Police to renew effort to tow johns' cars

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Right... so why aren't we going after pimps instead of Johns? You're pretty much spelling out who's at fault (pimps), but then whole-heartedly support going after Johns?

The johns are just as much at fault as the pimps. They are the ones that are making the market for this activity. If they didn't demand this service, it would go out of business very quick.

This isn't the John's fault though... if anything you're supporting the cops going after the one source of income these people have. What do you think these women do if they're not hooking? Join the secretarial pool? Become teachers?

You clearly have no concept of the issue at hand. The John's are the driving force behind this issue. Just like drug users are the driving force behind drug dealers. If there was no industry for these people there would be no need to lure young girls into the trade and keep them subjected. Of course there will always be people that fall into certain situations like this because of life circumstances. Removing the number of scum ball occupations such as this only increased their chance for intervention.

What do you think will 'fix' hooking? A harsh crack-down policy on Johns? That's working really well on drugs so far...

This policy is part of a wider approach the community needs to take. Ultimately the community as a whole as to solve this problem not the government and that includes the drug issue and crime issues. The fact is solicitation is currently illegal and committing crimes has consequences. I never said once that this is best way to solves this problem but until the community as a whole decideds to do something about it, it is one of the few things that can be done to curtail it.

Yes... the police do have no business in interfering with two consenting adults. If one adult is forced into the situation then it's no longer consenting, it's rape. Places like the Netherlands have legalized sex trade and everything seems consensual as far as I can tell... maybe (probably) the issue here is we're so backwards concerning sex legislation.

Well, by your statement most prostitution here would be considered rape. Also, if you don't think the Netherlands have many of the same social issues regard prostitution then you are wrong. There are benifits to legalizing it and regulating it but many of the same problems as far as the enterance into the trade are the same.

I agree that hooking (as it currently stands legally) = bad... I just don't agree that taking Johns cars away = fixing the problem. At all.

Again, no one said this would fix the problem completely. However, if the public knew that there was a full time unit designated to crack down on John's with the possibility of loosing there vehicle, it would definately curtail the current problem.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Well... if it doesn't work to deter prostitution in Calgary (and I seriously doubt it will), then the point is a poor one. When you say 'the girls will go elsewhere', is this the end-point of your solution? They'll move along to another neighbourhood? Or do you think the cops will drive them clear out of the city? Maybe even the whole province?

Again, if the police and province took this seriously and had a full time unit to do this. It would deter people. As it stands now they may run a few projects a year and that is it. You aren't going to deter anyone if you are only enforcing the law 3 or 4 times a year.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

The johns are just as much at fault as the pimps. They are the ones that are making the market for this activity. If they didn't demand this service, it would go out of business very quick.

You clearly have no concept of the issue at hand. The John's are the driving force behind this issue. Just like drug users are the driving force behind drug dealers.

Whats with all these posture points? I clearly have no concept of the issue at hand? Really? I'm just a babbling idiot out here, making things up as I go along? For a guy who's super-fast to get indignant about insults you sure don't mind dishing them out.

Its interesting that you think I'M the one with no understanding of the issue... I'm beginning to think the opposite. This is probably a point we'll agree to disagree on, but I'm of the opinion that the demand for drugs and paid-sex is insatiable and persistent. People do not engage prostitutes or buy drugs just because they're there, or because they're offered to them... they engage prostitutes and buy drugs specifically because they want those things. The police have tried for decades to curb both the demand and supply of drugs... would you say this effort (within the context of the resources involved) was successful? Has drug supply/demand dropped significantly now than decades prior?

If there was no industry for these people there would be no need to lure young girls into the trade and keep them subjected. Of course there will always be people that fall into certain situations like this because of life circumstances. Removing the number of scum ball occupations such as this only increased their chance for intervention.

The demand creates the industry, not the supply. If there was no demand for prostitution there would be no prositutes. Since there is a demand (apparently a high one, there are a lot of prostitutes out there) the market services the demand. The cops, by towing Johns cars, are going after the (insatiable) demand. I think this is probably ultimately futile when it comes to 'fixing' prostitution.

This policy is part of a wider approach the community needs to take. Ultimately the community as a whole as to solve this problem not the government and that includes the drug issue and crime issues. The fact is solicitation is currently illegal and committing crimes has consequences. I never said once that this is best way to solves this problem but until the community as a whole decideds to do something about it, it is one of the few things that can be done to curtail it.

So what is the best way? It very much seems to me that you support this program as a great thing... if it's not the best then what is?

Well, by your statement most prostitution here would be considered rape.

If that were (legally) true, then cops wouldn't have to tow Johns cars, they could just charge them for rape after the fact. While you may consider it rape, the law definitely doesn't agree with you.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

If that were (legally) true, then cops wouldn't have to tow Johns cars, they could just charge them for rape after the fact. While you may consider it rape, the law definitely doesn't agree with you.

You were the one that said it was rape, not me. I will respond more later. As per your comment about insults, it wasn't an insult, it is my perception that you really are not looking at the big picture, it is not an insult.

[jammies]

Let us think - if you want to discourage prostitution you can target:

#1: pimps
#2: hookers
#3: johns

Now there are far more johns than hookers, and far more hookers than pimps. Logically, the biggest impact per arrest would be to focus on pimps. The smallest impact per arrest would be to focus on johns.

However, arresting johns takes the least amount of effort, and is highly publicly visible - therefore, in order to preserve the illusion that "something is being done" to curb prostitution, yet another crackdown on johns! Yay!

It's right up there with the Multinova in useless exercises that do very little to curb the problem they are supposed to be addressing, but at least the Multinova makes money and takes few resources, whereas this exercise in public relations takes plenty of resources and is a net money-loser.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

You were the one that said it was rape, not me. I will respond more later.

I didn't say it was rape, in fact I specifically stated that consensual sex is not rape (forced into sex is rape). You said, by that definition, that 'most prostitution here would be considered rape'. I pointed out the law didn't agree with that notion, and here we are.

As per your comment about insults, it wasn't an insult, it is my perception that you really are not looking at the big picture, it is not an insult.

Hey, if you think that's the way to have a civil conversation, saying I clearly don't understand the concept, whatever. Maybe in your opinion I don't, but your opinion doesn't necessarily = reality. Could it be you meant to say 'I don't think you're looking at the big picture', and accidentally got rude? My mistake I guess...

[Alpha_Q]

First; you don't pay a prostitute for sex, you pay her to get lost after.

Second; All the legalization in the world, and all the police inforcement in the world will not remove illegal prostitution. There will always be some women who can't qualify for any legalized brothel and always be some man unwilling to be seen in said establishement.

Third; There are some men out there that are created in such a way that no amount of dinner and dating is going to get them laid. Why do you think prostitution is so rampant in Vancouver and Edmonton? There are just guys too ugly and/or filthy to get any kind of legal sex.

So, there should be some form of legalized, clean establishement where the women are safe and a guy can... satisfy his urge. At the same time there should be a dedicated number of cops making sure that all the illegal crack-whore prostitutes get the help they need, prick-pimps end up in jail, and Johns are told to go to the proper establishments or get arrested instead.

[urban1]

#1 - The pimp is likely already a criminal. Might be dealing drugs or a small time thief. Might be adicted to drugs.

#2- The street hooker likely has a myriad of issues including drug addiction.

#3- The john is the person with the most to lose. He might have a wife and kids. A house. A job. A reputation in the community. At the very least, he owns a car or has someone who borrowed him a car.

Id say if you want to discourage any of the above three from continuing their actions, its probably easiest to go after the john.


Another point... No one is arguing that by impounding cars, you are solving the problem of prostitution. By impounding cars, you are discouraging cars from cruising neighbourhoods and picking up hookers in those neighbourhoods. No one wants this in their community on their street.

The social issues here run deeper than impounding cars... domestic abuse, sex abuse, drug addiction, poverty, etc. It would be great if we could solve all those problems and give everyone a chance to get off the streets but thats not realisticaly going to happen.

I have a friend in Vancouver who lives a luxury condo downtown. Theyve had problems with owners renting out their units to women who turn out to be using the suites for hooking. No one lives there - a group of girls share the unit to turn tricks. The strata board has had a fun time trying to deal with this and get these people out of there. Do you think the owners and residents of other units appreciate the constant traffic of strange men? The strata board cant impound cars but they have other sanctions against the owner of the unit in question. Point is, no one wants this in their neigbourhood.

Tell me a better way to deter street prostitution?

Originally Posted by jammies

Let us think - if you want to discourage prostitution you can target:

#1: pimps
#2: hookers
#3: johns

Now there are far more johns than hookers, and far more hookers than pimps. Logically, the biggest impact per arrest would be to focus on pimps. The smallest impact per arrest would be to focus on johns.

However, arresting johns takes the least amount of effort, and is highly publicly visible - therefore, in order to preserve the illusion that "something is being done" to curb prostitution, yet another crackdown on johns! Yay!

It's right up there with the Multinova in useless exercises that do very little to curb the problem they are supposed to be addressing, but at least the Multinova makes money and takes few resources, whereas this exercise in public relations takes plenty of resources and is a net money-loser.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

You clearly have no concept of the issue at hand. The John's are the driving force behind this issue. Just like drug users are the driving force behind drug dealers. If there was no industry for these people there would be no need to lure young girls into the trade and keep them subjected.

It is impossible to destroy demand for either sex or drugs; you might as well try to outlaw air and then lock up those who continue to defy the law by breathing.

Anything pleasurable that it is possible to buy, some will buy. To seriously impact people's behaviour in this respect, you need to impose a police state or totalitarian regime, in order to make the penalties both draconian enough and certain enough that the risk/reward equation overwhelms all else. That is not a solution, that is just replacing one problem with a far bigger one.

[Phaneuf3]

i think there are better solutions to try to curb it.... yadda yadda... that said: i'm not against going against johns - until things change, enforce the law and such.

i don't like impounding cars though - that (potentially) punishes more people than the john themselves. there are plenty of other people (spouse, child, sibling, friend, whoever) that could rely on the use of that car for getting to work, school, etc, etc. why punish them for the actions of someone else?

just doesn't seem right.

[Tower]

This topic has gone from Suck to Blow!

[metallicat]

I am convinced this law is why a co-worker of mine has been without a car for the past couple of years.

Originally Posted by jammies

Let us think - if you want to discourage prostitution you can target:

#1: pimps
#2: hookers
#3: johns

Now there are far more johns than hookers, and far more hookers than pimps. Logically, the biggest impact per arrest would be to focus on pimps. The smallest impact per arrest would be to focus on johns.

However, arresting johns takes the least amount of effort, and is highly publicly visible - therefore, in order to preserve the illusion that "something is being done" to curb prostitution, yet another crackdown on johns! Yay!

It's right up there with the Multinova in useless exercises that do very little to curb the problem they are supposed to be addressing, but at least the Multinova makes money and takes few resources, whereas this exercise in public relations takes plenty of resources and is a net money-loser.

I believe the province/cities (ie. the police) plan is to combat all levels of prostitution. I know that the CPS' budget for certain units (Vice, etc) was increased substantially over the past 6 months or so with an increase in manpower.

To assume that police are ONLY targeting 'Johns' because it is the easy way clearly shows a lack on ignorance and short sightedness on your part.

Edit: What's with your police state mombojumbo- seems to be in every thread.

[Agamemnon]

To assume that police are ONLY targeting 'Johns' because it is the easy way clearly shows a lack on ignorance and short sightedness on your part.

Well... I think we're trying to figure out what targeting Johns by towing they're cars is actually going to do to the overall demand for prostitution. If it's not going to do much (if anything), why bother? For the sheer pleasure of inconveniencing Johns and their families?

Also, if you're going to call someone ignorant, you definitely want to make sure your statement is comprehensible (lack on ignorance?)... otherwise you might look ignorant on how to use the word.

Thanks teach, I'll take that into account. An obvious typing error is certainly an indicator of ignorance.

[Agamemnon]

nm... guess I won't debate this topic any more... surprising after years of debate I get a blue square for responding to a random insult... wacky.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

This policy is part of a wider approach the community needs to take. Ultimately the community as a whole as to solve this problem not the government and that includes the drug issue and crime issues. The fact is solicitation is currently illegal and committing crimes has consequences. I never said once that this is best way to solves this problem but until the community as a whole decideds to do something about it, it is one of the few things that can be done to curtail it.

Okay, this is kind of confusing. You don't actually believe this problem will ever be "solved", do you? We will never, no matter how many cars are towed and hookers rounded up and pimps sent to the slammer, be rid of this.

It's like the WAR ON DRUGS (and TERROR, I suppose). We'll never "win" and the people who are "fighting it" don't actually believe we will.

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Again, no one said this would fix the problem completely. However, if the public knew that there was a full time unit designated to crack down on John's with the possibility of loosing there vehicle, it would definately curtail the current problem.

Does this actually work? Since last summer has the current problem been curtailed at all?

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Sorry dude... I just re-read your posts and see that you not only didn't say that, but have indicated that it isn't out of the question for you. Misunderstanding on my part.

Sorry for the late reply but I just caught this now. Thanks..

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Okay, this is kind of confusing. You don't actually believe this problem will ever be "solved", do you? We will never, no matter how many cars are towed and hookers rounded up and pimps sent to the slammer, be rid of this.

No I don't think this problem will ever be solved. However, making it the least attractive as possible will definately reduce the amount of activity. It is exactly the same as the police towing speeders in Ontario. They will never stop people from speeding but one the word gets out that you may lose your vehicle, a lot of people will reconsider what they might do.

It's like the WAR ON DRUGS (and TERROR, I suppose). We'll never "win" and the people who are "fighting it" don't actually believe we will.

The problem of prostitution is much smaller than the "war on drugs". So the fight isn't quite the same, but I agree that we can never get to the point where it has been vanquished. Having said that, just because we know that we will never have a complete victory doesn't mean you don't do your best at reducing the conduct.

Does this actually work? Since last summer has the current problem been curtailed at all?

It hasn't work only because they have approached it half assed doing 2 or 3 stings a year.

[Kjesse]

I'll add my name to the list of people who think that this law is kind of stupid, even though I don't have a lot of sympathy for someone who picks a hooker up and gets their car towed as a result.

The crime is not victimless, unless you find a hoe that is really there on her own complete free will, and I believe at least 3/4 are not.

Legalization and regulation is the best way to combat most of the common problems associated with prostitution, and I support that, but it won't stop the more fundamental problem, which is women who don't want to do it but have no real choice because they too have mouths to feed.