Grasscity - Black Friday Sale - up to 70% Discount

Prostitution is illegal Attorneys are giving correct advice

Discussion in 'Pandora's Box' started by revjoel2013, Jan 24, 2014.

  1. #1 revjoel2013, Jan 24, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 24, 2014
    Stop calling independent escorts “prostitutes.” They are NOT prostitutes because they don't work for a pimp.  Independent escorts who offer erotic services are SEX WORKERS AND NOT PROSTITUTES.
    A prostitute is person who works for a pimp. It doesn't matter if they get paid for sex or not. As long as the pimp that is arranging a sex act, they are considered a prostitute. It doesn't matter if the pimp gets paid. The pimp can be a person who receives non-monetary favors.
     
    When there is a pimp involved, the act is consider prostitution not sex work. Prostitution is commercial sex.
     
    Not all street walkers are prostitutes. If they solicit on the street and there is no pimp, the act is considered loitering for soliciting sex acts.  The solicitation on the streets is considered prostitution when there is a pimp involved.  
     
    I hope people will change their terminology to be in line with the legal terminology. Associating “escort services” and “escorts” with “prostitution” and “prostitute” gives escorts a bad name.
    The words “prostitution” and “prostitutes” give a bad perception towards “escorts” and “escort service.”
     
    When the police chief make the statement that prostitution is NOT a victimless crime, they are correct. Prostitution involves a pimp or a prostitution ring.  Organized prostitution ring or pimping contributes to other crimes in a neighborhood.
     
    “[3] A prostitute is defined as a woman who offers herself indiscriminately to sexual intercourse for hire (People v. Romo, 200 Cal.App.2d 83, 90, 19 Cal.Rptr. 179; People v. Phillips, 70 Cal.App.2d 449, 452, 160 P.2d 872).” - PEOPLE of the State of California, v. Calvin Willie ROBISON, 4 Cal.App.3d 1014
     
     â€œhire. vb. To employ a person for labor or services. A bailment, where compensation is to be given the use of a thing, or for labor or services about it. The contract of letting and hiring is usually divided into two kinds; first, Locatio, or Locatio conductio rei, the bailment of a thing to be used by the hirer, for compensation to be paid by him. Secondly, Locatio operis, or the hire of the labor and services of the hirer, for a compensation to be paid by the letter. ” -Dean's Law Dictionary
     
    “A case might be made for limiting the offense of prostitution to “promiscuous” sexual activity for hire. 25 Requiring promiscuity as well as hire would, for example, bar prosecution of a mistress who is supported by her lover. Such situations fall somewhat outside the target evils of our Section, but the “hire” requirement itself is probably a sufficient safeguard, since the lover's financial contributions in these relationships are more likely to be interpreted as gifts out of general affection rather than “hire” for sexual activity.” -MPC Comment pg.175 (12)
     
    The statement “Do as thou wilt is the whole of the law. Love under will. Love under will”  doesn't grant the right to pimp someone. The decision to have sex should be a personal decision and not based on another. A pimp is imposing his or her will on the person under them.  There is no constitutional right to liberty to engage in prostitution under the 14<sup>th</sup> amendment. The liberty is not personal but based on a pimp with or without prostitution ring.
     
     By making a legal argument in court there is a constitutional right to patronize a prostitute, the defendant or the plaintiff is asking the court to grant a constitutional right to patronize a pimp or a person working for a pimp. The courts have ruled there is no constitutional right to patronize a prostitute because prostitution is a commercial activity.  The pimp creates a commercial sex situation. I have not seen a court case where the judge ruled on the right to patronize a sex worker.
     
    Prostitution is illegal. That is correct.  No attorney is giving bad advice by stating that prostitution is illegal. If an independent escort did not rebut the presumption of the pimp, they are admitting to prostitution (depend on the state).  Just remember there can an imaginary or fictional pimp that can exist in the legal system unless rebutted.
     
    This is not a word game. My definitions of “prostitute” and “prostitution” are based on court decisions.  An allegory is the difference between asking for “hamburger” vs. “hotdogs.”
     
     Not legal advice. For educational purpose only!!

     
  2. [quote name="revjoel2013" post="19394907" timestamp="1390527001"]“[3] A prostitute is defined as a woman who offers herself indiscriminately to sexual intercourse for hire (People v. Romo, 200 Cal.App.2d 83, 90, 19 Cal.Rptr. 179; People v. Phillips, 70 Cal.App.2d 449, 452, 160 P.2d 872).” - PEOPLE of the State of California, v. Calvin Willie ROBISON, 4 Cal.App.3d 1014[/quote]Sounds like an escort to me. Sent from my iPhone using Grasscity Forum
     
  3. What about "whores"?
     
  4. legalize it!!! a pimp gotta make his bread
     
  5.  â€œReturn. To bring, carry, or send back; to place in the custody of; to restore; to re-deliver. “Return: means that something which has had a prior existence will be brought or sent back. Sims v Western Steel Co., C.A. Utah, 551 F.2d 811, 820.””
     â€“ Black's Law Dictionary 6th Edition
    “another. adj. Additional. A second, extra, one more, supplemental, distinct, different, separate, variant.“
     â€“West's Legal Thesaurus/Dictionary by William Statsky
    “Other, adj. Additional; different or distinct from that already mentioned (the other factor).”
    - West's Legal Thesaurus/Dictionary by William Statsky
    Note: “Another” can communicate there are three parties involved. Here is an example sentence.
     
    § 11-34.1-1 Definitions. – The following words and phrases, when used in this chapter, have the following meanings: ……..
     
    (2) “Commercial sexual activity” means any sexual conduct which is performed or promised in return for a fee. ………
     
    § 11-34.1-2 Prostitution. – (a) A person is guilty of prostitution when such person engages or agrees or offers to engage in sexual conduct with another person in return for a fee. Any person found guilty under this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be subject to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six (6) months, or to a fine of not less than two hundred fifty dollars ($250) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or both. ………..
     
    Note: “performed” and “promised” are past tense verbs. The phase “return for a fee” communicates paying after the sex act. The word “another” and “return” can be interpreted as a pimp involved.
     
    www.sugarcitizens.net
     
  6. #7 Blix, Jan 24, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 24, 2014
    Keep on playing word games, but
    I'm not seeing a judge buying it.
     
  7. Prostitution is legal and regulated in Australia....
     
    But fucking expensive tho..... $350 for an hour with a girl...... there are some joint which run for $160 p/hr, but the cheaper joints aren't as good
     
  8. #9 revjoel2013, Jan 24, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 24, 2014
    I know who I am. I am a sovereign. I set my law. My will is the law.

    One of my law is "Do as thou wilt is the whole law. Love under will. Love under will."

    As long as my law don't contradict the courts opinion, there is no controversy.

    Sex work is lawful under my law. I don't know if it is legal or not because legal have to do with the bar association policy.
    I am not admitting to any crime or wrong doing.

    I cannot comment on the bar association policy because it is NOT my policy.

    If there is controversy between my laws, the laws of the state or bar association policy, let the judges decides.

    You don't want controversy. You don't set your law. There is no controversy. No constitutional challenge. Then it is OK police to sting escorts and hobbyist.

    I am not suggesting anyone commit future crimes. If you got injured, it is time to set your law and to bring it up in court.

    We live in the adult stage of the age of Horus. There is no reason why we cannot do as thou wilt.

    I am not a fanatic sovereign that think it is OK to drive without a driver's license. Anything that is dangerous but is not intent to cause harm or injury should not be ban but regulated. I am for reasonable government regulation and paying my fair share in taxes.

    What I am not OK with is the government getting into my private life. The government is a communist regime when the government can tell you that you cannot contract for something lawful; sex. Yes, there should be reasonable regulation like you cannot do it on the streets because it cause devaluation of people's properties. But in private, you should have the freedom.
     
    You can call me the "The second "Aleister Crowley "."  I will declare over the internet that the Age of Horus reach adult stage this April 2014.
     
  9. #10 revjoel2013, Jan 24, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 24, 2014
    My law is not from outer space. Read this journal article. Do you think the attorneys are contracting this journal article when they say prostitution is illegal?
     
    In my opinion, "No." The prostitution laws depends on the context. People may think that attorneys are giving incorrect advice because this journal articles and court decisions on mistress-lovers relationship. They are not. They are telling the truth and giving good advice.
     
    The intent is that the federal government regulate prostitution in  interstate commerce . The state government regulate prostitution in intrastate commerce
     
    The American Law Institute is the "people" in the 10th amendment that regulate commercial prostitution.
     
     
     
    http://www.pennstatelawreview.org/117/3/Motyl%20final.pdf
     
  10. The police, the judge, juries, and warden do not give a single fuck about your philosophies. I assume you live in the united states. That means that for the privilege of living on u.s. soil, and the privilege for taking advantage of the services the u.s. government offers up (streets, schools, sewage, military protecttion, etc.) You agree to abide by their laws and ordinances. And if you break one of those laws and are caught, then you are subject to the penalties that go along with breaking those laws.

    No judge in the history of judges has ever, or will ever say: "oh shit! You're a sovereign citizen and you have your own laws that are different from ours? Guess I have to let you go then.". You will go to prison and get butt rammed.

    I know you have your own philosophies which is cute and all, but reality doesn't make exceptions for people with hard opinions on things.
     
  11. You don't want to contest the laws!!! I will contest the laws.  If people don't ask the right questions and demand justice, were is justice???
     
    You going to believe the judges, prosecutors, and police don't give a damm. Since I expose the prostitution laws, the sting operations is in a decline. Before I say something, the stings were all over the place against escorts.
     
    You think that the police going to arrest me and a mistress for prostitution. I have talk to cops about it and they know to leave a lovers and mistresses alone.
     
    Maybe people think the same thing of MLK.
     
  12. Well, escorts have pimps too (as in someone who arranges the meetings), hell they even got their own drivers now. 
     
  13. What the fuck are you talking about? I am starting to smell troll shit here.
     
  14. Which is right??? Attorney's advice that prostitution is illegal or this law journal article???

    I am trying to explain it in a way that the law journal article and court ruling on mistress-lovers relationship doesn't contradict the attorney's advice that prostitution is illegal.

    Trading Sex for College Tuition: How Sugar Daddy “Dating” Sites May Be Sugar Coating Prostitution

    http://www.pennstatelawreview.org/117/3/Motyl%20final.pdf
     
    You tell me!!
     
  15. Well I have to make an exception to my claims that attorneys are giving correct advice until I figure out how to explain this.
     
    Sec. 43.02. PROSTITUTION. (a) A person commits an offense if he knowingly: (1) offers to engage, agrees to engage, or engages in sexual conduct for a fee; or (2) solicits another in a public place to engage with him in sexual conduct for hire.
    ( B) An offense is established under Subsection (a)(1) whether the actor is to receive or pay a fee. An offense is established under Subsection (a)(2) whether the actor solicits a person to hire him or offers to hire the person solicited.
     
    Someone point out to me that Texas Prostitution Statutes is sexist. I didn't see it the first time. But the more I read it, I can see it.  The "he" and "him" makes it sexist.  I tried to find out through the rules of construction and the definition section. It doesn't set a different definition rules.  
     
    (a)1 looks like applies to male prostitute or john.  
     
    (a)2 looks like applies to homosexual prostitution.  
     
    How does this applies to female escorts?
     
  16. Trading sex for money is illegal...period! In the united states anyway. Not that it is right...I disagree with such laws, but if you trade sex for money you are a prostitute and will be prosecuted if you are caught.
     
  17. #18 revjoel2013, Jan 24, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 24, 2014
    You telling me that the law journal article is wrong. When do you see mistress (sugar babies) or lovers (sugar daddies) get charged with prostitution?
     
    Do you see police going after sugar babies and sugar daddies for prostitution?
     
    Yes, being an escort or a client of an escort is exposed to prostitution sting. 
     
    I don't see sugar babies and sugar daddies exposed to sting operations.
     
  18. I read TX prostitution statutes several months ago. I did not catch it. Please don't blame anyone for not reading it correctly. Someone on the message board point this out to me. If they did not point it out, I will never catch it.
     
     
  19. I studied statutes, court decisions, this law journal articles, and attorney advice.

    If set in the context of pimping and prostitution rings, there will be no contradiction.

    The principle will not contract any statutes, court ruling, statutes, Model Penal Code, and this journal article with some exceptions.

    http://www.pennstatelawreview.org/117/3/Motyl%20final.pdf

    Maybe I will figure it out how to make the principle fit in all 50 states.

    I consider myself a legal artist.
     
Loading...

Share This Page