Sheriff Sues Craiglist For Prostitution Ads 695
Amerika writes "Craigslist is 'the single largest source of prostitution in the nation,' according to Cook County, Illinois Sheriff Thomas Dart. He has announced that he's filing a lawsuit against the popular classifieds site. Craigslist says it's determined to prevent criminal activity." NewYorkCountryLawyer adds a link to the 28-page complaint (PDF), which "alleges that Craigslist maintains 21 classifications of sex-for-hire, coded as 'w4m,' 'm4m,' 'm4w,' etc." and that it has facilitated child prostitution and kidnapping and human trafficking.
Ok, he's a hero (sometimes) (Score:5, Interesting)
Sheriff Dart has taken a stance against mortgage companies that are evicting renter's from homes that property owners are allowing to go into eviction. Sheriff Dart says, "Too many renters are being evicted for landlords' problems".
You think the Sheriff would love Craigslist... (Score:2, Interesting)
After all, it nicely lists all the sex providers for him to go after.
Of course, that would be a lot of work for him. So I can understand his desire to secure society by making the location of sex providers obscure ;)
when did singles sites become... (Score:2, Interesting)
when did singles sites become the target of prostitution crack-downs? just because craigslist has a "personals" section means that it is solely for prostitution? does this mean that _everyone_ on there is soliciting or seeking prostitution?
there is clearly a double standard toward craigslist and every other way to meet new members of the opposite (or same) gender. whether this is a double standard or not is irrelevant, this must be stopped; these pathetic knee-jerk "omg protect teh chrilden!1!!" is making me sick, it's everywhere
Standing? (Score:4, Interesting)
As this is a civil case, doesn't one need standing [wikipedia.org] to file a suit? As I understand it, that means that the individual bringing the suit has to ask for a remedy the court can provide, which would be redress of damage. Party A can't sue B for what B did to C because A was not harmed, and therefore has no standing. In what way has craigslist damaged the sherrif, and what damages is he asking the court to redress, exactly?
Re:All consentual sexual relationships are... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:when did singles sites become... (Score:4, Interesting)
Indeed. The Sheriff is correct that craigslist is carrying ads that any reasonable person would conclude are for prostitution. For sure.
The question is, what are the Sheriff's real motivations? Law-enforcement crackdowns on prostitution are spotty at best, so why this, why now?
The primary motivation against prostitution comes from females, who loathe it like all businesspeople loathe competition. These days success in business comes easiest to those who seize the law to ban their competition, and women-in-general have done exactly this.
To put it another way: the presence of legal prostitutes will increase what your female partner is willing to do in bed.
Given this, all male attacks on prostitution must be some attempt to curry favor with females. Or they've got a bad case of the Jesus.
Re:He didn't sue the mortgage banks (Score:5, Interesting)
But if those low rates were offered to the old occupants, I bet they would not have had to move out...
Even from a greed standpoint, that kind of crap didn't seem to make sense to me. Wouldn't it have been cheaper to cut the original owners the deal, instead of repossessing and reselling at the lower monthly rates? And paying for advertising about the low rates?
Re:The Biggest Prostitute: +1, Informative (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:He didn't sue the mortgage banks (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, extreme cases. Refusing to evict a rent-paying tenant because a bank wants to let a house sit empty and unsold in a rapidly-shrinking economy is not such a case.
Even if Federal interests were implicated, the Posse Comitatus and Insurrection Acts place severe restrictions on the ability of the President to use military forces (including federalized national guard units) for law enforcement. There essentially has to be an insurrection or disturbance of sufficient severity that the state cannot enforce order. Eisenhower got away with it in 1957 because the Governor of Georgia tried to use Georgia's national guard to violate the Fourteenth Amendment, giving a pretty good argument for insurrection.
When Governor George Wallace tried to block enrollment of black students at the University of Alabama in 1963, there was no national guard involved, and the DoJ sent a Deputy Attorney General and US Marshals.
Now, they could try using US Marshals for eviction without hitting the Posse Comitatus Act, but even then, the federal government's jurisdiction would be murky at best, particularly if there is no bankruptcy case involved. Eviction proceedings and real property rights are primarily a state matter. One could reasonably argue that the bank's Fifth Amendment rights against property being taken are being infringed, but they are receiving compensation in the form of rent, making the applicability of the Takings Clause arguable (the court would have to decide that it doesn't meet the requirement of "just compensation").
The best argument is probably due process -- the bank isn't really getting any. But, until the bank exhausts state remedies (that is, state courts and higher law enforcement have all declined to intervene), federal courts and the President would be unlikely to involve themselves.
Re:Read the Complaint (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually there have been numerous cases of underage prostitutes, willing and otherwise, on Craigslist.
Do you have any data to back this claim?
So... Kinko (Score:2, Interesting)
Let me attempt to assist authorities in prosecuting such heinous crime.
I was at a Kinko's store happily surfing when a girl next to me asked for help. I duly assisted her in setting up her Craigslist "erotic services" ad. [She offered me her business too but I pointed out to her her ad: her hourly rate was higher than what I make consulting. That gave me a graceful way to bow out)
Presently, after a few minutes of exposure, her ad generated responses. The entire room was treated to her loudly intoning "Yes! Yes! (Fsck) me! I love it in my (Ascii)..." Half the people in the room came to their feet, red-faced, while the other half...oh, we were stretched back in our seats laughing our heads off.
There you have it. Guilty as charged.
Re:Prostitution? (Score:5, Interesting)
I found my stolen car on there, and had the local Fox affiliate cover it, so I shouldn't complaining.
No BS, check the link from my homepage if you don't want to believe it.
Go CraigsList!
Re:Stupid intelligence (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, I've known some too, on a friendly, not professional basis. It's an interesting business to learn about, but not the safest out there.
I believe the terminology varies by area, as do some of the terms. In the end it's all the same. Guy is lonely, and wants to spend time with a pretty girl. Guy leaves some money in a conspicuous place. Adult things happen. Guy leaves happy. Girl leaves happy and a little richer.
My apologies, as I'm used to referencing proper professionals (versus street walkers) as escorts. No offense is intended.
Myself, I see no problem with it. I don't believe it should be against the law.
When I was in Toronto, I was in for a bit of a culture shock when I talked to some people there. Massage parlors, incall, outcall, and even "full service" strip clubs are perfectly acceptable. Toronto does not allow "street walkers". The general idea is, it's going to happen, like it or not. Be courteous. Anything that happens in the privacy of your [home|hotel|etc] between two consenting adults is exactly that.
I was addressing it from the law enforcement side. The majority of areas in the US have laws against it, and those are enforced. If they want to enforce it, there are much easier ways to enforce it, than to shut down one of the easiest places to make a visible statement. So you've picked up all the obvious street walkers, so they don't walk the streets. The next most visible is Craigslist, or any of many numerous print advertisements that list providers of these services. There will always be some web site that carries advertisements. Hell, searching Google is the most obvious.
**WARNING** Links NSFW! I'm writing most of this for those who are completely naive. Hey, lots of people don't know the business. I just happen to talk to a lot of people, and escorts have been some of them.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=chicago+escort [google.com]
or even searching for the full deal
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=chicago+escort+gfe [google.com]
Sorry, there are only over 300,000 pages for the "GirlFriend Experience" in Chicago.
Ok, so there are about 350 postings today on http://chicago.craigslist.org/ers [craigslist.org], and anyone who has a clue knows a decent percentage of these are duplicates, fake pictures (wrong girl shows up) or trouble (thug comes, takes your money, and laughs on the way out the door). Some are legit.
If they legalized it, a lot of the problems would go away. Right now, if a thug instead of the shown pretty girl shows up and robs you, you can't do much about it. Try calling the police and say "I was trying to pay for an escort, but some guy came and robbed me instead!". That's a spontaneous confession, and enough to land you in jail at least for the night. Talk about adding insult to injury. If it's perfectly legal, the same phone call would get the cops to your door, and hopefully get your money back and land the thug in jail. There is a whole list of other reasons that it should be legalized, that's only one minor example.
As I've been told many times before, it doesn't matter if it's an escort, a girlfriend, or a wife, you're always paying for sex. At least with an escort, you know the terms of what you're paying for. You will pay $x for $y hours. When the night is done, she'll leave (or you'll leave, depending on who's place it is), and you won't ever have to talk to her again unless you want to. With a girlfriend, you'll buy dinner, flowers, pay for movies, whatever, and then sex in the end isn't guaranteed. And once you're married, the guarantee is that you'll pay for the rest of your life, and sex may happen occasionally if you're lucky. :)
Re:Regulate and tax it (Score:2, Interesting)
Once you understand the fundamental end-game then the intermediary steps of not funding embryonic-stemcell research and being against prostitution come from.
Re:In other countries... (Score:2, Interesting)
The AC probably jumped to the conclusion that the sheriff was on a crusade based on religious temperament.
All in all, it was pretty easy to follow to me, if not necessarily well founded.
It's not really an improper conclusion. Show me one non-theist that believes prostitution is improper, and I'll show you a closet theist.
Only those who believe in some imaginary divine morality have an issue with folks selling sexual services.
Re:Standing? (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't know if you've been following the Chris Brown/Rhianna situation (both are popular R&B singers). Chris Brown allegedly beat Rhianna to an unconscious pulp. Actually, there's no "allegedly" about it as he did in fact do it. The response on sites like MTV.com have been by and large, pro Chris Brown, with many people (surprisingly women) saying that Rhianna deserved to get beaten up. She "asked for it", she wouldn't get out of his car, she "gave him an STD" (of which there is not even anecdotal evidence of this). MTV was so stunned and saddened by the response that the network commissioned a documentary to address domestic violence. It's really only been in the last 20 years that we've acknowledged women's issues like domestic violence and sex work.
The reality is that in the US, women don't amount to much. They have to be protected from themselves. Their worth as human beings is tied directly to their virginity and their ability to birth sons; so much of our morality laws were designed to reign in attempts by women to control their sexuality.
Wow, that sounded very feminist of me. Ending my rant now. :D
Re:In other countries... (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah, no one is really being hurt by this.
Heck, if prostitution moves entirely online, it'll be a good thing. The "bad image" caused by streetwalkers and such will go away, since the actual "marketing" of services happens invisibly online, and those involved can meet up in private.
It'll make law enforcement easier. It's far easier to track someone online that in real life, at least in the US it is.
Re:All consentual sexual relationships are... (Score:3, Interesting)
Though most prostitutes that aren't complete crack ho skanks with AIDS (i.e. the kind of girl you'd ask out on a normal date) cost more than dinner at the fucking Olive Garden
I think if you give serious consideration to all costs involved and run the numbers, you'll find that prostitutes compare favorably with traditional relationships in terms of cost.
Try keeping track of it sometime, how much you spend on a girl before she'll have sex with you. And compare that with the cost of an attractive prostitute ($150-$250).
Even funnier is if you keep track of it over time. My wife and I have what I consider to be a healthy sex life, but if I had to add up everything being in the relationship cost me (including kids) and divide that by the number of times we have had sex, the result would definitely suggest that hiring prostitutes instead of getting married would have been a sound financial decision.
Remember, if it flies, floats, or fornicates, rent, don't buy. It's cheaper in the long run.