4 ms·

Pandering, or "offering or promoting prostitution" is still a crime.

Bartweiss 10y ago
But it's effectively a secondary crime, like selling drugs. If no one ever used heroin, we wouldn't criminalize it (as indeed we don't criminalize selling other random chemicals). The general pattern for drug and prostitution stings is that the police will commit those secondary crimes, but intervene before allowing the primary crime to happen. In this case, they pretty much committed the primary crime at length before acting.
- 75j 10y ago
  > If no one ever used heroin, we wouldn't criminalize it (as indeed we don't criminalize selling other random chemicals). In a way [0], the US does preemptively ban chemicals, regardless of whether that chemical has even been synthesized or used recreationally yet. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Analogue_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Analogue_Act
  - Bartweiss 10y ago
    Fair enough, but I think the logic of the point stands. We don't criminalize baking soda, we're just trying a Minority Report sort of approach to things that are likely to be used rather than playing catch-up with known-psychoactive analogues. Certainly the metaphor bit still applies - selling and importing these things are only banned because of their abuse potential, not because the chemical is seen as intrinsically bad.
- klodolph 10y ago
  No, with drugs the more serious crimes are distribution and possession, it is not illegal to consume illicit drugs. It seems like the usual pattern for drug busts goes the opposite way as you'd expect—bust a user and use them to get the dealer.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - Bartweiss 10y ago
    In terms of sentencing and bust structure, yes. Pursuing dealers is more effective (and cheaper) than pursuing users. But I stand by the point of the metaphor, which is that we criminalize distribution because of use. If you couldn't use it, it wouldn't be illegal. So even when flipping users, the intent is to run stings without letting the primary 'event' of drug use happen. That seems like the key difference between drug stings and this sting.

But it's effectively a secondary crime, like selling drugs. If no one ever used heroin, we wouldn't criminalize it (as indeed we don't criminalize selling other random chemicals). The general pattern for drug and prostitution stings is that the police will commit those secondary crimes, but intervene before allowing the primary crime to happen. In this case, they pretty much committed the primary crime at length before acting.

75j 10y ago
> If no one ever used heroin, we wouldn't criminalize it (as indeed we don't criminalize selling other random chemicals). In a way [0], the US does preemptively ban chemicals, regardless of whether that chemical has even been synthesized or used recreationally yet. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Analogue_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Analogue_Act
- Bartweiss 10y ago
  Fair enough, but I think the logic of the point stands. We don't criminalize baking soda, we're just trying a Minority Report sort of approach to things that are likely to be used rather than playing catch-up with known-psychoactive analogues. Certainly the metaphor bit still applies - selling and importing these things are only banned because of their abuse potential, not because the chemical is seen as intrinsically bad.
klodolph 10y ago
No, with drugs the more serious crimes are distribution and possession, it is not illegal to consume illicit drugs. It seems like the usual pattern for drug busts goes the opposite way as you'd expect—bust a user and use them to get the dealer.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- Bartweiss 10y ago
  In terms of sentencing and bust structure, yes. Pursuing dealers is more effective (and cheaper) than pursuing users. But I stand by the point of the metaphor, which is that we criminalize distribution because of use. If you couldn't use it, it wouldn't be illegal. So even when flipping users, the intent is to run stings without letting the primary 'event' of drug use happen. That seems like the key difference between drug stings and this sting.