Laws provide against injury from others; but not from ourselves. - Thomas Jefferson
Short articles about laws, laws and more laws, none of which accomplish anything productive.
Because Everyone Knows That Laws Deter Streetwalkers
If I live to be a thousand I will never understand why lawheads believe that more laws will stop people who are already breaking existing laws; they seem wedded to the concept that if we only increase the penalties enough, the offending behavior will stop. Of course, this is nonsense; most criminologists agree that increasing the severity of a criminal penalty has no demonstrable deterrent value. For example, despite penalties which are wildly and insanely out of proportion to the offense, drug use has increased over the 40 years of the drug war just as alcohol use increased during Prohibition. Even the death penalty has no demonstrable deterrent value (except to the individual executed, obviously). Yet lawheads just keep making new laws and then demanding that cops enforce them and courts incarcerate an ever-increasing number of American citizens. Here’s the latest example, courtesy of the New York Daily News of July 27th:
Harsher penalties for selling sex near school grounds are now in place…State Sen. Ruben Diaz Sr. first proposed the bill that will now slap pimps, prostitutes and johns caught plying their illicit trade within 1,000 feet of a school with automatic felony charges. “I’m happy,” Diaz said yesterday. “I think that this is a big step in protecting our children.” Years of unchecked prostitution in the playground of…the West Farms School…led to the legislation, which is now in effect for schools statewide…
In recent weeks, The Urban Justice Center had urged [Governor] Cuomo to veto the bill in an online petition…”In the modern era, most sex workers who work on the street are engaged in sex work out of desperate need. They face widespread physical and sexual violence, especially from the police,” the petition stated… Meanwhile, Diaz is calling on the NYPD to make sure the law is enforced. “You could have as many laws as you want, but if the police do not enforce them, the law becomes nothing,” he said.
This is a textbook example of governmental sledgehammer-enabled egg-breaking. Somehow there will be enough cops to enforce this statewide, even though there weren’t enough of them to keep an eye on ONE PLAYGROUND in the Bronx. Let’s put ‘em all in jail! That’ll learn them dirty whores, pimps and “johns”…which according to Melissa Farley means the majority of the population of New York.
Those damned dirty amateurs are at it again, having unprotected sex and spreading diseases to their unsuspecting spouses. Why isn’t there a law against this? We need to abolish unpaid sex; it’s demeaning to women and as this paraphrased July 26th anecdote incontrovertibly proves, men hate women who give them sex for free and give them diseases on purpose as a way of inflicting violence. It’s true, I saw a study which proves it and anyone who denies it must be a misogynist too.
A 33-year-old married woman from Delavan, Wisconsin has sued her 35-year-old married lover on the grounds that he infected her with herpes during an unprotected adulterous sexual encounter in January of 2010; she contends that he knew he was infected and is therefore liable under Wisconsin law. In May of this year she insisted police arrest the man, and when they declined to do so she filed the lawsuit without the help of an attorney; the suit demands $350,000 from the man’s auto and homeowners insurance, the former presumably on the grounds that the sexual encounter took place in his pickup truck.
The man denies giving the woman herpes and suggests she check with her other partners, but she claims he was the only man she cheated on her husband with. She claims to have experienced panic attacks while driving with her spouse and children, and that her spouse is reluctant to have normal sexual relations because of her diagnosis.
I’m sure her husband’s reluctance to have sex with her has nothing at all to do with the fact that she cheated on him and was caught red…umm, handed.
Die-hard partisans are most amazing creatures; they can viciously castigate the “other side” for whatever-it-is, while simultaneously ignoring “their side” doing essentially the same thing. Case in point the tiresome feminist bleating about the Republicans’ “war on women” while ignoring the one waged by Democrats. They are enabled to do this by defining knife attacks on amateurs as “aggravated assault” but the same attacks on sex workers as “emergency surgery”. Case in point: Barbara and Shannon Kelley’s July 28th Huffington Post article bemoaning the Republican renewal of the gag rule prohibiting funding to health agencies which give information about abortion, while totally ignoring Obama’s continuation of the Bush Era policy of prohibiting funding to health agencies which refuse to demonize prostitutes:
Surely you have heard that the Republican-controlled House of Representatives has voted to reinstate the Global Gag Rule that prevents any family planning agencies that provide information about abortion service from receiving any U.S. foreign aid. Who gets hurt? Women, children and anyone who believes the conversation about women’s issues needs to move forward. But once again, that conversation has been hijacked by the right-wing strategy to frame deeper issues related to women and families in terms of a women’s right to choose…organizations that receive funds cannot use their own money to provide abortion-related information or services, or advocate for liberalized abortion laws. The rule imposes no similar restrictions on advocacy against such laws…Under the…rule, these organizations face a choice: either participate in the American right’s global campaign to restrict women’s rights and access to reproductive health care or lose critical U.S. funding. That funding is crucial for agencies that cover a number of issues related to healthy women and children…What also gets cut out of the equation when these agencies are defunded is access to contraception…the Guttmacher Institute has found that when abortion becomes illegal, abortions don’t decrease — they just become dangerous. Life-threatening, actually. And what better way to avoid abortions than to provide contraceptive services. No brainer, right? Go figure…But what makes us even more angry is the way the debate on abortion sucks the energy out of the fight for a better world for women and children — here and abroad. Suddenly, regardless of where we stand on a women’s right to choose, we’re in a defensive position…
Funny thing; nearly every methodologically sound study ever done proves that when prostitution becomes illegal, it doesn’t decrease — it just becomes dangerous. Welcome to our world, ladies. Apparently, you don’t think women’s health issues are important when the women choose to make their living providing sexual services to men. We believe the “conversation about women’s issues needs to move forward” as well, and recognizing that “a woman’s right to choose” must include choosing why she has sex (rather than simply how or with whom) is a big part of that. By reducing that broad and powerful phrase to a mere euphemism for the right to abortion, “feminists” of your ilk have not only allowed the enemy within our ranks, but actually invited him in. In furtherance of your narcissistic concerns you either lobbied for the rights of certain women to be restricted or remained silent while others did so, and now you’re crying because the crop which has sprung up is the very one you planted. Unfortunately, it isn’t just you who will be forced to eat it.
In my July 3rd column I reported that internet behemoth Google had censored Irish human rights campaigners “Turn Off the Blue Light” by cancelling their ad under the false excuse that it was an escort ad when in actuality it led to a site opposing imposition of the “Swedish Model” on Ireland. The group protested the removal through approved channels and was of course rebuffed, but when they protested in person at Google headquarters in Dublin an amazing thing happened, as reported in the Independent on August 7th:
A small group of campaigners for…rights for Irish sex workers is claiming a victory against internet giant Google…After their complaint was received Google apparently reviewed the situation and agreed to reinstate the advert last month…Google said…”We permit political advertisements regardless of the political views they represent, and apply our policies equally. Just as the net itself provides space for a thousand political opinions to bloom, Google is committed to being a neutral platform for people to advertise their political messages.”
I reckon a flea in a tender spot can make even an elephant scratch.
One Year Ago Today
My very first miscellanea column, “Legal Sundries” appeared on this date last year; the items covered were the suicide of the “Craigslist Killer”, WWAV’s advocacy for New Orleans prostitutes forced to register as “sex offenders” under the “Crime Against Nature” law, the rationale behind porn being legal despite the fact that it’s paid sex, and men suing women for injuries resulting from cowgirl sex.