They went after people who were soliciting child prostitution.  

...f#@king pervs

Agreed!!! Disgusting  and pathetic  is the only way to describe those arrested.

-- Modified on 12/18/2013 12:16:53 PM

Is it's going to give ammo to the do-gooders to keep the spotlight on Montgomery and Sheriff Fucktard to keep up the stings so they can "save the children" through entrapment.    
 I saw there was one 57yr old high school teacher who when found out "she" was 16yr old cheerleader, he wanted her to wear her uniform for $160 FS.  Sick mo fker.    

I agree whole-heartedly eom

30 soliciting a minor for prostitution
31 misdemeanor prostitution charges
21 drug-related felonies
18 adult business misdemeanors
16 outstanding felony warrants

30 soliciting a minor for prostitution
31 misdemeanor prostitution charges
21 drug-related felonies
18 adult business misdemeanors
16 outstanding felony warrants

All this was just MSCO 111 and seems all customers lured from ads.

...would hate to get references from some ticketed ladies.  IJS

I concur that anyone that is desirous to have a 16 year old person perform an illegal sex act is despicable. However, I do not agree with LE methods of how they orchestrate their stings. They failed to mention that the ad that was posted on BP represented an 18 year old female. They also failed to mention that this CRI (confidential reliable informant) did not disclose in many cases that they were  actually 16 until the client or target was at the location. Moreover, they failed to mention the unethical  trickery utilized to entrap many of the targets.  Comes Now, LE is trying to associate the entire adult hobby as a part of these cases. LE may have a problem with governmental misconduct in some or all of these cases. If these ladies are not 16???  Should the government be excused to assist and or conspire with a 16 year old to advertise an illegal enterprise? I think not! This very well is just the beginning of LE agenda to utilize the BP publication to Charge many providers as well as hobbyist.  I have no problem with arresting pedophiles. However, LE should limit their scope to pedophiles and not misrepresent to tax payers that pedophilia is part of the adult hobby that is victimless.

I agree that the conduct of LE is way out of hand.  They tricked that CEO of Wild Oats the way you are describing.  The ad said the provider was 18, and he believed she was 18.  Then he meets with her in a motel room, then the undercover officer said something like "Can you buy me some cigarettes?  I am not old enough."  One can only speculate if the guy even knew what the hell she was talking about.  It wasn't even his intention to meet a 17 year old.   As a side note, the cop who was pretending to be 17 was really in her 30s.  So the guy doesn't leave immediately, and he is charged with soliciting a minor. It is not that she was a really minor, it is that he "thought" she was a minor that is the crime.  

all part of government employee and elected officials who believe they have a moral obligation to battle "sin".  This particular war on sin was an offshoot of the Temperance movement when certain women wanted booze outlawed because some men were spending all their time and money in saloons.  Voila  morals laws (sometimes called blue laws) were born to fight sin and keep Americans "healthy".  Too bad we weren't able to repeal all laws against prostitution when Prohibition was repealed.  
And, please don't lay this at the door of conservatives. Many conservatives are also Libertarian. We think the government needs to get all its laws out of people's bedrooms.  
Whenever this country finally grows up, perhaps we can get government back to its true and legitimate functions and leave citizens alone. (true and legitimate functions is a subject for another day.)

and keep the investigations ongoing.  Why pause in between?? Keep busting those pedophiles!!!! Duh....

Just sayin.

Correct Maxwell, good post.  I wish I could say more...

In AZ it's 18

But if they did that, an old, fat blowbag of hate wouldn't be able to get in front of the TV cameras and say "look at me!".

So by the responses on this post, many folks from other states would get their dicks cut off.

these arrests were made in AZ and the rest of the nation has nothing to do with the topic.

It said that in the year 1880, the age of consent used to be 10 in a lot of states.  But I think that back then (pre-industrial age) people were still arranging marriages for their kids.  So basically kids from different families marry each other so that families could join together for economic reasons.  Not 40 year olds marrying 10 year olds, that would have to have been considered wrong no matter what century you are talking about.  

I'm not in a pissing match with you sport.  The point being...what if someone from a state with a lower age of consent was simply visiting?  There were no consistent cell phone laws from state to state until last year. So continue to "like" your tepid responses.  The universal condemnation in this post was simply that of age, not age in Arizona.

One thing if someone has disdain for dating young women/girls. But where there is no consistency of the application of law for the same behavior is always a challenge.  I remember the uproar years ago when I women visiting from a Scandinavian country was castigated and condemned for being a bad mother when she left her baby in a carriage outside of a restaurant.  That was an accepted practice in her country where crime for her entire country was less than 2% of crime for the given US city.