Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Should prostitution, gambling and drugs be legalized nation wide?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 12:28 AM
link   
Here's some more of my thoughts of VICE and it's legality.

We have pillars of the community taking valium, Oxycontin; getting a little nookie from their secretaries in exchange for a nice fat raise; and on the golf course make bets larger than the cost of my pickup. All the while criticising the trailer trash for their weed, lotto, and working girls.

People regardless of class seek fleeting comfort in many things, and always will.
as Sinatra said "what ever gets you thru the night"....

However some drugs are evil and should be illegal. And the penalties for DUI should be raised and mandatory whether you drive a Porsche or Pinto.




posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 12:59 AM
link   
Gambling-Yes. If someone is foolish enough to throw money in a machine and expect even more to come out, let them have their cake, I say. May as well have some of the money lost go to something good like fixing up the roads or what have you.

Prostitution-No. STD's and unwanted pregnancies are an epidemic in this country, and everyone knows birth control and condoms are not 100% effective. All this will do is increase health care costs and taxes for everyone.

Drugs- Yes and no. Legalize and have the government regulate marijuana. We have far too many people in jail and prison wasting taxpayer dollars over a "drug" no more harmful than alcohol-which is legal. Meth, coke, heroin, etc., I would say no. Those drugs have too far high an addiction rate and renders the users too out of control to steal and commit violent crimes.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Prostitution should be legal I think there nothing really wrong with it. One of my good friend is a prostitute and she loves it (yes she does) it one of the oldest job out there. But drug no weed is ok but anything else no no no. Why those other thing kill off most of my other friends so did gambling it destroy so many life's. I thought the same way with prostitution by my friend show it not that bad it just that it is unsafe but she a tuff girl (she kick my ass in wresting) so she can hold her own. So legalizing will make it safer for her.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 07:30 AM
link   
First I'd like to dispense with the STD and exploitation arguments on prostitution.

STDs: You're not targeting the problem. The sex is causing the STDs, not the money. If you believe we need to legislate against people's right to be stupid, the only honest way to do it is to stop hiding behind the bible and make it illegal to have sex with more than one person in your lifetime. Targeting prostitution alone is dishonest. What you're doing is saying "the country would never go for what I REALLY think needs to be done because they would consider it an infringement upon liberty, so for now I'm just going to isolate my efforts to a single aspect of the issue where the majority of the people will take my side for religious reasons."

Ironically, the law does a tremendous disservice to the effort to prevent the STDs because there can be no system for routine screening of prostitutes, nor for locating the infected prostitute after a John tests positive. Nor can there be any regulation to drive infected pros out of the industry. If there's a clean brothel, it's gonna be a virtual certainty that the girls who work the street for less money and with less safety must have been unable to get a health card, and that's gonna clamp down on infected pros. What's more, a tax on the industry could pay for the necessary regulation. We're ALREADY paying the pricetag for prostitution's consequences, we're just not making the prostitutes and johns pick up the tab they run up for us. Why lose money paying for the cure when we could MAKE money paying for prevention?

Exploitation: Where is a woman going to be exploited and abused more, on the corner or in a routinely inspected brothel? You can ruin a legit business if the employees go to the state to show that they've been beaten, underpaid, blackmailed, given unsafe conditions, etc, and you can institute drug screenings to weed out "crack whores" though frankly I'm not sure there is a legal basis for that.

Afterall, I was a crack-whore of sorts and everyone respected me for it. I worked unreasonable hours in a dangerous job with for an employer who didn't respect me very much, and I never turned down a shift, because I had become accustomed to certain things that were bad for me such as video games, eating somewhat regularly in a non-health-conscious manner at places like Outback, going to Key Club, Morongo a couple of times a month for a concert and getting hammered there on Jack and Coke, etc. The difference is somewhat arbitrary unless you can quantitatively measure the strength of the respective habits and the distate for the job. You'd argue that I wouldn't perform sexual acts for those things. I argue that a prostitute wouldn't quarry rock 60-80 hours a week for drugs.

You're talking to a guy whose mom founded and ran a legit escort service (by legit I mean strictly dancing or social outings, no sex, and active cooperation with local vice units to keep both her girls and the competition on the level). The company was completely staffed by women who'd either left other places because they wouldn't be exploited, or who HAD worked outside the law before and gotten sick of it. Working within the law, at a company that was subject to business laws, where they could go to the law with a problem and not be arrested or thrown out of court, they loved it. They often said that they were exploiting their customers, despite popular opinion. (Incidentally, I was 13 at the time, which in a variety of ways might account for me being so strange).


Next I'd like to address the corruption argument against gambling. It is true that debt can be an organizing principle of organized crime, and that any trade where money changes hands easily represents a chance for bribery, money laundering, etc.

Gambling should be illegalized. I've changed my mind. I'm am so filled with zeal for my newfound beliefs that I would like to ask for you all to support me in the fight to ban a few similar evils, all of which are at this very moment contributing to many of the evils in our government and society.

The following industries must be banned, or if they cannot be banned, be the subjects of billions of dollars worth of red tape and automatic thorough federal investigation: Publishing, Real Estate, Banking, Credit, Movie Making, Music, Insurance of all kinds, public speaking, and certainly others which I will realize later.

All of these industries pose one risk or another in common with gambling.
A politician can be bribed through a rigged casino win. He can also be bribed with a book deal and mass purchase of his book, with a movie deal (just ask Scott Ritter), or in some cases, even a music deal for himself or a loved one.

A person can fall so heavily into debt that they must do things they would not normally do if they have a gambling debt. The same is true if they have a property in danger of forclosure, or a credit debt.

Take my father for example. To make a long story short, he's got a lot of pull in our labor union. He could probably be the local VP if he wanted to be.

Some years ago he and my mother had their first million in equity spread between a few properties, but they still owed quite a bit on a few as well. When real estate tanked, they got in trouble. There just wasn't enough credit or enough overtime or enough schemes to help them weather that storm and come out ahead when property went back through the roof just over a decade later. Instead they ended up bankrupt after a couple of years.

What if my dad had taken a high place in the union and was holding it during those hard times? Do you suppose his bank would have an opportunity to take advantage? See that the union backed a political candidate that would be good for the bank's business? All they'd have to do is let my dad refinance one loan and give a bogus appraisal of the property value so that he could borrow against enough equity to save the others, then default on the one.

Of course the bank wouldn't be the only one to take advantage of a prominent person who has fallen on hard times. Anyone with enough money can arrange a bribe for you by getting you a ghost writer and a publisher.

Take Deion Sanders for example there. He put out what had to be the single worst record I have EVER listened to... EVER, and he just so happened to do it in 1994- the year before he signed a 7 year, 35 Million Dollar contract with the Cowboys. Salary Cap circumvention? Probably.

So if we're going to stop corruption, let's stop corruption. Let's kill lucrative industries that can be exploited. Organized crime will go where the money is, and the only way to protect America is to go broke. I for one will fiddle while this country burns down if doing so ensures that my union will never take sides in an election that it doesn't care about for ideological reasons. Even moreso if it keeps Deion Sanders out of Dallas too.


I'm sorry, but bring on the vice. We're not stopping it, we're just refusing to take our cut of the profits.
Suppose a hitman for whatever reason offered you a large sum of money. Let's assume that you have an aversion to blood money. You've still got two options: you can say no, or you can say yes, then offer the money as a bounty on the criminal's capture. Which makes more sense?



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 08:49 AM
link   


posted by The Vagabond

First to dispense with the STD and exploitation arguments on prostitution.

STDs: You're not targeting the problem. The sex is causing the STDs, not the money. If you believe we need to legislate against people's right to be stupid, the only honest way to do it is to stop hiding behind the Bible and make it illegal to have sex with more than one person in your lifetime. Targeting prostitution alone is dishonest. [Edited by Don W]


Some of the earliest family law cases were those involving incest in the Kentucky mountains. It was discovered by the lowland people that whole families slept in one bed. Not by some devilish choice but by necessity of poverty. I say that to say this, we can’t enter every bedroom in America, but we can follow the “paper trail.” Not perfect, I admit, Vagabond. OTOH, there is a compelling societal interest in young people - mainly young women - who are victimized by forces over which they usually have little awareness, no understanding and for sure, no control. If every prostitute was a 30 year old PhD, maybe I’d ignore this issue.



Ironically, the law does a tremendous disservice to the effort to prevent the STDs because there can be no system for routine screening of prostitutes . . If there's a clean brothel, it's gonna be a certainty that girls who work the street for less money and less safety must have been unable to get a health card . . a tax on the industry could pay for the regulation. We ALREADY pay the price tag for prostitution's consequences, we're just not making the prostitutes and johns pick up the tab they run up for us.


That would be one advantage to “Fun Houses.” Also, there is no reason the Fun House concept could not be subsidized in the interest of protecting the more vulnerable members of our society. Remember, Vagabond, not everyone is born a hero.



Why lose money paying for the cure when we could MAKE money paying for prevention?


There is no cute comeback to that logic.



Exploitation: Where is a woman going to be exploited and abused more, on the corner or in a routinely inspected brothel?


In our high tech world, I can envision a not so obvious “panic button” right by the bed. Hit the button, lights and cameras come on. Electronic sirens blast. Maybe like a plane’s black box, we have a continuous recorder running, and we could look back and see the last 60 seconds before the panic button was hit? Maybe not a prevent all, but it would help be a catch all.



The difference is somewhat arbitrary unless you can quantitatively measure the strength of the respective habits and the distaste for the job. You'd argue that I wouldn't perform sexual acts for those things. I argue that a prostitute wouldn't quarry rock 60-80 hours a week for drugs.


A very novel perspective (for me) and one which will take more time to digest than I have available here. Back to you later.



You're talking to a guy whose mom founded and ran a legit escort service . . The company was completely staffed by women who left other places because they wouldn't be exploited, or who worked outside the law before and gotten sick of it.


Alternatives. It is good to have options. I’m not familiar with this industry but I’m sure it is very difficult to keep this kind of highly artificial relationship on the up and up. Hmm? Maybe I should say, on the level. Not much better. I know what you mean. If it works, good. If it degenerates into a “call girl” meeting place, then we’re back to ground zero.



Next I'd like to address the corruption argument against gambling. It is true debt can be an organizing principle of organized crime . . Gambling should be illegalized. I've changed my mind. I'm am filled with zeal for my newfound beliefs I would like for you to support me in the fight to ban similar evils all of which are contributing to the evils in our government and society. . The following industries must be banned, or if not banned, be the subjects of billions of dollars of red tape and automatic federal investigation: Publishing, Real Estate, Banking, Credit, Movie Making, Music, Insurance of all kinds, public speaking, and certainly others which I will realize later . .


I think I get your point, Vagabond. I am not however, able to grant that the Mafia-types are into all those industries to the same extent it is into gambling, prostitution and drugs. And I would offer that to the extent Maria-types are into those once legal industries, their entry was facilitated by the ready cash they found in gambling and were counseled to “diversify” into more straight-forward businesses. The cancer of crime has already spread into otherwise legitimate enterprises. Like NJ landfills. Say hello Jimmy Hoffa. Hello WTC debris. Etc.

I heard someone who might know say the Russian Federation is 20% Mafia owned. This condition could explain why Russian’s on the street seem willing to grant more power to Mr Putin. Democracy is nothing if your life is controlled by lawless gangs. Whether or not wearing pin stripe suits.



A politician can be bribed through a rigged casino win. He can also be bribed with a book deal . . A person can fall so heavily into debt that they must do things they would not normally do if they have a gambling debt. The same is true if they have a property in danger of foreclosure, or a credit debt . .


On that point - gambling debts are equal to credit card debt - I am not well informed. My sense is that gamblers - Mafia types - use violence to enforce their claim. Gambling in a legitimate casino, your debt will be on a cold check at the bank or on overdrawing your credit card. The casino does not have to enforce the debt, face to face. Illegal gambling OTOH, seems to carry a risk of broken legs, acid in your face and finding a prematurely dead family member. I don’t know if this is real or in the movies. I tend to think it is real.



Of course the bank wouldn't be the only one to take advantage of a prominent person who has fallen on hard times.


I don’t see how a large bank could do that. There are too many people involved in large loans and the collection process is monitored by the FDIC. Yes, anything is possible where people are involved, but some things are very unlikely.



So if we're going to stop corruption, let's stop corruption. Let's kill lucrative industries that can be exploited. Organized crime will go where the money is, and the only way to protect America is to go broke. I'm sorry, but bring on the vice. We're not stopping it, we're just refusing to take our cut of the profits.


Frustrating? Sure. Discouraging? Yes. Seemingly insurmountable? Maybe. Worth an investment of our time and energy? By all means. Moral: take small bites. But keep on eating!



[edit on 7/17/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite


Some of the earliest family law cases were those involving incest in the Kentucky mountains. It was discovered by the lowland people that whole families slept in one bed. Not by some devilish choice but by necessity of poverty.



There's a good background story to that if you like novels: "The Prince of Tides"
The dog food episode was the funniest I've ever read, I laughed till I had tears in my eyes.



I say that to say this, we can’t enter every bedroom in America, but we can follow the “paper trail.”


Somebody please tell that to Rick Santorum! Oh wait, they did...




Faithful Progressive: Charge of the Not Too Bright Brigade: Sen ...
Rick Santorum Claims Old Shells Are Missing Iraq WMD's ... The two-bedroom house that the Santorum children called home for education purposes and that ...
faithfulprogressive.blogspot.com/2006/06/charge-of-not-too-bright-brigade-sen.html

Bendomenech.com: In Defense of Rick Santorum
In Defense of Rick Santorum · The Speech Trent Lott Didn't Give ... has no business banning one kind of bedroom act between two consenting adults, ...
www.bendomenech.com/blog/archives/000880.html

ASU Web Devil - Santorum a good senator who made a dumb speech
Rick Santorum\'s moral views toward homosexuality, he has to acknowledge that any use ... is a legal institution and goes beyond the privacy of the bedroom. ...
www.asuwebdevil.com/issues/2003/04/29/opinions/428183

Santorum: "The Most Vulnerable Incumbent"... | The Huffington Post
Rick Santorum Called "Rooster" Before His Days In The Senate. ... Just another Rapture-obsessed, fundie abortofreak who wants the NSA in your bedroom. ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/07/15/santorum-the-most-vulne_n_25092.html

Making Everybody Mad: Rick Santorum and Me - Why the Senator from ...
But since when do I have this right that Mr. Santorum claims I have to control what my neighbors do in their bedroom? And if I don’t have that right, ...
www.theinternetparty.org/commentary/c_s.php?section_type=com&td=20030710000126

Santorum versus Freedom :: AO
Rick Santorum, perhaps my favorite Republican US Senator, opened his fool ... get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn't get involved in cultural issues. ...
www.alwayson-network.com/comments.php?id=11575_0_6_0_C




posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 05:06 PM
link   
"Prohibition fails; in that, it attempts to legislate a man's appetite and makes crimes out of that which is not a crime."-Abraham Lincoln.

Yes legalize Gambling, Legalize POT, and Legalize prostitution.

Regulate them all.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:01 PM
link   

posted by psyopswatcher

There's a good background story to that if you like novels: www.amazon.com...] "The Prince of Tides"

The dog food episode was the funniest I've ever read, I laughed till I had tears in my eyes.

Somebody please tell that to Rick Santorum! Oh wait, they did...



I always thought of Rick Santorum as John Ashcroft, Jr. Remember he lost his re-election race to a dead man! And did no better as AG.

Although Gonzales proves the devil you know is often better than the devil you don't know.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by TONE23
"Prohibition fails; in that, it attempts to legislate a man's appetite and makes crimes out of that which is not a crime."-Abraham Lincoln.

Yes legalize Gambling, Legalize POT, and Legalize prostitution.

Regulate them all.



Aagh... Spoken like my kinda bureacrat.


I'd just like to point out that the internetparty.org link I posted (next to last) is a deadend. Wonder what happened to them? Internet peeps who can't keep a site running??? I would join the internet party.

Here's the cached page for their rant on Santorum. (Yes, I'm campaigning against him.)


My kid's first semester in college, he had to take a math course so he signed up for Math for Games. Figuring the odds, counting cards, etc. Reminded me of the MIT Blackjack Team. But his is a school run by nuns so maybe it was more to do with running a bingo parlor.

Seriously though, our state just past some gambling laws and is working out the deals of who is going to run them now. Gonna need more bureacracy.

I still wish he'd take a couple classes in economics, at least statistics. Then he can get his Master's in archeology. :p



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by TONE23
Yes legalize Gambling, Legalize POT, and Legalize prostitution.

Regulate them all.


Because anything the government "regulates" immediately plummets in quality...

We wouldn't want that now would we?




posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me

Originally posted by TONE23
Yes legalize Gambling, Legalize POT, and Legalize prostitution.

Regulate them all.


Because anything the government "regulates" immediately plummets in quality...

We wouldn't want that now would we?



Quite true, from a certain POV).. but which would you rather have.. lessened quality..or PRISON... kind of an easy choice.. to me.

Gambling- Would improve due to undercutting the black market gambling and making these funds accountable- would hinder organized crime signifigantly.

Prostitution- Regulation would in fact improve the quality. Check out Vegas sometime.. aka the bunny ranch.. outside vegas.

drugs -On this one I both, agree and disagree with you.
A.) Agree- I agree that many of the massed produced drugs, namely POT, would suffer in quality when being massed produced and distributed.. but only if you think about it from a "ciggerette" point of view.
B.) Disagree- Try looking at it more like a "cigar or coffee" POV. The culture of growing herb has blossomed signifigantly. If made legal there would be a tremendous amount of business competition that would make many different high quality strains. See Cannibus Cup. Also, not for anything but with pot... anyone can grow it and therefore you can make your own quality.

Sorry Mirth, I am going to have to disagree with the lessening of quality.


[edit on 18-7-2006 by TONE23]



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by TONE23
Prostitution- Regulation would in fact improve the quality. Check out Vegas sometime.. aka the bunny ranch.. outside vegas.


I want the government to tax it, not regulate it...

As for quality, the Bunny Ranch over the "talent" at the Bellagio, or Mandalay Bay (where it's illegal)? I don't think so...

p.s. As a frequent Las Vegas visitor, I always bring my own "entertainment."

Casino Monkeys, not just for rolling the bones anymore...



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 02:05 PM
link   

original quote by: Mirthful Me
I want the government to tax it, not regulate it...


Boy, sometimes, I can get really de dede when I get all excited.... I have used the very wrong word(open mouth pull foot back out).

Hell, tax it sure.. but your right regulate....DOH!
I guess the real word I wanted to use was Legalize.. yeah thats it.



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 02:08 PM
link   
in short?

Yes.


I think we should follow Hollands example on how to do it correctly.



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Prostitution, why not legalize it? It's the only chance some people have of getting sex with someone other than themself; why deprive them of it? Every time I flip thru the channels and see an episode of COPS where they're setting up a sting to bust johns; I can't help but shake my head. What a waste of time and money.

Gambling, legalize it. Many people gamble with their lifestyles every day. Or they have dangerous hobbies. If they earned it, it's not my place to tell them how to spend it.

Drugs. How hypocritical our society is. Alcohol and tobacco are legal; pot can land you in jail.

Legalize pot. But, meth, heroin, etc., I'm against it. They cause way too many societal problems, problems that aren't mitigated by just putting a tax on them. I'd really have a hard time agreeing with legalizing them.

Just my .02



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
As for quality, the Bunny Ranch over the "talent" at the Bellagio, or Mandalay Bay (where it's illegal)? I don't think so...


I don’t know about quality of the service (never paid for it anywhere) but I do know the unregulated (un-statutorial) and un-taxed prostitution is sure a lot cheaper.

Legalize it all and let God sort them out.



posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 11:42 PM
link   
I think it boils down to two things.

1. Do you believe the government has a right to tell you how to run your life and spend your money or not?

The business about outlawing prostitution because of STDs is a red herring. STDs are not transmittecy by prostitution, they are transmitted by sexual intercourse and sharing needles. You want to outlaw STDs, Fine. Outlaw sex and needle sharing!

You say that's impossible? I agree. You're not going to stop STDs by outlawing prostitution.

2. Legalize prostitution, dope, and gambling so the Government can make money on it? How hypocritical!

This is one of the most egregrious arguments I have ever heard. If the government has no business telling you what to put in your body or how to live your life (which in my view it does not), what on God's green Earth gives them a right to extort money from you for doing something completely legal?

Extorting money from users does not make something legal, it just makes the Government the monopoly pimp and dope dealer. Is this what all you people want? A big powerful government telling you to give them more of your money just so you can choose to smoke a doobie or visit a hooker?

What possible business is it of the government's, anyway?



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
I2. Legalize prostitution, dope, and gambling so the Government can make money on it? How hypocritical!


Way above.


How about a step further and apply what you said to tobacco and alcohol as well?

And guns.



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
2. Legalize prostitution, dope, and gambling so the Government can make money on it? How hypocritical!

This is one of the most egregrious arguments I have ever heard.



In a vacuum you are correct. The catch here goes back to the interrelationship of priviledge and responsibility which in my opinion constitutes the greatest but least understood drawback to government social programs.

Whenever the majority of individuals vote that their society should provide them with a given thing through the government, they are then obligated to their government to uphold certain obligations which facilitate that giving.

When the government is made accountable for the public good in a particular area, they recieve justification for abridging liberties which affect that aspect of the public good.

Therefore, as long as we demand that our government provide a medical insurance program, the government can outlaw or tax things which harm the public good, and indeed it should in those cases tax those things so that the people who will inevitably be using that government program because of their bad choices are paying a greater share of the burden.

In other words, the only way that the government taxation of drugs and prostitution can be put in its rightful place as a non-issue is to first relieve the government of its charge to provide health care through social programs.

There is only one path before us on this issue less fair than dictating our liberties based on the ability of the government to pay for the consequences, and that is carving one man's liberty out of another man's livelihood. If a crackhead has a heart attack, can't pay his emergency room bill, and the hospital ends up writing it off as a business loss, thus reducing tax revenues and forcing the government into a tax hike which takes money from me, the level at which circumstances differ from the crackhead simply breaking into my home and stealing from me to finance his habit is semantic at best.

To have absolute liberty without respect for benefit to the government, we must disassociate the government from the public good by reinstituting personal responsibility.

If you can be trusted to smoke crack in a responsible manner (I'd like to see you try!) then you can be trusted to keep the money you're taxed for government involvement in the healthcare industry and reserve that money towards the medical expenses you incur due to your drug use.

This is a package deal. If we don't get rid of the government programs, we can't tell the government to keep its nose out of related business.

I believe that if more people understood this the left, though I would not expect them to change their fundamental objectives, would seek ways to help people help themselves without such a large and overbearing government.



posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 09:06 PM
link   
I was shocked at the recent legislation that passed the House regarding online-gambling... Shocked at the hypocracy.

Lotteries and horse racing are fine but sports betting is not?

Gotta go...I got the Braves at +150...gotta watch the end of the game!





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join