Link:
http://brandysbedroom.wordpress.com/...e-step-closer/
On May 11, 2011, the Texas House took a step to combat human trafficking and reduce commercial sexual exploitation of children and adults with the passage of HB 1994, which authorizes”…the creation of first-offender programs at the local level for eligible first-time prostitution and trafficking offenders.”
Also called a “john” school.
The Bill was introduced by Rep. Randy Weber, R-Pearland, who stated, “This is a program aimed at first offenders. This is aimed at educating those arrested on the negative consequences of the sex trade and human trafficking,” Weber said. “It is a program which goes after the demand of the sex trade–it’s the johns.”
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/82R/analysis/html/HB01994H.htm
Chara McMichael, Chief of Staff for Rep. Weber, explains that he carried HB 4009 last year to create a statewide Human Trafficking Prevention Taskforce consisting of members of law-enforcement departments, prosecutors and service agencies. Since then, regional taskforces have also been formed.
“Representative Weber introduced HB 1994 because, whether it is the commercial sex industry or human trafficking, we will never cut back supply if we do not reduce demand,”
Rep. Randy Weber, R-Pearland notes that there are currently forty “john” schools in the United States, “…with low recidivism rates in those communities, including Waco, where only three repeat offenders have been reported since 2002.”
Rep. Jessica Farrar, D-Houston, said she was not as familiar with the industry as Weber and asked what exactly he meant by a “john.” Farrar questioned why such a person –the” john” — should have deferred adjudication for a first-time offense.
“Likewise, I’m not familiar either,” Weber said. “The john, and let’s face it, in the vast majority, is the man that is soliciting prostitution and we aim to go at the demand.”
-----------------------
Forced trafficking for any reason is a terrible crime. But let’s stop lumping all prostitution with forced trafficking, it is two separate animals. I can see what they see as this is a feel good bill. Let’s rescue these poor people by taking away the demand for their services. But realistically, it is not helping anyone (except for the local government in the way of fees and voting supporters). Soliciting another person for the purpose of prostitution is ALREADY a crime. So what? You think threatening them with a crime AND a classroom is going to keep people from doing this when just having a criminal record wasn’t enough? “Oooh I better not pick up a ho because I may have to go to CLASS.”
And what is class going to be like? They are going to bring in only the horror stories, the worst of the worst, to lecture these men like five year olds on how if you pick up a prostitute on Leopard Street, somewhere in China a 10 year old gets murdered by a violent pimp. Remember the old saying? Step on a crack you break a mothers back. Yea, kinda like that. Are these ‘Johns’ going to be the ones that pick up street walkers? Or are they going to be the ones who hire online escorts? Because the latter isn’t going to believe a damn thing the class teaches them. They know better.
But lets talk about who this bill is trying to protect. The women involved in prostitution. Let’s take away their ability to feed themselves and their family and to pay their bills. Wonderful idea. What’s going to happen to them? Is the pimp going to say “oh, no more customers, you can go home now as long as you promise to not rat me out.” Um no. Get ready to find some more body parts scattered in the underbrush. What about the women who do this without a pimp, who do this willingly due to economic needs? Start cutting back on the demand and these women are going to need to compete more for the dwindling customers. Before if a man wanted to have sex without a condom we could say to hell with you, NEXT. But if we don’t know if and when there will be a next, a woman may engage in riskier behavior. I wrote about this before somewhere, not sure if it was on my blog or someone elses but I’ll re-iterate it here:
Two prostitutes and five customers. If the customer wants to do something I don’t agree with they can kiss my ass and find someone else because I know there is another customer.
Two prostitutes and one customer. Well now I have to compete with the other hooker to get paid so I’ll either have to undercut her price or offer something she doesn’t (which may be something I don’t want to do in the first place) so that I can eat tonight or keep the electric on.
You people aren’t thinking about the women who need to do this. Whether that need is eating or avoiding getting beat up by a pimp. Because you know who the pimp is going to blame if honey don’t make him money.
Now the good clients may get deterred. The bad clients don’t give a shit. This is the same argument I have against the Swedish model where selling sex is legal but purchasing sex is bad. Anytime you try to go after the demand it’s the women who suffer because of it. It forces us to find our clients deeper underground where the shitholes are.
Yea, great job protecting us…. NOT
--------------------------------
I love Brandy's site.. I love the fact she has candor and very strong opinions on the subject of the hypocrisy of law enforcement, and the laws with regard to prostitution.
Texas bill "John School"...
