Feds can pay award for turning in foreign violators of U.S. prostitution law

[ICU 812]

Several concepts on this thread . . .help me keep them straight.

The one that I am not sure about just now has to do with a SD/SB situation. Outside of being considered prostitution, Is this also considered "Sex Trafficking" now?

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Gotyour6

Then leave

Simple

And prostitution is not federal but sex trafficking is.

You meet a hooker outside the country that is sex trafficking.

That 300 a month hooker is a federal charge

Dear SkankHunt42,

If you meet your Venezuelan girlfriend in Aruba or Lima or where ever, and if the two of you make love, that is not sex trafficking. If you help her and her family, who like most in Venezuela are destitute and don't have enough to eat, you're doing something positive.

When you engage in PFP for $20 to $100 in Rochester, New York with a Back Page provider, there's a very good chance you're having sex with someone who IS being trafficked. Furthermore, you may be enabling someone with a drug habit, and a good chunk of what you're paying may be going to a pimp (that is, a sex trafficker).

Again, IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE WHETHER THE WOMAN IS INSIDE OR OUTSIDE THE USA. Regardless of whether you see a provider in Rochester or Bangkok, arguably you are involved in sex trafficking, as defined in the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000.

Davephx's original post refers to reward money that the Department of State may offer to combat SEVERE trafficking.

SEVERE Sex Trafficking is defined as follows,

(A) sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age; or

(B) the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services, through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.

Unless you're a pimp, or you have sex with underage girls, or you force or coerce a women to take your money and have sex, then you are not engaged in SEVERE sex trafficking.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

The one that I am not sure about just now has to do with a SD/SB situation. Outside of being considered prostitution, Is this also considered "Sex Trafficking" now?

No, This is something that SkankHunt42 (alias GotYour6) made up to annoy another poster, who has a Venezuelan girlfriend who he supports. A real SD/SB relationship is not prostitution or sex trafficking.

[sjohnlewis]

Originally Posted by ilikefun

Reward not award.

Who cares about that? I want to know how much. Damn I have a whole list of hookers. How much do I get for turning each one in?
Where to I turn them in, or who do we contact? Can we use their hobby name, or do we have have their real names? What about the pimps, do we get more money for them?

What about the girls that only do this part time for fun, do they count? What about the ugly girls who only do it for pay because it is the only way that they can get it

This is looking better and better for the guys.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Tiny

SEVERE Sex Trafficking is defined as follows,

(A) sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age; or

Sorry to be monopolizing the thread -- giving this some further thought, the feds can use the following definition for sex trafficking:

"The term sex trafficking' means the...obtaining of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act."

So, let's say you obtain a provider for the purpose of having sex. Then they presumably can try to say you're involved in sex trafficking. That potentially isn't a big deal, but I don't know. I couldn't find a penalty for simple sex trafficking, but then you'd probably need to be a lawyer and spend a couple of weeks researching federal statutes and regulations to know whether it's a federal offense.

However, what if that provider was, perhaps unknown to you, "induced by force, fraud, or coercion" into having sex with you. This could be the case if she has a pimp, or is in some Asian Massage Parlor where she's threatened with violence if she leaves the establishment.

Then I think the law is clear. By definition (see three posts up in this thread), the simple sex trafficking becomes SEVERE sex trafficking, and you're potentially exposed to something very serious, if you assume that "the obtaining of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act" is the same as banging a provider.

This isn't anything new though, the law has been around for eighteen years, and I guess we can take some comfort in knowing they aren't throwing people in jail for 25 years simply for seeing a prostitute.

[xfrankthetankx]

Trafficking requires that the victim is underage or if of age that they are being forced or coerced by a trafficker (read as manager, etc.).

But the media and the wording of this bill equates prostitution and sex trafficking as the exact same thing.

[woodyboyd]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

The one that I am not sure about just now has to do with a SD/SB situation. Outside of being considered prostitution, Is this also considered "Sex Trafficking" now?

ICU, the definition of trafficking that applies to the U.S. is the use of money to coerce a woman into having sex. The federal law uses the term recruitment.

If you know GY6's history, you would learn he has a SB he met when she was in high school somewhere like the mall and he is banging women who likely are pimped out on Backpage. He is the EXACT kind of guy D.A.s are looking to prosecute. They put his 40 or 50 something ass and the 18 year old in pig tails and a school girl outfit in front of a jury, and it's all over for him.

It's very hard to say a john recruited or coerced someone already in the sex trade or puts herself out there on a website like Seeking Arrangement. He was telling other guys to be real men like him and hunt young women who are high school age "in the wild". I said following GY6's advice was horrible and dangerous, and the troll just couldn't stand the fact that I called him out on this.

He's trying to deflect from my success story of a girl I met abroad and fell in love with. He is jealous of my success, and he has called her a whore and said I am breaking the law. I pay $300 a month for an apartment for her and send her parents a $100 per month for food. If I was dumb enough to tell her, "Only reason I am paying for this is for sex. The minute you cut me off, the food and apartment are gone.", and she recorded it, then the feds might, might have a case. Instead I have a million texts, pics, and videos that show the world the sex we are having is based out of love.

But let's say she recorded this and it were true. The real question is why any jury here would believe the feds give a fuck about any foreign woman. Trump is trying to deport them, and Obama droned to death hundreds of innocent ones.

IMO what the feds want is money. The drug cartels are enslaving a lot of women and using those women to pull in a lot of cash, and the feds think any money obtained in an illegal trade belongs to them. That is the kind of case they want.