Turn all attention to the Midwest City police.

Story on KFOR > http://www.kfor.com/news/local/kfor-news-police-website-catch-escorts-buyers-story,0,6746091.story

Honestly, police do not arrest people for freely having sex, but arrest people offering to pay money for sex. Something is very wrong with this! The government and the police need to seriously butt out of people's lives. What people does is none of the officials' business. And it is a waste of taxpayers' money to spend time to setup undercover stings, which is totally stupid and unnecessary.

This is why people should never pay upfront for sex, just to be on the safe side, because one of these people posting ads online may just be undercover police. Instead, have sex freely (which is not a crime) and tip the person in the end (which is also not a crime to tip).

Also, another idea is to plan some simple activity/work for a fee. Maybe to vacuum a carpet for 100 bux? Be paid for the task, and then continue on with the sex thrill. There are ways to get around these things without ever be arrested and police will simply have nothing to go on with.

Btw, here is a quote... "Not too long ago, Craigslist eliminated their adult personal ads." at the end of the story. LOL! Well, I got news flash...

Personals
* strictly platonic
* women seek women
* women seeking men
* men seeking women
* men seeking men
* misc romance
* casual encounters
* missed connections
* rants and raves

As we can see, still going strong on Craigslist. Now, remember people, just do simple things to bypass the stupid law and to avoid the police.

I'm thinking people going to motels with people they meet off the internet for sex in exchange for cash are well on their way to mucking up their lives without the police's help. But as I have said, before, elderly, single men and people with severe handicaps - I'm not going to say anything about it.

With so many young people lacking social skills (I've read) due to online addictions in their social formative years, I wonder if we are going to see an increase in this sort of thing as they age and end up alone because they don't know how to deal with another human being.

Yet another piece of the puzzle...

As a married christian.....

Lets just be honest here for a second about craigslist. What is the real difference between someone going out and spending alot of money on beer, shots, etc and having a one night stand with who knows who or two adults making a clear minded decision to have sex with each other (im guessing the pro's are more likely to use protection as well) and paying someone for their time and travel?

Isnt that safer for everyone?

I guess where i differ from most people is that i dont see the benefit of spending time and money on forcing my values on other people when at the end of the day people are still going to do what they want. As long as people are respectful of other people (not working the corner or interfering in other peoples lives) i could give a darn about what happens over the internet and then in some cheap motel behind closed doors.

As a married christian.....

Lets just be honest here for a second about craigslist. What is the real difference between someone going out and spending alot of money on beer, shots, etc and having a one night stand with who knows who or two adults making a clear minded decision to have sex with each other (im guessing the pro's are more likely to use protection as well) and paying someone for their time and travel?

Isnt that safer for everyone?

I guess where i differ from most people is that i dont see the benefit of spending time and money on forcing my values on other people when at the end of the day people are still going to do what they want. As long as people are respectful of other people (not working the corner or interfering in other peoples lives) i could give a darn about what happens over the internet and then in some cheap motel behind closed doors.

A wise man wrote this.

Lets just be honest here for a second about craigslist. What is the real difference between someone going out and spending alot of money on beer, shots, etc and having a one night stand with who knows who or two adults making a clear minded decision to have sex with each other (im guessing the pro's are more likely to use protection as well) and paying someone for their time and travel?

The behaviors are more similar than a lot of people want to admit but there are significant differences. You seem to be focusing on the spending of money and the fact that sex is involved. If those where the difinitive parts, you could just as easily claim that rape and robbery fall into the same category.

The main difference is that one night stands are usually between people who at least know each other or have mutual friends. It isn't a "sure thing" and they are at least trying to engage in civilized behavior as a means to an end. The desire for sex is wonderful about encouraging civilized behavior. <vbg> The behavior is usually engaged in with the notion that it "might" lead to a longer term relationship - if only for a few dates. It is rarely embarked on with the notion that it is just a one night stand unless the two of them are pretty cold individuals - particularly if money is involved. How many men are going to drop a load of cash on a woman they know with the notion that they will never go out with her, again - they just want the one date? Moreover, I know few women who would go out and pay some guy for sex. Or who are so excited about getting a few shots and a dinner that they would sleep with the guy to pay for it knowing in advance that it is just one date. To equate an alcohol fueled ONS with a professional encounter may seem similar to men but I doubt most women would agree. But then, I wonder if some guys are pretty cold about the whole thing from the beginning and the women are just being idiots. That is sort of a sad situation, really. I wish the guys who are being hypocrits would just go see a whore. And I also wish the women would quit being stupid.

As to the professional encounter, the notion of "clear minded decision to have sex with each other" misses the point that the hooker isn't doing it for sex. It is about the money. That is a completely different dynamic that the alcohol fueled ONS.

I don't know about how prevalent the use of birth control compares but since so many ONS are fueled by alcohol, chances are the use of protection during sex with the hookers is more consistent.

Keeping it illegal ensures that human trafficking, drugs and horrible physical and sexual abuse will remain part of that industry. It is something that can and should be taxed and regulated.

PQ, one might opine the primary differences in the alcohol fueled ONA and the (often) meth or pipe fueled ONS are twofold:
the labels in the clothes and tooth retention

Unless there is a bad drug habit, most of the time horrible sexual abuse is what leads to going into a life of prostitution in teh first place.

And Kevin, you may be on to something.

It appears some of you have fallen victim to the 'Pretty Woman' syndrome. Sorry to ruin any demented fantasies you may have, but you are painting prostitution with too broad of a brush.

That being said, I freely acknowledge the version of prostitution expressed by several above does exist. By that I mean; yes, there are 'whores' and the 'men' who wish to transact with them. That is one reason I am very clear with my activism that I think the gov't should stay out of prostitution that is 100% private, consensual and unorganized.

The problem though lies in the reality that the police most often do not know if the prostitute is acting consensually and uncoerced until after the arrest is made. I can point to dozens and dozens of examples of where ads placed on the Internet are done so with the specific purpose of trafficking an unwilling individual. There is no way to uncover those instances without these stings. The other problem lies in the fact that many of the police officers entrusted to investigate these crimes of vice are often more deviant than the offenders - making the prostitutes get undressed and touch the undercover officer(s) and/or themselves prior to the arrest if the female is attractive. This serves no other purpose than to satisfy the deviant nature of the investigating officer(s). Or, in a reverse sting having the 'John' undress and masturbate in front of the female undercover officer prior to arresting him. The purpose of this is often to force a plea of guilty. The 'John' is fearful of having such a lurid tape from the investigation played for a jury.

I defy any of you to look into the eyes of a prostitute who's been the victim of horrendous sexual and physical abuse and addiction and tell her you see no difference in what she's been through and a one-night-stand. And don't retort that, "if she really wanted out she'd leave." You don't have to look any further than the widely reported stories of kidnapping victims Shawn Hornbeck, Jaycee Lee Dugard and Elizabeth Smart to see that people often do not act logically when they are victimized.

covered above

Yet another scenario that falls under my touch the stove category. You know the stove is hot, so why touch the blasted thing.

Unless you have been living under a rock.... Everybody under the sun knows police departments do these kind of stings all the time so why even waste time with responding to an internet sex for cash ad. Besides, many criminals use sex ads as a ruse to commit kidnapping, strong arm robberies and muggings. Criminals know most people will not even entertain the idea of reporting to the police. Just simply because the victim would have to confess or the investigation would reveal they were seeking the services of a prostitute or meeting someone for casual sex.

When I was doing guardian ad litem work, we had a child in foster care as a result of his mother not being able to handle him. He'd clearly been sexually abused and was acting out by aggressively sexually abusing animals and younger children. At the time he was six. The probation officer and I got into a power struggle about sending the child back to his mother. I felt like she was not making any progress on her issues but his department was running out of money. We got into some heated arguments about it. The history was that she would get the child back from foster care and within three weeks, take him and have him put on heavy medication to control him. Repeatedly, he could come back into care, be taken off the meds and do fine with foster parents and teachers.

Anyhoo, after a heated discussion with the probation officer, he called her to set up a meeting I'd insisted we have prior to making the decision to send the boy back home. She had a message on her machine directing callers to her craigslist listing where she was offering her services for some pretty kinky stuff. And BTW, the woman weighed over 300 pounds.

She used to take the boy with her to her sessions. Oh, and her solution to the sexual abuse of the dog was to get rid of it and replace it with a different one.

Good Lord Penny.. Do they not ever terminate rights over in VA?

The main difference is that one night stands are usually between people who at least know each other or have mutual friends.

I'm just guessing here but I'd say you haven't had many one night stands if any.


I feel sorry for the dive motels losing valuable clientele in these tough economic times. It's getting harder and harder to make an honest buck these days.

Good Lord Penny.. Do they not ever terminate rights over in VA?

It is hard. In this case, the problem was that she kept moving from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. We had three jurisdictions that came before the judge in charge of this case and he actually made a ruling (that I think probably would have been overturned if appealed) that, essentially, said tag, you're it. Unfortunately, the agency that ended up holding the bag was a small jurisdiction that had no money, was short staffed, and their workers weren't good.

Before she even became involved with this particular court, she'd lost two children to social services in California. This child came into care in my jursidiction when she moved there to escape the jurisdiction just to the north of us that had filed an abuse complaint. I actually got a call from the lawyer who represented that jurisdiction begging me to do something about the mother but they had completely screwed up the abuse investigation and the abuse allegations were thrown out (they knew about the abuse and waited to file something when they thought she was going to take him out of the jursidiction). I quickly filed a child in need of services case so we could keep him in care.

I managed to get the child taken into foster care three different times. Everytime that happened, they kept assigning it to the same social worker who liked her. The woman was an idiot and believed her goal was to reunite families, no matter what. When she should have been thinking of the best interests of the child, she would focus on how hard it was for this mother to be separated from her child. One time, she placed him in a home that had a day care center even though the child had engaged in sexually aggressive behavior towards younger children and the foster family had specifically let them know that they would not accept sexual predators. I had him moved, right away. Caregivers the mother had used over the years repeatedly begged me to help that child.

The child would be placed in residential, gradually weaned off meds (at four he was on anti psychotics) and the mother would do absolutely everything social services and the court asked. I think she enjoyed the attention and she would be petted and praised all the time for the progress she was making. CASA and I begged the court to stop sending the child back home but the woman would pass drug tests, she would keep a job, she would go to counseling. The court was utterly frustrated but felt it's hands were tied when she fulfilled all the criteria and the underlying abuse had taken place two foster care placements back. They'd keep him absolutely as long in care as they could but eventually, time was up. They didn't blame the mother when the child abused the dog - they saw that as a psychological problem of the boy and that only gave Mom ammunition to show that she was a caring parent faced with a horrible situation. Eventually, they'd send him home for more and more extended visits and things would be fine - for a short while.

I had this case for years. Within a short period of time after a given case was closed, something else would come up and we would start all over again. The last time the child came into care it was because I filed a Child in Need of Supervision case. Supervision cases, unlike Service cases, were assigned to probation instead of the department of social services. I had hopes that we might be able to actually do something for this child but it was during this time that the bottom dropped out on state funding (about 2008). It was during this time that the Craigslist deal came up. We managed to keep him in foster care, for a time, and I hoped that this time we'd get her rights terminated.

By mid 2009, time was running out on how long he could stay in care and probation started sending him home. Mom was back to being on the straight and narrow. I was in the midst of shutting down my practice because I knew I was coming home in a few months. They assigned the case to a different GAL (I hand picked her). Horribly, they ended up sending the boy home to his mother. Once the funding for residential went away, a lot of kids were in that boat (and one of the reasons I get so angry when I see welfare cheats who take money away from kids like this). I saw him sitting in court multiple times in my last few weeks before we moved. His mother kept calling the police on him, claiming he was attacking her and destroying things. He probably was. At that point, she was claiming victim and, again, she probably was. I don't know what has become of that that child but I suspect nothing good. I suspect he will end up in prison for something awful. And Mom will play victim (unless he kills her) and get all kinds of tsk tsking from idiots who will insist that she just had bad luck.

I'm just guessing here but I'd say you haven't had many one night stands if any.


I feel sorry for the dive motels losing valuable clientele in these tough economic times. It's getting harder and harder to make an honest buck these days.

True, true.

Good Lord Penny.. Do they not ever terminate rights over in VA?

FWIW, termination decisions aren't real quick in most jurisdictions. Sometimes that's a good thang, sometimes not.

FWIW, termination decisions aren't real quick in most jurisdictions. Sometimes that's a good thang, sometimes not.

I've been called to testify in a few parental termination hearings. In all cases it was parents who were involved in prostitution who were either endangering their children or grooming them to become prostitutes themselves. It's a very slow process. In many cases the parents simply lose their kids and then move out of state to have more.