It basically showed nothing that those who frequent this board don't already know.  It showed a lady vice cop running a bunch of computers and chatting with potential victims on Yahoo.  It also showed that vice does indeed have a vip membership to this site as they showed a "juicy details" screen.  It also showed them bringing up the Eros and Exotics web sites.

A local provider was interviewed but it seemed like they just used a few sound bites from her to help sensationalize the story.  They mentioned that she had been arrested in a sweep and is back working again.

someone, anyone, explain the problem, moral or legal, of online "dates"

i can understand the problem of street walking, because the community and neighborhoods should not have to deal with the 'eyesore' of public trasactions.

but, if everyhting takes place in the privacy of one's home, and no harm is being done to consenting adults, and LE has achieved their goal of cleaning up nighborhoods with street walkers.....WHAT PURPOSE/COMMUNITY SERVICE ARE YOU FIGHTING?

WOW!!
So the "Johns" are called "Hobbyists" & the "Prostitutes" are known as "Providers". TELL US SOMETHING WE DON'T ALREADY KNOW :0

Seriously though, any guesses on who "Janet" was?  And how is it that SHE isn't automatically a target now?  I have a feeling that "Janet" had to have given FOX a little more inside info than what WAS aired.  Wouldn't you agree?  So why didn't they show it?  

Actually, their "Story" made me feel SAFER than it did frighten me into NOT taking calls.  How about you all??  Did last night's story cause ANYONE (hobbyist OR provider) to consider either CURBING their actions or STOPPING altogether?  

= I'm Curious =

You're right. Nothing most of us didn't already know or believe and what we're all on watch for anyway.  While it was a little troubling to actually see TER review details I think it was "worse" to see photos of Providers we know (!!) - although somewhat obscured - because you know those news types looked at the sites and pages the PD guys showed, they didn't select them on their own at random.  Is it ratings week already!?

and further segments will get in deeper. It should be interesting..

There were two other interesting points-

1. I though they said that LE had not only placed ads on the top Internet sites, have a VIP TER membership, but also set-up their own Internet escort sites. (They made some comment about running their own Internet site and that this was the best way to catch people.)

I wonder which one(s)?

2. When the LE "escort" was on the phone with a customer, she made a comment about condoms.  I remember someone posting on the L.A. TER discussion board last year that this is how they were caught by LE, casually just mentioning "yes" to this statement regarding the use of protection.

Did you also notice her saying.......Make Sure You Bring Cash??
OK so do most of us girls take checks?

I was really hopeing for something more from this news segment. I was told that it would be more informative, and shed a bit of a better side our favour? The quote from the provider ( Its just sex!) really set the tone for the whole segment. I was really dissapointed to say the very least.
Can anyone here see anything posative about the news last night? Other than  the fact, you guys now know for sure what vice is up to!

The only answer has been: because it's illegal.

So is spitting on the sidewalk, cursing in public, speeding, smoking pot, drinking under the age of 21..

I thought it was halarious actually.  That guy (newscaster) that said "It's really hard to watch this stuff" looks like someone I have met, LOL.   I gotta say that Sgt. Mark Sullivan is pretty sexy though!

"Janet" is a local Provider, who, as they mentioned, had been arrested once before, last year. She, along with anyone else in the industry, IS a target, continually.

The interview was with Fox6, and with the woman - not with LE, and of course, the news botched her responses to more readily fit the message THEY want to portray.
At least at this time.

From what I understand, much of the interview that DID take place will come out in 'segments', and I would be very interested to see if it all casts ANY other light or perspective on the 'hobby' or our 'community' other than the falsehoods the media insists on.

I'm very proud of her courage for doing what she's done, but it is out of everyone's control what they do with it.

At least, everyone, congratulate "Janet" on her cajoneys. It's gotta start somewhere and she's opened that door for us all..

My following comments on the Monday night "expose" of internet escorts should be viewed as "unfair and unbalanced" (antithesis), as opposed to the "fair and balanced" reporting (thesis) by our local Fox channel.

Although it has been pointed out that Fox-6 is not owned by Rupert Murdoch and is only an affiliate, it certainly shares the same sleazy approach to news that we've come to expect from his operations. For nearly half the program, they were promising the "expose" would be up next -- only for it to show up at the 30 minute mark. Meanwhile, I had to suffer teases from the female anchor such as "They say that Senator Kerry and a woman had an affair, come back to hear what Senator Kerry and the woman have to say" (Both deny, no other evidence, just groundless rumors).

As expected, the actual program didn't give away anything that participants of this board didn't already know. I think I heard a figure of ~100 hobbyists snared by internet website stings. If so, this is actually a fairly meager figure. It was fairly common to arrest ~30 in a single evening for johns cruising El Cajon Boulevard. Would be interesting to see how much per head LE was spending to apprehend these wayward pilgrims.

The pumpkin-head anchor who was "shocked" at the outrages presented in the report was Brian Christie. If he actually was "shocked", he should get out more. Being in the entertainment industry (God knows it's not news), it would be hardly a surprise if one or more in the newsroom weren't hobbyists.

By the way, the real scandal in San Diego is the chronic underfunding (greater than $1 billion) of the city's pension fund, which may involve criminal negligence on the part of city officials. The feds are already investigating, and it may involve substantial improprieties in the bonds they've issued over the past 5 years. Interestingly, Don Bauder in the Reader (late of the San Diego Union) has been all over this story for months. Although Fox-6 led on Monday with this story, where were they when it would have made a difference. Oh, that's right. That would have taken real investigating, real reporting and a real news stations.  

-- Modified on 2/17/2004 5:31:18 PM

-- Modified on 2/17/2004 5:32:13 PM

and our local "major" news media not actually reporting on it?

WOW

HEE HEE 2sense, do you think things will EVER change?

The Copley boy is a (literally) rolling party king and the news stations spend more time on weather and traffic than city hall and it's blunder after blunder after crime after crime.

How many mayors do we need to count back to find one that isn't suspect or convicted? Really?  LOL

All of a sudden I'm thinking it's so ridiculously humorous that it reminds me of Saturday Night Live's spoof MR BILL.  That little clay guy that got crushed no matter what he did. I don't know why it reminds me of that, but it does. OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Elise [email protected]

If we see a cop, we cease...spitting on the sidewalk, cursing in public, speeding, smoking pot, drinking under the age of 21..

In other words, ladies and men don't break laws in the presence of law enforcement.

Internet providing is, I'm guessing, in LE minds, soliciting prostitution, IN LE PRESENCE?  (When people are lax and mention sex, money, condoms, etc.)  So, while the "date" takes place behind closed doors, the advertisement, setting the environment all takes place, here on the internet, in a rather public setting.  At least, one that is easily accessible to cops?  We do know they are here, watching/reading every move we make.

That's just my guess.

[email protected]

Anyone know of a good tattoo removal place?  LE's cutting into my action, and I gotta bunch of mad girls now.  Damn!

Off-topic for this board, but Bauder seems to have been the only guy over at the UT who ever rocked the boat.  He was the only one who examined actual numbers and compared them to the official line in press releases...no wonder he's not there anymore.

Ever see an article critical of the ballpark financing / stadium financing since he left?

OK, back to the smutty sex-talk.  

I think it would be best to tat over the existing tat. It looks better and is faster. I can't believe you're still in town. Hit me up.

jay
[email protected]

It seems as though every few months (at most), there is a story on one of the local stations in regard to this hobby. Yet, every time a story is done, many here jump on the board and act as though the “secret” is out and we will have to see what happens. Many wonder who will get busted next or make a big deal that TER was shown on the telecast. This is nothing new and I doubt that we will see anything new for sometime. A story like this is not much more that filler for the telecast.
    Personally, I could care less about who owns what station and what their political views are. I make up my own mind based on as many facts as I can find. I in no way consider myself smarter than the next guy, just a bit more informed.
    In recent threads, I have seen people ask as to why the police bother providers that advertise online. The argument is that they are not ruining businesses by walking the streets and making a particular area look sleazy. For the most part, I agree with that assessment. I see nothing wrong with advertising a service on the net and conducting business, discreetly, behind closed doors. Oops, I forgot the fact that this is an illegal hobby. I wish it wasn’t. But, I have an open mind and am willing to look at this from many sides, if not all.
        Why should the cop bust a guy who runs a stop sign when no other cars are at the intersection? Safety. That is probably what the officer would say. The same goes with this hobby. The fact remains that none of us know all of the past partners of the last provider or hobbyist that we saw. It’s possible that a past partner was carrying something.
     Now, don’t blow up on me. I am a hobbyist. But, look at it from the other side of the table. Example: John goes to see Jane for an afternoon tryst. They are both consenting adults, so what is the problem. Well, Jane got an STD from a previous customer a week earlier. She just got tested 2 weeks ago and is not scheduled for another for 2 more weeks. Now, John takes this pesky little STD back home to his wife or girlfriend. A few weeks later, the wife goes for her OB/GYN exam and gets the shock of her life. Needless to say, her beau gets a 50-gallon drum of whoop ass opened up on him when he gets home that day. Maybe they get a divorce, maybe they don’t. Also, it’s not unusual for an absent minded John to leave bits and pieces of paper laying around or in his dirty pants with the name and number on them. Then the wife or girlfriend calls the lady and all Hell breaks loose.
    Like I said, this is what the anti-hobbyists will say. If so many feel that this is such a victimless crime, then why don’t those individuals go out and try to overturn or modify the law? I won’t, simply because I believe that a majority of our county/state would not go for it.  
    As far as the pension fund. I think that Murphy is screwed and I can't wait to see him try to get out of it. Let us remember that poop flows uphill. LOL.
    By the way, many felony arrests are made on misdemeanor stops. Go figure. It just usually works out that way. A guy gets pulled over for a tail light out, he starts to sweat like crazy, the cop does a search and finds a gun, drugs, etc. That scenario is so common.  
    Again, please don’t bash the heck out of me for simply stating a point that others on the opposite side of the table would most likely make. I am a proud hobbyist and will continue to hobby under the cover of well-reviewed providers. LOL.  Have a great day.

Last time I checked, this was a Discussion group. Which means that we are entitled to discuss things that interest us as hobbyists and providers. If such discussions are boring to you, then you have every right to ignore them.

To me, it's of much interest to learn what LE is doing in regards to this hobby. I would imagine that any of those arrested by LE for prostitution wished they'd paid more attention to LE activities; just one arrest can ruin your whole day. The great thing about these boards is that you can get information from literally hundreds of participants (think Kubla Khan's general, "Bayan of the Hundred Eyes"), with the exception of the occasional Judas Goat. With this knowledge, you are much more likely to pursue this hobby "safely".

Yes, it's true that there wasn't a lot new on the Fox-6 program on internet prostitution, but I would imagine that the discussion of it on these boards was helpful, especially to newbies.

Although employing well-reviewed escorts provides some level of protection, it would be foolish to think that you are completely immunized. In very general terms, the same techniques used in sophisticated undercover drug busts could be effectively used to go after us, if LE was so inclined. One of the best quotes I ever heard from an attorney goes: "Anyone can be taken down, it's really just a question of how much money and resources you're willing to spend." (see Bill Clinton for further information).

I find your justification of LE going after us because of potential STD transmission to be a "red herring". If LE was truly worried about STD transmission, why would they do just an AIDS test? Why wouldn't they also run a panel of the much more frequent venereal diseases, such as chlamydia, syphilis, gonorrhea etc.? Again, if STD prevention is the key, shouldn't there also be contact tracing of sexual partners? One additional benefit of this board is that it emphasizes the use of condoms. Since these are effective barrier protections for many STD's, it is entirely possible that hobbyists and providers are less exposed to STD's than those who frequent singles bars, and fail to use such protection.

One other point for "thatotherguy", when it comes to announcing that you're better informed than others, that's perhaps something best left for "others" to decide.

Did you read that thoroughly? I never said that I agree with those that are working to eliminate the hobby. I simply stated what their main argument is. Personally, I feel that one can make better arguments when understanding his/her opponents point of view.
   Others are unable to read my mind. So, no, they do not get to pass that judgement.I simply feel that I take more time than others to look at all issues from as many sides as possible before passing judgement or making a statement. Doing otherwise constitutes ignorance.  For some reason, you took so much of that post in such a negative way. Even after I stated several times that it was not meant to piss anyone off. I guess I failed. Can we stop the pissing match now?LOL

-- Modified on 2/19/2004 7:02:43 PM

-- Modified on 2/20/2004 7:08:25 AM

r u meaning to imply that u r still in this city while you r barely holding onto your freedom....hey player u better shake this town man....it is not that serios!...this is a big world fool....u better find another place for yourself in it....it's full of money and bitches....take your bitches and go dummy or I am just gonna have to laugh when i see you on the news busted cause u r just an idiot and a disgrace to the game if you r stupid enough to still be in this town or even come through here to visit while you looking at a life bid...real talk

I was just seeing if anyone reads the UT.  Heard this guy was tattooing the girls that were working for him, "Property of Shugashaft."  What a piece of work...  This board is awesome.  You guys and gals rock!