“Paying for sex with prostitutes who are controlled by pimps is set to become a criminal offence in England and Wales, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said. Anyone who knowingly pays illegally trafficked women for sex could face rape charges, while kerb crawlers could face prosecution for a first offence. Pleading ignorance of the circumstances under which a prostitute is working will not count as a defence”.

It’s an obvious question, but how is the customer of the prostitute supposed to know whether they’re being pimped or have been trafficked into the country or not? Ask to see their tax return? Sign an affidavit or give a receipt afterwards?

More to the point, if the police know any given prostitute is in that criteria (to the extent they could prosecute the customer), oughtn’t they be taking action against the known pimps & traffickers themselves?

Recently read on a mailing list, if the list had a quotebook, I’d nominate it for the front page of it:

I’ve never been able to understand how certain sections of Christian
believers, including some politicians, can be so little worried by
people killing each other, but so exercised by people loving each
other.

“When the police arrived, the things they saw and the things they took photos of all point (to) the very obvious truth that Cuddles was a brothel” – so said the counsel for the prosecution in the trial of the Mister Big behind the notorious Bearwood ’sauna’.

What astounds me is that it apparently took until September last year for anybody to realise Cuddles was a place where more than one’s back could get rubbed. This place, along with many other similar establishments across the city (including three within half a mile of each other along the Bristol Road in Selly Oak) have been well known by, well just about everybody, for what kinds of services you can receive in them. So, if they’re actually bothered, why has it taken until now for the police to act?

More to the point, having raided Cuddles, are the police going to raid all the other brothels in the city, or was the action prompted by other motives?

Alternatively, isn’t it about time for legislation to accept that two (or three, or four…) consenting adults having sex with each other is no more a truly criminal act if cash is handed over than if it isn’t, and for the law to accept that it is far better for all concerned for it to take place in a clean, hygenic, safe indoor environment than out on the street?