Allowing sex workers safety and protection.

[sutty27]

That worked really well in the states a few years ago.

 

The legislation was flawed, and it still managed to reduce the amount consumed and the number of deaths associated with its consumption.

[monkey104]

A land mark ruling that would have tested the right of sex workers to offer services together in brothels to protect themselves has collapsed, due to the ill health of a police officer who brought the charges:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/mar/29/sex-workers-rights-case-collapses-after-five-years

 

This is such a shame, as there is no doubt that many working in the sex industry are vulnerable to, and at risk from all manner of violence and abuse.

This prosecution of the women should not have happened anyway.

 

I agree. I lived in Germany for 9 years and part of my patrol pattern was to visit the brothels ensuring the safety and security of servicemen. ( and to make sure they were behaving).

The brothels were out in industrial estates and covered by CCTV. The girls had to have regular health checks and pay tax.

There was security on the door and the girls felt safe.

Prostitution is the oldest profession in the world and is not going to go away so why not make it safer for the sex workers and clients alike by regulating it?

[Stranza]

Which country has it about right?

I would have guessed Holland previously but I've only seen the industry from a tourist in Amsterdam perspective.

 

O.k. the UK is rubbish to it's sex workers but who has the best model to follow?

[sutty27]

Which country has it about right?

I would have guessed Holland previously but I've only seen the industry from a tourist in Amsterdam perspective.

 

O.k. the UK is rubbish to it's sex workers but who has the best model to follow?

 

New Zeeland.

[crookedspire]

After watching an ' Very British Brothel' featuring an well known Sheffield sauna is it time to give ' ladies of the night's an safe space to work instead of this unofficial turn an blind eye policy? I really think it should be legal instead of women working on the streets giving an chance for an wannabe ripper to strike let's face it men want sex married or not theirs always going to be an demand for it.

[Cyclone]

Yes, its very close.

 

UK market for illicit drugs is around £5 billion.

 

Tobacco smuggling costs over £2 billion in lost revenue each year.

 

Alcohol smuggling costs the UK economy around £1 billion a year in lost revenue.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjhgariiO3LAhWJuRoKHSpdA4cQFggtMAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.gov.uk%2Fgovernment%2Fuploads%2Fsystem%2Fuploads%2Fattachment_data%2Ffile%2F401233%2F04562_alcohol_quartely_report_IW_v1D_web.pdf&usg=AFQjCNFqZJnh-VqJ1XCchP4v7QY2k411vA&bvm=bv.118443451,d.d2s

 

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwizzb2gie3LAhUEXhoKHR5_AaYQFggjMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.gov.uk%2Fgovernment%2Fuploads%2Fsystem%2Fuploads%2Fattachment_data%2Ffile%2F418732%2FTackling_illicit_tobacco_-_From_leaf_to_light__2015_.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGs9aAcSndH5-t89DtOkVC31NN0TA&bvm=bv.118443451,d.d2s

 

Lost tax revenue is not at all the same thing as the value of the trade.

 

---------- Post added 12-01-2017 at 22:29 ----------

 

£3 billion in lost tax means the total sales of illicit tobacco and alcohol is higher than £3 billion.

 

No it doesn't. The tax on tobacco is something like 70% isn't it? In which case the sale price without tax would be only 30%, so if that's the price they sell at (it might not be) it would mean the total sales would be less than £1.5billion.

 

Interesting reading though, the black market is created by the high level of taxation, legality not withstanding in this case.

So legalise drugs, and don't punitively tax them.

Legalise prostitution and tax the income like any other income.

 

---------- Post added 12-01-2017 at 22:34 ----------

 

Drug dealers will sill find buyers, they will sell higher potency, sell to kids.

 

All the evidence (which we've gone through with you before) says otherwise.

 

---------- Post added 12-01-2017 at 22:35 ----------

 

I wouldn't criminalise the user, I would help them stop using it, it would be illegal to produce, sell and distribute, but not use.

 

On what moral basis would you ground this action?

Edited January 12, 2017 by Cyclone