Which of the following things could the United States ban with successful results? Which would fail, and or potentially cause even bigger problems if we try to ban them.
If you believe there are some, but not others, you must explain why some work, while others do not.
Is it taxed?The cannabis business in Canada was semi-organized at best, when biker gangs got involved. For the most part the entire industry was developed by average Joe 'pot-heads' who like their weed and learned to grow some for themselves.
The discovery of the process of how & when THC begins to be processed in the plant was a revelutionary revelation.
Add grafting, cloning (by scion) and hydroponics hit the scene and pot went from an average 12% THC to 20 & 25%.
That's when the "Rodeo Drive" strains began, soon after the "4-20" movement (even cops still don't get that code)
Today's pot retails at about $150 to $300 per ounce for bud on the legal market here. And there is some really slick stuff
The grey market sells buds (it costs the same to grow low grade THC as it does high grade so there's no sliding scale) adjusted for inflation what was a $20 lid (street ounce) is now $41, delivered or $140 total.
So even with making it 'legal' the larger market here is free range and forever will be.
I am disputing your premise that they are consenting in the first place.When you consent to selling your body, you consent to people buying your body.
It's not about the wage.Just like with any job, your employer cannot make you work for slave wages.
I do think buying sex should be illegal across the board.If that’s your opinion, then shouldn’t you want it to be illegal across the board?
The results from The Netherlands and Germany (and other countries that have fully legalized it) cast a lot of doubt on that theory. Sex trafficking and abuse of prostitutes are rampant in those societies, and trafficking got worse after buying sex was legalized.Prostitution is a furtive, back alley business, puting vulnerable woman in jeopardy, solely because it is illegal.
Brothels would not be banned under the selling-legal-buying-illegal framework, unless they are acting as an employer. If it's just a building that the entrepreneurs use to run their business in exchange for paying rent, which also offers bodyguard services to its tenants in exchange for a fee, then no problem.Hundreds of street hookers get beaten up or go missing every year. Legal cathouses on the other hand protect the sex workers, etc.
Everyone is cut out to have dignified work of some sort where they are not abused. And if they aren't (e.g. due to some mental/physical impairment) then we as a society should care for them instead of letting people sexually exploit them.Not every woman is cut out to be a typist or assembly line drone.
The issue is not the amount of money they make.It's a well paying job, with benefits, medical care etc. security.
Helping incels is pretty far down on my list of priorities. They can work on self-improvement or seek psychological help without abusing women in the process.I paraphrase Mark Twain, ***** don't wear out.
Plus as I said, it would help a lot of incels & maybe prevent some mass shootings.
Honestly, I don't know the numbers on that. I think it's probably a bit more nuanced than that, and suspect there are far more murders stopped by personal choice than the law, but that's not a hill I'm prepared to be murdered on.
It is interesting (if predictable) that the "bans don't work" position hits a brick wall at 100mph when the subject turns to a thing somebody wants banned. Then the "bans don't work" position magically transforms into "If it saves just ONE life then it's a success!"
Really? How man cars do you see on the road without airbags, seatbelts or catalytic converters?None would be successful.
So who wants CFCs? Who really wants a car without airbags or seatbelts?That is the basis for much of both crime and commerce, supplying people with what they want.
Right, but alcohol is incredibly popular. Heroin not so much.You can try to legislate morality, but as long as there is a desire for something and/or providing it is profitable, then it will still occur by hook or crook.
Alcohol Prohibition is the best example, as there was an actual Constitutional Amendment, the highest "law of the land" and it simply did not work.
& like drug prohibition, the product was killing people, either with the poisons from distilling (heads & tails) that are usually dumped by quality distillers, or made with wood alcohol & other crap. Also like the drug wars of today, bootleggers would kill off competitors, or during hijacking their competitions shipments.The actions enforcing prohibition simply weren't strong enough. If the anti-alcohol force had been 30 million instead of just 3k we might have made a dent.
Having sex is okay, as long as it's free? Not everyone wants a relationship, including woman. Of course we are assuming all sex workers are women.The results from The Netherlands and Germany (and other countries that have fully legalized it) cast a lot of doubt on that theory. Sex trafficking and abuse of prostitutes are rampant in those societies, and trafficking got worse after buying sex was legalized.
Sweden got it right. They made it legal to sell sex and illegal to buy sex.
Brothels would not be banned under the selling-legal-buying-illegal framework, unless they are acting as an employer. If it's just a building that the entrepreneurs use to run their business in exchange for paying rent, which also offers bodyguard services to its tenants in exchange for a fee, then no problem.
Everyone is cut out to have dignified work of some sort where they are not abused. And if they aren't (e.g. due to some mental/physical impairment) then we as a society should care for them instead of letting people sexually exploit them.
The issue is not the amount of money they make.
Helping incels is pretty far down on my list of priorities. They can work on self-improvement or seek psychological help without abusing women in the process.
Yes.Having sex is okay, as long as it's free?
Then don't have a relationship. No one said that was required.Not everyone wants a relationship, including woman.
Men should be protected from sexual exploitation too.Of course we are assuming all sex workers are women.
Safeguards against sexual exploitation are not "puritan bull crap." Do you think that buying child prostitutes should be legal, and if not, why not?I'd say that there must be regulations to make sure the workers rights are protected & they are free to leave the trade whenever. All this puritan bull crap has created the problems.
Wow child prostitutes' huh. You know you lost the argument when you bring child prostitutes up. That would not be allowed in a legal regulated cat house.Yes.
Then don't have a relationship. No one said that was required.
Men should be protected from sexual exploitation too.
Safeguards against sexual exploitation are not "puritan bull crap." Do you think that buying child prostitutes should be legal, and if not, why not?
???Wow child prostitutes' huh. You know you lost the argument when you bring child prostitutes up.
That's not what I asked. I asked why not. What separates the child prostitute case from the adult prostitute case? If it's something about consent, then ask yourself how much consent is actually given when a desperate person performs sexual acts for dollar bills.That would not be allowed in a legal regulated cat house..
What do you do for you money????
That's not what I asked. I asked why not. What separates the child prostitute case from the adult prostitute case? If it's something about consent, then ask yourself how much consent is actually given when a desperate person performs sexual acts for dollar bills.
Not sure why that's relevant. Data science and AI?What do you do for money?
You're not sure?Not sure why that's relevant. Data science and AI?
Really? How man cars do you see on the road without airbags, seatbelts or catalytic converters?
When was the last time you bought an aerosol can with CFCs?
So who wants CFCs? Who really wants a car without airbags or seatbelts?
Right, but alcohol is incredibly popular. Heroin not so much.
Regular guns are incredibly popular, but there are far fewer Assault Rifles. Right now in Australia where it's illegal to buy an assault rifle, it's still possible to find one, but they cost like $35,000.
If we managed to ban them in America, I'm willing to bet it would be incredibly difficult to find one anywhere, and even if you did it would be unreliable, poorly made, and incredibly expensive. That's not even factoring in the reality that you'd be hard pressed to find bullets for it.
Was it's goal to give rise to organized crime? It sure succeeded at that.I think it depends on your definition of "successful"
Everybody was taught prohibition failed but it actually succeeded in its goals
Opinion | Actually, Prohibition Was a Success (Published 1989)
www.nytimes.com
Letting strangers jizz on one's face for money is not the same as flipping burgers for money. They are qualitatively different.You're not sure?
So your selling your mind not your body, the difference ends there, you're selling something.
Yeah, I like building AI. But even if I didn't, it would still not be the same as prostitution. People aren't trafficked into becoming data scientists.Do you enjoy your work?
Recidivism in drunk driving is down here by 67% since the current penalties were enacted, which include installation of manadory ignition interlock systems (at the driver's expense), even for a first offence. On the 4th conviction w/in 10 years, you lose your licence w/ no chance of ever getting it back. (first offence is 1 year) Deaths due to drunk driving are down 16%.Any discussion of "banning" something has little meaning without also discussing the penalty for violating the ban and the availability of the means to do so.
Speeding and drunk driving are banned, but people still do them routinely because the penalties for them are a joke, and the means to do them are readily available.
Anyone who claims to care about saving innocent lives without also demanding that we dramatically increase the penalties for speeding and drunk driving, and cut off the availability of the means to do both of these things, is a liar.
Letting strangers jizz on one's face for money is not the same as flipping burgers for money. They are qualitatively different.
Yeah, I like building AI. But even if I didn't, it would still not be the same as prostitution. People aren't trafficked into becoming data scientists.
I think that the logic that prostitution is just like any other job with some unlikable duties is fundamentally flawed, and leads to some pretty horrifying conclusions. Which is why I brought up child prostitution.
If prostitution is just like any other job, it would imply that child prostitution should be legal...at least for kids old enough to work jobs (which is 14 in most states). And even for younger kids, it would imply that the only problem is a violation of child labor laws, instead of a much more severe sex crime.
IMO it makes much more sense to view prostitution as inherently victimizing. People, regardless of age, are not actually consenting to sex if money is changing hands. Which is why buying sex should be illegal.
On the 4th conviction w/in 10 years, you lose your licence w/ no chance of ever getting it back. (first offence is 1 year) Deaths due to drunk driving are down 16%.
Sex is fine if its free. Or is that degrading also?Letting strangers jizz on one's face for money is not the same as flipping burgers for money. They are qualitatively different.
Yeah, I like building AI. But even if I didn't, it would still not be the same as prostitution. People aren't trafficked into becoming data scientists.
I think that the logic that prostitution is just like any other job with some unlikable duties is fundamentally flawed, and leads to some pretty horrifying conclusions. Which is why I brought up child prostitution.
If prostitution is just like any other job, it would imply that child prostitution should be legal...at least for kids old enough to work jobs (which is 14 in most states). And even for younger kids, it would imply that the only problem is a violation of child labor laws, instead of a much more severe sex crime.
IMO it makes much more sense to view prostitution as inherently victimizing. People, regardless of age, are not actually consenting to sex if money is changing hands. Which is why buying sex should be illegal.
I think my last post was pretty polite. Since you chose to open with this sentence, this post will be less polite.The last paragraph makes zero goddamn sense and is nothing more than a bunch of word salad.
No it's not. And the people who pretend to believe this know perfectly well that it's not. If your child, spouse, friend, or relative got this particular job, would you congratulate them on pursuing their dreams? If a person on unemployment refused to take a job as a prostitute for which they were qualified, would you regard them as a lazy bum? If a little girl wanted to grow up to be a prostitute just like mommy, would you see this as a heartwarming story of family loyalty?Sex work is work, just like any other exchange of labor for compensation.
Waiters and mechanics aren't being trafficked in record numbers. We don't have an entire class of laws dedicating to waitering offenses like we do for sex offenses. We don't have an age of consent for waitering aside from general child labor laws. We don't have major scandals where public figures are secretly hiring waiters. We don't consider it a tragedy if teenagers get jobs as waiters; if anything it shows ambition.You don't go up to a waiter or mechanic and say "you didn't actually consent to being a waiter or mechanic right?"
Getting a job that requires a driver's license implies that you have a certain set of skills. Your argument is that the only reason child prostitution is bad is that children lack the required technical skills in pleasuring perverts? And that if they were better at the job, it would be OK?Your "it's not comparable because kids can consent to sex work" argument is wack. It's more akin to, say, getting a job that requires a driver's license.
The evil shit is perpetrated by the assholes who exploit prostitutes. If it were up to me, the criminal penalties would be much harsher than a slap on the wrist. You'd do some serious prison time for sexual assault if you violated someone who only "consented" because you dangled a dollar bill in front of their face.And none of the faulty rationale you've provided is justification for the state banning it, and all the evil shit that comes with police trying to enforce those bans.