Spitzer and Prostitution Ring?

daver

alafairnadia wrote: people aren't going to stop doing illegal things like abuse drugs or buy a prostitutes time just because they're illegal -- obvi, no? so why not make it legal and regulate it. cripes.

I agree with legalizing a lot of things, but not for that reason. Just because someone isn't going to stop doing it anyway is no reason to make it legal.

pitu

daver wrote: [quote=theoryofpractice]Had a thought today about one similarity between Guiliani and Spitzer -- former prosecutors make bad governors, prostitutes or no.

Well, except for the fact that Guiliani wasn't the governor... :?
Let's go with the spirit of that - former prosecutors making for bad people who govern :roll:

a case could surely be made, although I'd like to hear the other side of the argument

daver

pitu wrote: Let's go with the spirit of that - former prosecutors making for bad people who govern :roll:

a case could surely be made, although I'd like to hear the other side of the argument

So the question on the table is whether former prosecutors can make good in government? I suppose that is a question of taste. I would say that former Attorney General Bill Clinton made a good president. *shrug*

Other than Monica.

alafairnadia

daver wrote: [quote=alafairnadia]people aren't going to stop doing illegal things like abuse drugs or buy a prostitutes time just because they're illegal -- obvi, no? so why not make it legal and regulate it. cripes.

I agree with legalizing a lot of things, but not for that reason. Just because someone isn't going to stop doing it anyway is no reason to make it legal.

no, definitely not. if a pedophile isn't going to stop molesting kids, I don't think the solution is make pedophilia legal. and there are different reasons for making both prostitution and various forms of gambling legal versus reasons for making drug use (and therefore establishing trafficking and distribution paths) legal.

daver

alafairnadia wrote: no, definitely not. if a pedophile isn't going to stop molesting kids, I don't think the solution is make pedophilia legal. and there are different reasons for making both prostitution and various forms of gambling legal versus reasons for making drug use (and therefore establishing trafficking and distribution paths) legal.

I suppose that falls into the victimless realm. I reject the argument that personal drug use is not victimless based on the notion that the violent climate created around drug dealing has something to do with the drug. Go to Amsterdam and check out the violent drug culture. Rewind the American clock and witness the violence during Prohibition. As far as prostitution, I'm _all_ for morality, while simultaneously all _against_ legislation of it. So, um, one vote for alafairnadia's plan.

alafairnadia

daver wrote: [quote=alafairnadia]no, definitely not. if a pedophile isn't going to stop molesting kids, I don't think the solution is make pedophilia legal. and there are different reasons for making both prostitution and various forms of gambling legal versus reasons for making drug use (and therefore establishing trafficking and distribution paths) legal.

I suppose that falls into the victimless realm. I reject the argument that personal drug use is not victimless based on the notion that the violent climate created around drug dealing has something to do with the drug. Go to Amsterdam and check out the violent drug culture. Rewind the American clock and witness the violence during Prohibition. As far as prostitution, I'm _all_ for morality, while simultaneously all _against_ legislation of it. So, um, one vote for alafairnadia's plan.

oh yeah - make something illegal that a ton of people want, you're going to get violence. so it's not victimless in that sense. but it is the illegality that makes it take victims, if that makes sense? drug dealers wouldn't go around shooting people if they were put out of business by regulated industry that could undercut their pricing and make the purchase of the substance a safe experience.

and shit, I love playing poker and was seriously considering going to one of the illegal rooms around the city -- they're all somehow mobbed up and, like spitzer and prostitutes, there are always quite a few cops playing in them. then some guy got his head blown off a few months ago during a robbery and all I could think was ... the city could be making so much off of this operation but instead it's ripe for thieves who _know_ there's half a million bucks in cash just sitting there guarded by a couple wise guys. granted, the head-blowing-off thing was an accident - the stupid thief dropped his shotgun - but still. scary. thanks for the tentative support. when I run for office, or start lobbying someone, I'll let you know.

alafairnadia

back to spitzer:

I work in midtown east and was going to a hardware store at lunch since the one across from me has caulking that expired in 2005 and I wanted some quality, new product. anyway, as I walk in and look for an opportunity to interrupt the guys who are like the hardware expert types, they're talking about how the whole thing was a setup by the feds to get spitzer to resign. like, seriously - they thought it was this grand conspiracy. THEN, I stopped into a pizza joint to pick up some lunch and - no shit - someone else was earnestly trying to convince his buddy that the whole thing was a right-wing conspiracy. kinda fascinating.

jeffrey

alafairnadia wrote: ...and shit, I love playing poker...
...the city could be making so much off of this operation but instead it's ripe for thieves who _know_ there's half a million bucks in cash just sitting there guarded by a couple wise guys.

Sadly, in reality, the city would find some way to blow the old maxim that the house always wins (over the long run).

Witness OTB.

*scratches head*

theoryofpractice

daver wrote: [quote=theoryofpractice]Had a thought today about one similarity between Guiliani and Spitzer -- former prosecutors make bad governors, prostitutes or no.

Well, except for the fact that Guiliani wasn't the governor... :?

Did say he was the Governor, I said he was a governor, as in, "an official appointed to govern a town or region."

The point being (attempted?), guys who prosecute maybe aren't great at massaging the deals required for good governance.

theoryofpractice

jeffrey wrote: [quote=alafairnadia]...and shit, I love playing poker...
...the city could be making so much off of this operation but instead it's ripe for thieves who _know_ there's half a million bucks in cash just sitting there guarded by a couple wise guys.

Sadly, in reality, the city would find some way to blow the old maxim that the house always wins (over the long run).

Witness OTB.

*scratches head*

OTB is a money loser for the City because the State stands to eventually extract, via an inflexible formula, more than it makes in profit -- and the City would have to cover the shortfall. Hence the move by the Mayor to shut it down.

raw

The pics of the prostitute were a let down. Sure, she's attractive, but $1000.00/hour attractive? Then again, if she had to do it with Spitzer, she was underpaid.

mr. met

The pics of the prostitute were a let down. Sure, she's attractive, but $1000.00/hour attractive? Then again, if she had to do it with Spitzer, she was underpaid.

link?

maybe he paid $1000.00 because he wanted her to do some kinky shit.

daver

mr. met wrote:

The pics of the prostitute were a let down. Sure, she's attractive, but $1000.00/hour attractive? Then again, if she had to do it with Spitzer, she was underpaid.

link?

maybe he paid $1000.00 because he wanted her to do some kinky shit.

It is on the front of nytimes, ferchrissakes, use yer head man!
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/13/nyregion/12cnd-kristen.html
http://www.myspace.com/ninavenetta

mr. met

sorry, i don't read paper newspapers. thanks, though.

she's really hot. worth the G, i'd say.

daver

mr. met wrote: sorry, i don't read paper newspapers. thanks, though.

Nor do I. nytimes = nytimes.com = http://nytimes.com

mr. met

i saw that but the headline didn't give it away.

sprite

I thought Nicholas Kristoff's op-ed in today's NYT was interesting; am now rethinking my stand on legalizing prostitution. A quote:

One response would be: Prostitution is inevitable, so we might as well legalize and regulate it. That’s a pragmatic argument that I used to find persuasive. If brothels were legalized and inspected, I believed, then we could uproot child prostitution and reduce AIDS and sexually transmitted infections.

I changed my mind after looking at the experiences of other countries. The Netherlands formally adopted the legalization model in 2000, and there were modest public health benefits for the licensed prostitutes. But legalization nurtured a large sex industry and criminal gangs that trafficked underage girls, and so trafficking, violence and child prostitution flourished rather than dying out.

As a result, the Netherlands is now backtracking on its legalization model by closing some brothels, and other countries, like Bulgaria, are backing away from that approach.

In contrast, Sweden experimented in 1999 with a radically different approach that many now regard as much more successful: it decriminalized the sale of sex but made it a crime to buy sex. In effect, the policy was to arrest customers, but not the prostitutes.

Some Swedish prostitutes have complained that the policy reduced demand and thus lowered prices, while forcing sex work underground. But the evidence is strong that the new approach reduced trafficking in Sweden, and opinion polls show that Swedes regard the experiment as a considerable success. And the bottom line is that if you want to rape a 13-year-old girl imported from Eastern Europe, you’ll have a much easier time in Amsterdam than in Stockholm.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/13/opinion/13kristof.html?ref=opinion

daver

Saw an apropos opinion, not much substance to it though: The Myth of the Victimless Crime

drano

mr. met wrote: sorry, i don't read paper newspapers. thanks, though.

she's really hot. worth the G, i'd say.

Hot, sure, but dime-a-dozen hot. I doubt the fee worried Eliot too much, though - if I had his money I'd burn mine.

mr. met

Hot, sure, but dime-a-dozen hot. I doubt the fee worried Eliot too much, though - if I had his money I'd burn mine.

yea, i meant it was worth it for the spitzmeister or anyone else with a bunch of money.

sassyhermione29

Subject: Great info about Spitzer prostitution scandal

We all know that Spitzer has resigned.

What we don't know is why Spitzer, the former Attorney General of New York, disregarded his extensive first-hand knowledge of both state and federal law enforcement techniques, and made suspicious funds transfers that he must have known would catch the attention of investigators.

Could he have subconsciously wanted to get caught?

It's possible, especially since Spitzer was actually caught with the same methods he used to break up another prostitution ring during his time as attorney general.

Our story, "Why Was Spitzer So Reckless?"examines the possible psychological, social and even neurological reasons behind Spitzer's seeming self sabotage.

http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/politics/March-April-08/Why-Was-Spitzer-So-Reckless.html

mr. met

We all know that Spitzer has resigned.

What we don't know is why Spitzer, the former Attorney General of New York, disregarded his extensive first-hand knowledge of both state and federal law enforcement techniques, and made suspicious funds transfers that he must have known would catch the attention of investigators.

Could he have subconsciously wanted to get caught?

It's possible, especially since Spitzer was actually caught with the same methods he used to break up another prostitution ring during his time as attorney general.

Our story, "Why Was Spitzer So Reckless?"examines the possible psychological, social and even neurological reasons behind Spitzer's seeming self sabotage.

oh please, dude wanted to get laid and didn't think he would get caught. who knows why he didn't think he'd get caught. wanting to get laid makes guys do a lot of stupid things.

sassyhermione29

Yeah, he wanted to get laid. But HELLO! He was employing the EXACT SAME procedures to obtain his prostitutes that the people he was catching were using. He can't be that dumb!

daver

SassyHermione29 wrote: Yeah, he wanted to get laid. But HELLO! He was employing the EXACT SAME procedures to obtain his prostitutes that the people he was catching were using. He can't be that dumb!

Hey, I said that yesterday!
http://www.brooklynian.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=423110#423110

And perhaps, he _can_ be that dumb.

I figured your link to be a blatant shill, but I clicked anyway and there were actually some links of interest there. While there are no obvious answers, the reading was definitely interesting. So thanks for that.

eggcream

mr. met wrote:

true. but prostitution is victimless in most cases. and the war on drugs and the war on vice are both dumb because they will both be around forever, no matter what.

Totally disagree prostitution is victimless in most cases. Someone most always gets hurt, in this case Spitzers wife and 3 girls. This "Kristen" is a troubled young woman as well.

daver

eggcream wrote: [quote=mr. met]

true. but prostitution is victimless in most cases. and the war on drugs and the war on vice are both dumb because they will both be around forever, no matter what.

Totally disagree prostitution is victimless in most cases. Someone most always gets hurt, in this case Spitzers wife and 3 girls. This "Kristen" is a troubled young woman as well.
In my opinion, you are on rather unstable ground.

I do not doubt that "Kristen" is a troubled young woman. However, I believe that she is a grown up capable of making her own decisions.

I agree that Spitzer's wife and children have been harmed by this, but no more so than by any infidelity. Do you support locking up people who cheat on their spouses? Or otherwise harm their feelings?

I believe that this is firmly in the legislation of morality column. Would I elect someone who patronizes prostitutes? Not knowingly. Do I think it should be illegal to do so? Not 100%. Perhaps it has its place. Do I think Spitzer should have resigned? Absolutely. If nothing else, he did violate the public trust, he violated the law, whether I agree with that law or not, and the shell games with the money really bother me. Especially coming from him.

pitu

Patterson held a press conference this afternoon.
He was asked if he has ever patronized a prostitute.
He replied "Only the lobbyists"

Our new gov is sassy!

more of the substance of that press conference

sprite

pitu wrote: Patterson held a press conference this afternoon.
He was asked if he has ever patronized a prostitute.
He replied "Only the lobbyists"

Nice!

daver

Right on for Patterson, that is funny!

In other news, Penthouse to Spitzer Call Girl: Call Us.

raw

eggcream wrote: [quote=mr. met]

true. but prostitution is victimless in most cases. and the war on drugs and the war on vice are both dumb because they will both be around forever, no matter what.

Totally disagree prostitution is victimless in most cases. Someone most always gets hurt, in this case Spitzers wife and 3 girls. This "Kristen" is a troubled young woman as well.

And what about all those poor saps who worked for Shitzer? They worked for him believing he was Mr. Morals putting prostitution organizers behind bars. Now all the people who worked for Spitz are screwed, cleaning up their desks. I'd love to ask the former Governor if it was worth it. How long does an orgasm last anyways? Spitzer himself is more likely to relive the memory of getting busted than getting off.