OMB

Could this be the way forward? a big maybe...

60 posts in this topic

Hi there,

First post on here but would firstly like to say 'what a brilliant site this is' (pats on the back all round to members). Been lurking for a while, but these new laws coming in have pushed me into joining up to contribute.

Was thinking the other day, after reading many posts on the new law topics. Seems lots of punters will refrain from the soho walkups leading to loss of revenue for the girls working there (I myself visit the walkups often, aswell as parlours and the odd indie (infrequent not weird -hehe) but feel there is too much at stake from april re the walk ups.

A thought occurred that, would it be in the best interests of the working girls who are not breaching these new laws to visit the police themselves indicating that they are working at whatever address on whatever days/times and under their own volition. Thus the police do not need to raid said walk up and punters can safely punt away. Bit naive I hear you say ...maybe. How to get the message across that a particular girl is metaphorically "legal" and therefore not on police radar.

I feel there is a nugget of an idea here which can be transformed into something more practical for WG's and punters. Maybe (try not to laugh too hard) some sort of licensing system needs to happen, or something along those lines.

I realise this train of thought may sound daft, but maybe some of you can kick it about and make something workable from it.

I know careful punting is the way forward, stick with english girls etc, but surely if soho faces a major decline the WG's can take steps to metaphorically legitimise themselves.

Just a concerned punter, with no wish to be caught pants down with the risk of a criminal record and the baggage that goes with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a belting idea in principle, the question is how it would work on a practical level. If we are to push for regulation then we need to be seen to be self - regulating. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi there,

First post on here but would firstly like to say 'what a brilliant site this is' (pats on the back all round to members). Been lurking for a while, but these new laws coming in have pushed me into joining up to contribute.

Was thinking the other day, after reading many posts on the new law topics. Seems lots of punters will refrain from the soho walkups leading to loss of revenue for the girls working there (I myself visit the walkups often, aswell as parlours and the odd indie (infrequent not weird -hehe) but feel there is too much at stake from april re the walk ups.

A thought occurred that, would it be in the best interests of the working girls who are not breaching these new laws to visit the police themselves indicating that they are working at whatever address on whatever days/times and under their own volition. Thus the police do not need to raid said walk up and punters can safely punt away. Bit naive I hear you say ...maybe. How to get the message across that a particular girl is metaphorically "legal" and therefore not on police radar.

I feel there is a nugget of an idea here which can be transformed into something more practical for WG's and punters. Maybe (try not to laugh too hard) some sort of licensing system needs to happen, or something along those lines.

I realise this train of thought may sound daft, but maybe some of you can kick it about and make something workable from it.

I know careful punting is the way forward, stick with english girls etc, but surely if soho faces a major decline the WG's can take steps to metaphorically legitimise themselves.

Just a concerned punter, with no wish to be caught pants down with the risk of a criminal record and the baggage that goes with it.

There's no increased risk of being caught in a raid, at the end of the day the women who are covered by this legislation were already on the police radar and they would organise raids to rescue them and prosecute the traffickers/pimps etc. Since I've never been caught in a raid in 14 years, I don't see why that should change now, and even if it does statistically most of the raids don't find any women who claim to be sex slaves etc. In pentameter 1+2 over 800 premises were raided but most had no sex slaves present.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've often thought about ladies registering at the local council/police station a bit like doormen (who have to register to be able to work.) Then the girls can work wherever they want as long as they're registered. They wouldnt have to wear the badge like a doorman but would have to carry a registration card at all time whilst working. When registering they would have to show ID etc. Then any venue employing anyone not registered woud be fined or even closed. Like a club/pub would be if they used an unregistered doorman. It will never happen though, also there would be a lot of girls who would not want to register themselves as a WG...:):(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can what you're saying, but I feel that if the gov't want me to be responsible for who I punt with (risking a criminal record) then there needs to be some sort of criteria I can use to verify I'm not committing an offense.

Do we need to carry a copy of the law(s) around with us and get the working girl and maid to sign to say they are not in breach of this legislation.

I compare it (very loosely) to the scenario: It is illegal for me (I would be charged) to use a plumber who is in breach of certain conditions eg not corgi registered ... but there is no corgi register to check, corgi registration doesn't even exist. (My central heating is about to burst). It's madness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It will never happen though, also there would be a lot of girls who would not want to register themselves as a WG...:):(

That's what I would have assumed.

Presumably to have accurate and useful records the Police would need evidence of identity ie. full names and addresses and a photo.

The OP in his initial post referred to Soho walk-ups. I haven't been to a Soho walk-up but I presume that there are a lot of foreign girls, some of which won't have working visas. I can't see them wanting to register.

Anonymity is a crucial part of punting, from both the girls and guys point of view.

Even if the idea were introduced, it would be abused and made unworkable by false ID's, registrations etc.

As a punter I wouldn't want to have to register as such and I don't think that the girls should be required to. Once on the database then you're on it for life.

Then somebody in the Home Office or HH suggests that if ID cards are ever introduced the girls status as a prostitute goes on the ID card. Picture the scenario.....ex-working girl, her partner and kids go to Disneyworld in Florida and are refused entry at Orlando airport because her ID card says that she's a registered prostitute.

Ok...this is a very extreme scenario but I just can't see many girls wanting to register with the Police.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Then somebody in the Home Office or HH suggests that if ID cards are ever introduced the girls status as a prostitute goes on the ID card. Picture the scenario.....ex-working girl, her partner and kids go to Disneyworld in Florida and are refused entry at Orlando airport because her ID card says that she's a registered prostitute.

And a week later a torrent made from a "mislaid" CD is uploaded on Demonoid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough, when put in that context I think the idea has been kicked into touch.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone think of something that the government have got involved with to change for the better that has worked (in say the last 25 years)

Add local councils and the police into the pot and you really are looking at the mother of all cock ups ...

ID Cards Gun laws Imigration ETC ETC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can what you're saying, but I feel that if the gov't want me to be responsible for who I punt with (risking a criminal record) then there needs to be some sort of criteria I can use to verify I'm not committing an offense.

Do we need to carry a copy of the law(s) around with us and get the working girl and maid to sign to say they are not in breach of this legislation.

I compare it (very loosely) to the scenario: It is illegal for me (I would be charged) to use a plumber who is in breach of certain conditions eg not corgi registered ... but there is no corgi register to check, corgi registration doesn't even exist. (My central heating is about to burst). It's madness.

HHs interest in my view is to make you too afraid to punt in the first place, its not to do with punting responsibly as you or i can never know if a lady is working as a WG out of free choice for definate. All we can do is make our own judgements and hope we are right and she is a WG of her own free will which is i believe what most WGs are. The onus will be on the punter to know she isnt coerced etc when we have no way of possibly knowing this in most cases.

It may be madness but i believe some of those that punt and are aware of the 1/4 start date will stop or go to Indies instead. So there is a method to the madness, its a large blunt instrument called fear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can what you're saying, but I feel that if the gov't want me to be responsible for who I punt with (risking a criminal record) then there needs to be some sort of criteria I can use to verify I'm not committing an offense.

You've hit the nail on the head there, and basically come up with the fundamental flaw which I have already discussed in a hundred other threads. There is no method of figuring out whether you're in the clear.

If you want to avoid speeding you maintain your car and speedometer and keep an eye on it. If you're concerned whether you're insured to drive on a car you can ring the insurance company. If you're concerned a person is underage(that's strict liability if they're under 13) then you can insist on seeing photographic ID. Whether you've commited an offence is verifiable with 100% accuracy.

But not with this law. You could be arguing the whole way with everything resting on the testimony of the girl you were caught with. And for what? a £1000 fine? The moment someone stands up and fights it all the way it'll collapse. Might get a guilty plea from some people to get it out the way, or some cautions issued by police, but at some point someone will fight it and there's going to be a queue of very well qualified barristers looking to make a name for themselves offering their services on this one. There is no other offence where you're held responsible for something that no matter how careful you were or how aware of the pitfalls you were, you could not have avoiding commiting the offence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The moment someone stands up and fights it all the way it'll collapse.

I think this government has previous history of producing legislation that collapses at the first real test, i seem to recall things being overturned on appeal quite frequently, no reason to suppose that this wont be the same. Looks like the election date has been set at 6th May now, which gives Hh & Co 5 weeks to do something with their new toy, would not surprise me if they come out of the gate running at midnight on 31st March just to try to get people in court quickly to show its working - that is possible by 5th May, isn't it ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think this government has previous history of producing legislation that collapses at the first real test, i seem to recall things being overturned on appeal quite frequently, no reason to suppose that this wont be the same. Looks like the election date has been set at 6th May now, which gives Hh & Co 5 weeks to do something with their new toy, would not surprise me if they come out of the gate running at midnight on 31st March just to try to get people in court quickly to show its working - that is possible by 5th May, isn't it ?

Claiming victory will be no problem irrespective of how many, if any, cases are brought to court, if there are none they just say "There you are, our legislation has stopped demand", if there are lots of cases then they just say "We told you so, it's a good job we brought the legislation in".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think this government has previous history of producing legislation that collapses at the first real test, i seem to recall things being overturned on appeal quite frequently, no reason to suppose that this wont be the same. Looks like the election date has been set at 6th May now, which gives Hh & Co 5 weeks to do something with their new toy, would not surprise me if they come out of the gate running at midnight on 31st March just to try to get people in court quickly to show its working - that is possible by 5th May, isn't it ?

well actually I think the plan is that there isn't time for a case to get embarrassing for the govt. There's a good chance a magistrate would simply say "the law says strict liability, so who am I to argue". You'd have to go through crown courts etc. before someone with real brains and legal nous took a look at it and by then the election would be over. It's also unlikely that they'd find someone to prosecute in the time available. It's fairly rare for the police to find a genuine sex slave....they could try experimenting with the definition of "deception" or "other forms or coercion" but that's unlikely until and unless they've already succeeded with a real proper sex slave. Which is bound to fail imho for the reasons I've given on a hundred other threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a belting idea in principle, the question is how it would work on a practical level. If we are to push for regulation then we need to be seen to be self - regulating. :)

I mentioned this organisation on PN before (Redline), and there were some negative comments made. http://www.punternet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20488

A couple of days ago i visted thelbb site and made what could be deemed a rather undiplomatic statement on a thread which was covering redline. I had to endure several postings from their admin.

It looks like there is intention Manchester want to be self regulating, and that Redline will be instrumental in this. If you read more they want to expand nation wide.

Presently the is no information as to who they are and where they get their funding from is still a mystery to me. But some escorts in Manchester have met them, as have selected brothels.

I don't know the politics of thelbb and other forums, and the brothels in Manchester, (and I probably don't want to know) but the idea does sound good, and could well work in a city like manchester where brothels are presently tolerated.

http://www.thelbb.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,42371.0.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Presently the is no information as to who they are and where they get their funding from is still a mystery to me. But some escorts in Manchester have met them, as have selected brothels.

Put Redlineuk.org into a search and noticed on McCoys Guide link there is

' ....meeting she had had with a new quasi governmental organisation called Redlineuk. ... ' ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've often thought about ladies registering at the local council/police station a bit like doormen (who have to register to be able to work.) Then the girls can work wherever they want as long as they're registered. They wouldnt have to wear the badge like a doorman but would have to carry a registration card at all time whilst working. When registering they would have to show ID etc. Then any venue employing anyone not registered woud be fined or even closed. Like a club/pub would be if they used an unregistered doorman. It will never happen though, also there would be a lot of girls who would not want to register themselves as a WG...:):(

But wouldn't this information be relevent when being vetted for the new Vetting and Barring Scheme ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Put Redlineuk.org into a search and noticed on McCoys Guide link there is

' ....meeting she had had with a new quasi governmental organisation called Redlineuk. ... ' ?

Not sure if it's true but hey, this is what it says :-

When I got there I was greeted by Jane and her colleagues and I showed her my recent escort agency guide. It turns out she has taken over the now closed parlour Cherry's in Whitefield and she told me of an interesting meeting she had had with a new quasi governmental organisation called Redlineuk.

This lot appears to be the police pretending not to be the police, for fear of scaring off anyone who wants to give the authorities info re trafficking, but who realise that the police have more of a financial interest in taking anyone they can to the cleaners courtesy of the proceeds of crime act than doing anything else. The idea would appear to be try it out in Greater Manchester and if it works then roll it put elsewhere around the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure if it's true but hey, this is what it says :-

When I got there I was greeted by Jane and her colleagues and I showed her my recent escort agency guide. It turns out she has taken over the now closed parlour Cherry's in Whitefield and she told me of an interesting meeting she had had with a new quasi governmental organisation called Redlineuk.

This lot appears to be the police pretending not to be the police, for fear of scaring off anyone who wants to give the authorities info re trafficking, but who realise that the police have more of a financial interest in taking anyone they can to the cleaners courtesy of the proceeds of crime act than doing anything else. The idea would appear to be try it out in Greater Manchester and if it works then roll it put elsewhere around the country.

You must have persevered to find that link. Google did not have it, only found it in Bing after I remembered to turn on adult mode. Could explain why they will only do face to face meetings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's another subject, but I cannot see that paid sex between adults has any bearing at all on on how the participants relate to children.

There are several WGs I have seen who are volunteers in sports clubs, even a few teachers. I am sure thay can keep the two lives separtate.

Similarly I coach under 18s in my sport, but that has nothing to do with paying delightful 30 & 40 somethings for the occasional hours naughtiness

It has been accepted for sometime that Gay or lesbian is NOT the same as paedophile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure if it's true but hey, this is what it says :-

When I got there I was greeted by Jane and her colleagues and I showed her my recent escort agency guide. It turns out she has taken over the now closed parlour Cherry's in Whitefield and she told me of an interesting meeting she had had with a new quasi governmental organisation called Redlineuk.

This lot appears to be the police pretending not to be the police, for fear of scaring off anyone who wants to give the authorities info re trafficking, but who realise that the police have more of a financial interest in taking anyone they can to the cleaners courtesy of the proceeds of crime act than doing anything else. The idea would appear to be try it out in Greater Manchester and if it works then roll it put elsewhere around the country.

I find this confusing. The parlour owners must know about clause 20 yet this palour and Shangri-La have new management. Not forgetting another facelifted their website recently. I would gather from this that all eyes should be on how GM police deal with Sandys and WFB.

The police forces I think that may take a harder stance are Thames Valley, Ipswich and Leeds.(virtually has no brothels so may go after escort agencies)

Edited by met012
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's another subject, but I cannot see that paid sex between adults has any bearing at all on on how the participants relate to children.

Of course it shouldn't but if the public perception is that we are are drug addled, pimped out, bottom of the heap morally then I dare say many folk would feel it in their interests to know if their nearest and dearest was being taken too and from sports events, etc., by someone involved in prostitution ? Punters have said they would feel it in their interests to know if their children/grandchildren were having a sleepover at a prostitutes home.

We have only recently had headline news regarding the revelations of women molesting children in nurseries - no links to prostitution but sexually deviant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there were 2 of my regs a few years back, divorced mums living where they could afford - a not great area of Sunderland. Both were working to

a. move somewhere better

b. to pay for all the activities and trips away, trying to keep the kids away from the local bad guys & druggies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously come 1st April a widespread pubicity campaign will frightenoff the 80% of really casual punters and as a result an awful lot of parlours etc will go pop, cashflow will be gone

obviously punters in the know will still punt albeit with an eye out to the type of outlet they visit (true independents etc) but that will not sustain the vast majority of WGs mainy of whom are totally unaware whats around the corner next month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seriously come 1st April a widespread pubicity campaign will frightenoff the 80% of really casual punters and as a result an awful lot of parlours etc will go pop, cashflow will be gone

obviously punters in the know will still punt albeit with an eye out to the type of outlet they visit (true independents etc) but that will not sustain the vast majority of WGs mainy of whom are totally unaware whats around the corner next month.

I think you're being a little OTT. For example was it not for the fact I'm a fairly regular punter who frequents this site I think I'd know very little about the incoming law. Most punters are already fairly ignorant about the law as it stands, and I don't think this new law will start frightening people off in any great numbers at all. If they hear about it through publicity coming up like the posters we've seen then they're fairly clear about the fact that it's only forced women who are off-limits, and I don't think many would be unduly worried that they'd be :-

a) caught in a raid

:D caught in a raid with a forced prostitute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now