Which country more libertarian? Britian legalizes "small brothels"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,136
Location
Washed out of Four-dollar Bayou. Now I'm... somewh
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4619098.stm


New law to permit small brothels

About 80,000 women in Britain work as prostitutes

The law could be changed to allow two prostitutes and a receptionist or maid to work together legally in brothels, the government has confirmed.

Currently only lone prostitutes can offer sex from flats or other premises without breaking the law.

Launching the new prostitution strategy for England and Wales, minister Fiona Mactaggart said that working in groups would be safer for women.

The Home Office plans also include tougher rules for men who buy sex.

Criminal gangs

The strategy also means more kerb-crawlers could lose their driving licences, while prostitutes would get help over drugs and housing.

Head-to-head: The strategy

Ministers ditched earlier plans for licensed red-light zones, believing they could send out the wrong message.

Ms Mactaggart said such zones only shifted the problem to other areas.

"I cannot accept that we should turn a blind eye to a problem that causes misery for people living in or near red-light areas," she said.

"There is no evidence that decriminalisation or licensing prostitution would achieve our objectives of reducing exploitation, improving the safety of those involved and making local communities safer."

But she said prostitution would not be eradicated "overnight" and evidence from sex workers suggested allowing them to work in pairs off the street increased their personal safety.

"Where women are working for themselves and are less likely to be managed or pimped on a large scale, in the interim it is probably more sensible not to use the very serious penalties we have against people who run brothels," she said.

"Very small scale operations can operate in a way that is not disruptive to neighbours."

Kerb-crawlers arrested for the first time could be forced to take part in a "re-education" programme at their own expense, instead of being fined, under the plans.

But Ms Mactaggart said there would be no extra cash for police.

Prostitution laws: Reaction

The strategy includes action against those who exploit prostitutes, such as people traffickers.

But Ms Mactaggart said men who use prostitutes who have been trafficked will not be charged with rape, as some campaigners have demanded, because they often reported their concerns.

"They don't think what is happening to those women is right - even if they don't think prostitution is wrong," she said.

'Nervous'

The Conservative Party criticised the measures, saying more needed to be done to tackle the underlying social problems which caused prostitution.

But the strategy was "warmly welcomed" by child protection charity Barnardo's.

Chief executive Martin Narey said it would "help those who are trapped to find a way out of prostitution and [it] concentrates on bringing to justice those pimps who condemn children and young people to such misery".

But Cari Mitchell of the English Collective of Prostitutes told the BBC crackdowns made streets more dangerous for the women.

"Very obviously, if there's a crackdown, clients are much more nervous. And women don't have time to check them out properly before they get in the car," she said.

Instead, the group is calling for the end of criminalisation of prostitution.

Drugs

Under the new strategy, police will be encouraged to work more closely with charities running safe houses to help women get out of the sex trade.

The strategy includes measures to encourage women to get help with drink or drug problems.

These include creating a new penalty for the offence of loitering or soliciting for prostitution so courts can direct women into drug or alcohol programmes rather than fining them.

And ministers promise to ensure access to drug treatment services, health services and supported accommodation to women who want to get out of prostitution.

Measures to improve prostitutes' safety include expanding the Ugly Mugs scheme, already running in several areas, which lets prostitutes know about violent punters.

The government will tighten up guidance for social workers, focusing on the children most at risk from being lured into prostitution, such as those leaving care.

Teachers, police officers and nurses will be trained to help the spot the risks.

About 80,000 women in Britain work as prostitutes, and half of those are under 25, the Home Office estimates.
 
It actually seems like a good idea.

As more or less stated in the article, having it be legal actually gives the government more ability to mitigate the harmful effects of the activity. I also liked that they acknowledged that creating 'red light districts' is a bad idea, only moving and concentrating the problem. IE it's one thing when one house in the neighborhood or one apartment in a complex has some prostitutes in them, it's another when half of them do.

This can actually be a smart action for socialists to take. Once you acknowledge that you can't stop the activity, you legalize it to enable you to regulate it.

As for prostitution, I support legalization, and at least some regulation in the health aspect to prevent them from becoming a vector for STD's.
 
As for prostitution, I support legalization, and at least some regulation in the health aspect to prevent them from becoming a vector for STD's.
I support it for this reason and many others. One of those is that it makes it easier for police to go after people trafficers. Many trafficed women end up as forced prostitutes. Legalizing prostitution allows things like having the police call girls to hotel rooms for a recorded (and paid for) chat and makes it somewhat more likely that trafficed girls will turn to outsiders and the police for help.

I am in favor of legalized prostitution and brothelkeeping. Pimping, forcing people into prostitution and people trafficing are entirely different matters, ones I take a dim view of.

Cheers,
ErikM :evil:
 
prostituting oneself per se has always been legal here, just 'soliciting for the purposes of prostitution' [steetwalker], 'keeping a disorderly house' [brothel madam] and 'exercising control, direction or influence over the movements of divers prostitutes' [pimping] that are illegal.
Girls who operate out of a private apartment (and are not too blatent) are usually left alone.
 
Malone, I would hope that your judgement as to the degree of libertarianism isn't predicated on the legalization of brothels.

There are probably one or two other aspects.

:D, Art
 
Which country more libertarian? Britian legalizes "small brothels"

One of the few "freedoms" that the left embraces whole heartedly is the freedom to have sex with what/whomever you want.

Its a good way to "break the hold" that religion (and morality in general) has on the populace so its easier to make the state into the peoples' God.
 
They're sure not libertarian on other fronts! Besides the gun ban, they're also poised to ban replica guns, and there have been calls to ban swords "except for licensed individuals with reasonable use for it", and...pointy kitchen knives.

No, I'm not kidding. http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=579102005

------------
Doctors seek kitchen knife ban
EDWARD BLACK

Key points
• Doctors claim long kitchen knives serve no purpose except as weapons
• 55 out of 108 homicide victims in Scotland were stabbed last year
• Police superintendents say a ban would be difficult to enforce

Key quote
"Many assaults are impulsive, often triggered by alcohol or misuse of other drugs, and the long pointed kitchen knife is an easily available, potentially lethal weapon, particularly in the domestic setting" - Dr Emma Hern, writing in British Medical Journal
-------------
 
It's a good step, but when you consider the fact that the UK has cameras on street corners, working on putting in microphones and a license-plate tracking system, it's hard to call them libertarian really. Not to mention the gun banning and pointy knives banning.
 
Zundfolge said:
Its a good way to "break the hold" that religion (and morality in general) has on the populace so its easier to make the state into the peoples' God.

Sorry, but that wins the circular logic award. Big-church morality, which is usually a brand of hypocrisy from the philandering middle-ages popes to the caught-with-male-prostitute rolex-wearing bible-thumpers of today... is an easy means of keeping the population in line with threats of "eternal punishment" unless they obey whatever the ruling class' whims of the moment are. It's also generally soaked in money.

A philosophy of "live and let live, adults ought to be respected to be able to make adult decisions" is far more conducive to things like, oh, gun freedoms as well, whereas the idea of "we decide what's best for you" is conducive to control. Of bedrooms, and of guns.

Think about that.
 
Art Eatman said:
Malone, I would hope that your judgement as to the degree of libertarianism isn't predicated on the legalization of brothels.

There are probably one or two other aspects.

:D, Art
True, but I'd guess this would be one minor aspect. It may be smart for the govt to legalize it, and to mandate health inspections etc, but the mandated inspections might aggravate some libertarians.

I don't think Britain's govt would ever be mistaken for "libertarian". But, neither would ours.

Regards.
 
Justin said:
The entire premise built into the title of this thread is doubleplus asinine.

I agree. In order to truly be libertarian, the government wouldn't have the authority to decide one way or the other whether prostitution was legal.
 
Manedwolf said:
Sorry, but that wins the circular logic award.
I think you misunderstood my post (which in retrospect I can see it was poorly worded).

I stated that the only freedom that the left embraces is sexual freedom because they believe it is a good way to "break the hold" that religion and morality have on the populace so they can replace it with their morality (ie the state as God).

In other words, the left doesn't "allow" sexual freedom because they believe in freedom (which is what the original poster apparently believes) but because its a freedom they can allow us to indulge that doesn't interfere with their power.
 
The law could be changed to allow two prostitutes and a receptionist or maid to work together legally in brothels, the government has confirmed.

What if one of the prostitutes is dressed as a maid?
 
I'm a bit confused. Does the original article imply that men using a prostitute are breaking the law but the prostitutes themselves are not? Could anybody who knows clarify this?
 
I have a question. Can it be that while legalizing this has it's benefit, couldn't they then later see more regulation, supervision, red tape, and increased taxes from this and a larger agency enforcing them? I guess what I am trying to say is that it may not be "Libertarian" in the long run and only another step into a larger socialistic system.
 
phoglund said:
I'm a bit confused. Does the original article imply that men using a prostitute are breaking the law but the prostitutes themselves are not? Could anybody who knows clarify this?

Only if he solicites the girl from a motor vehicle to accept his offer of business.
 
That Airstrip One's quasi-legalization of prostitution somehow puts it in the running as being somehow libertarian.

I assume, by your title, that you're trying to draw a comparison between the United States and Great Britain, and their relative levels of liberty, with the implied notion that Britain's doing so makes it ever-so-slightly more libertarian than the US.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top