  walkers are high on drugs supplied by there pimps. to keep them working

Great...  I had heard that Mpls was thinking of taking the same track as St. Paul.  If I remember correctly, St. Paul's website ended up going to the MN Supreme Court...  Not sure if they upheld it or just chose not to here the appeal, but there's another issue here.

The original purpose of the St Paul website was to lower the evidentiary standard...  The state has to have lots of carefully gained evidence to get a conviction in front of a jury, and it's too easy for just one guy on the jury to be sympathetic to the defendant's need for some good ol' fashion noggin'.  So what do you do?  You arrest the "john" and out him to his family, employer, neighbors, etc. regardless of the outcome of the trial.

The idea is that you don't have to follow any rules, or put up with the nuisance of things like judges, juries, defense attorneys, or that pesky constitution thing if your only goal is to humiliate the defendent, not convict them.

I'm not sure if St. Paul still outs suspects or only outs convicted people...  And I'm not sure what the plans are for Mpls.

My frustration is not just a constitutional one...  It's more practical than that.  I'm a taxpayer and I pay law enforcement officials to enforce laws, not to humiliate people.  Under what circumstances is it appropriate for any taxpayer-funded government entity to engage in the humiliation of its constituents?  All law enforcement officers in Minnesota appear before a judge in their primary jurisdiction and take an oath to serve as honest officers of the court...  In what way is the judicial system being advanced by bypassing it and using public vigilanteism in its place?

And even assuming that people are only posted after being convicted, we still have a problem...  The city's police departments are imposing sentencing, as being outed is part of the punishment for the crime...  For most, it's the most significant part.  Huh?  In Minnesota, only a judge can set the sentence for a convicted defendent.  The DA can propose sentencing, but ONLY a judge, not the police, can set the sentence.  In Minneapolis and St. Paul, the police departments have chosen to set their own sentence that again bypasses judicial control.

These web sites are wrong at every level and the elected leaders of these cities are duty-bound by their own oaths to root out the  LE officials behind them and prosecute them.  The use of sworn police officers, and the use of taxpayer-funded city resources to mock the judicial system is criminal misconduct and the city councils are negligent if they do not insist that the city attorneys prosecute those behind this.

-- Modified on 5/19/2004 8:49:50 AM

From my viewpoint, it comes down to this.  So long as minors are not involved, no one is being coerced, no one is neing harmed by someone else, or is having their property stolen or damaged by another then I see no justification for this activity to be illegal.  Indeed, I regard it as harmful to society for this activity to be illegal because some of our society's resources, which are finite, are being wasted instead of being used for something helpful.  There are real crimes that truly hurt people being committed all the time.  It offends me that my tax dollars are wasted on this sort of matter.  I have never in my life felt any safer or that my life was improved in any way when I have heard about someone being arrested or convicted for being or patronizing a prostitute.

I can sympathize with folks who don't want street hookers in their neighborhoods or in front of their businesses.  That probably needs to remain illegal except for the possible establishment of a RLD.  I'm in full agreement with you otherwise!

The resources expended in 2002 enforcing prostitution would have solved 17 murders.

Write!

I wouldn't want it in front of my home or business either.  I view that as a matter of regulation, just like their are various regulations, such as zoning, that control the activities of other businesses but don't make them illegal.