#48 Bob

Ok, here we go with the prostitution again.

You guys are deluded about the dangers of prostitution. It’s not like drugs at all, prostitution is not a “Victimless crime”

The core mechanic of prostitution is manipulation.

I don’t buy the exploitation argument against prostitution anymore than I buy it for any other outlawed “vice”. The concept that an activity must be banned because people are too weak willed to look after themselves is one of the corner stones of the nanny state. It’s bad enough when used to outlaw gambling and drugs, but in the case of prostitution, I find it sexist as well. Manipulation and exploitation of women is the primary argument the feminist movement makes against pornography and it doesn’t hold water in that case either.

If I were a woman, I’m pretty certain I would be insulted by the idea that the state needs to make my decisions for me because I’m too easily manipulated by the opposite sex. I would also consider laws against prostitution an assault on my right to use my body and brain to put food on my table and a roof over my head no different from a physicist, construction worker, or sports star.

I’m sure there ARE prostitutes that enter the profession fully in possession of their reasoning ability, and of their own free will… but all available data indicates that the vast majority do not.

How generous. Sorry, but I think you have it backwards. I’m sure there are women who are manipulated by men just as there are men who are manipulated by women. The risk of manipulation is a part of every single human interaction on the planet, but people are still allowed to make their own choices.

I don’t know where you’re getting your statistics, but it’s not very meaningful to argue about how women are victimized by prostitution in places where it’s outlawed. Ask the women who work the profession where it’s legal and has the protections that the law allows for any business. It’s not the profession that victimizes prostitutes. The real persecution of prostitutes is at the hands of legal establishment in places where it’s banned, not to mention the “vast majority” of a sexually repressed population who condone that persecution.

If the phrase, “My body, my choice” means anything at all, it means a woman can use her body to earn a living. It doesn’t matter whether it’s coming from a militant feminist or some misogynist moron who thinks a woman’s place is in the kitchen, laws that restrict people’s choices are antithetical to freedom and, last time I checked, women have as much a right to freedom as men.

So you’re all for police bullets going through bad guys and hitting grandma over across the street?

The only time I ever use a round that is NOT a hollowpoint is on the firing range, because the steel plates eliminate over-penetration. On the battlefield, troops don’t particular care if a round goes through one enemy and into another one. In a neighborhood, a shopping area, etc – it’s extremely important that a bullet not go through several people.

Yes, HP bullets can be more lethal. They’re also safer to non-targets. Your point is simply ignorant.

Cops shouldn’t be extended special rights, but they also shouldn’t have especially restricted rights (not that that is the case too often).

You guys are deluded about the dangers of prostitution. It’s not like drugs at all, prostitution is not a “Victimless crime”

The core mechanic of prostitution is manipulation. Actually… mentally… it’s a LOT like extracting a confession from an innocent person. All they have do is shut up and not cooperate… but for whatever reason, they can’t. And are convinced to confess. And get convicted.

It’s the same with many prostitutes. Weak upbringing, bad coping skills… all that’s needed is a ‘boyfriend’ to swoop in and provide direction. But he’s not a ‘boyfriend’ at all, he’s a pimp that manipulates her into doing tricks.

Good luck with laws against that… after all, who’s the victim? If you accept that women WANT to do tricks (As many of you seem to have) then you place an unbelievable requirement of proof on the victim to PROVE she was being coerced.

I’m sure there ARE prostitutes that enter the profession fully in possession of their reasoning ability, and of their own free will… but all available data indicates that the vast majority do not.

That said… No, I don’t think prohibition is working. Not working at all.

The first thing I would do is to make “Happy Ending” massages legal. A hand job is nowhere near as intimate as sex, and can easilly be executed in a mentaly compartmentalized manner by the provider.

My POINT is that our very own police can shoot US with types of ammunition that our very own military CANNOT USE even against Al Queda or the Taliban.

But it’s okay to use against us??

It’s a War on Drugs, i.e. a War on Americans.

Therefore, I suggest that the please at least follow the Hague Convention regarding small arms ammunition.

The police still get to use exploding ammunition in crew-served weapons mounted on their tanks and APC’s.

I guess there are prosecuters that are more rabid than Bloomers Blumenthal.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/20/pushed-against-wall-craigslist-sues-south-carolina-attorney-general/

As long as the National Anti-Quartering Association (NAQA) is on the job, the 3rd amendment will remain secure. http://www.theonion.com/content/news/third_amendment_rights_group

Well, it was no lolcat, but the fact that the video’s maker wasn’t tasted/arrested instantaneously is pretty out of the ordinary, at least from what we’ve come to expect, knowing what we do.

I detest the police, but your argument is disingenuous at best. The Geneva Convention applies to war, not domestic ammo purchases.

“I didn’t sign the Geneva Convention and I’m pretty sure the guy breaking into my house didn’t either.”

If you shoot at someone, you are intending to incapacitate/kill them as quickly as possible. The more lethal the ammunition, the better. The problem isn’t that cops have hollowpoint bullets in their firearms. The problem is that, in many instances, police aren’t held accountable for shooting and killing people in situations that do not warrant such force.

Sheriff Sue Rahr has asked Seattle police to review the investigation once it is completed to ensure it was thorough and without bias.

Gosh, the police shall investigate the police to be “thorough and without bias”. Isn’t investigating your own the DEFINITION of worst case bias?

Hollow-point, dumb-dumb, or other exploding small arms ammunition are banned under the international military treaties and conventions.

Because the police are not technically “military”, they continue to insist on using the ammunition on the American citizenry that causes the most grievous wounds possible.

War on Drugs, etc. Us-vs-Them mentality.

Hollow point bullets make a entry wound about the diameter of a normal person’s finger.

The exit wound is as large as a fist or pie plate. Or larger.

Hence, our military do not and not allowed to use hollow-point ammuntion as it is in contravention of the Hague Convention.

I think dogs and kids should be kept out of this.

Sorry pam, the other thing you’ll note if you read this site long enough is that cops shoot dogs…alot. In fact, I’d say they like it, gives them an easy excuse to use their cool toys.

Really? You haven’t been around the internet that long, have you?

That said, the pros and cons of ammo choice as it concerns innocent, unintended targets isn’t very helpful when the intended targets seem to be innocents themselves more often than not nowadays.

“Police hollow-point ammunition is incidentally BANNED by the Geneva Convention.”

It’s not, actually… though that statement does get regularly repeated all over internet.