Don’t Drive by Hookers

A Los Angeles City Councilwoman is pushing for a plan that would use license plate reader technology to log visits to areas that are “known for” prostitution.  She then wants to use that database to send letters to the vehicle’s registrants, explaining that the car was in such an area.

Councilwoman Nury Martinez seems to have the typical statist mentality about this.

In a statement issued by her office Wednesday, Martinez said, “If you aren’t soliciting, you have no reason to worry about finding one of these letters in your mailbox. But if you are, these letters will discourage you from returning. Soliciting for sex in our neighborhoods is not OK.” (source)

You know what’s worse than soliciting sex?  How about a government that is so fucking out of control and obsessed with a victimless crime that it would destroy all notions of privacy, freedom of association, and presumption of innocence?

I remember getting pulled over one time in a really shitty part of town. Why did I get pulled over?  The cop figured I had to be there to buy drugs or pick up hookers.  “A white guy in a Porsche in this neighborhood?  You ain’t here visiting a friend.”    I managed to convince him that my reason for being there was far less insidious — I was lost.

Screen Shot 2015-11-28 at 9.03.18 AM

Cleaning things up — like dirty Civil Liberties

Under Martinez’ program, my wife would get a letter in the mail suggesting that maybe I was there to fuck a hooker.  But, lets say I was there to visit a friend, or a client, or lets just say that I wanted to sit outside the church and listen to the choir sing.  Lets say I just wanted to drive down the street to gloat at the poors.  Lets say I wanted to drive down the street just because I damn well fucking wanted to.

I don’t see what the problem is with street hookers anyhow.  I mean, they’re a bit low class for my tastes, but if there’s a willing seller and a willing buyer, who am I to interfere?  But, there’s a practical element here t0o — I’ve lived in neighborhoods with street hookers and street drug dealers.  You know what those streets were?  Safe.  Why?  Because violence and property crime was bad for business.

I understand that some moral crusaders just can’t stand the fact that someone might be smoking a joint, or getting a blowjob.  I even understand that my libertarian attitude might not win the day in the marketplace of ideas.  But, I sure as shit can’t see anyone with half a sack of ethics saying that we should turn ourselves into a surveillance and snitch state just so that some ugly chicks in way too high heels don’t give $20 blowjobs to creepy guys.  If you’re going to blow up the Bill of Rights, at least make it worth it.

 

5 Responses to Don’t Drive by Hookers

  1. Miles Archer says:

    I live in the burbs and commute through some lousy parts of Richmond CA. There’s a notorious motel (special daytime rates!) that I drive past from time to time. I can’t imagine getting a letter from the state every time I take that shortcut.

  2. Jim B says:

    What you said!

    Jury is definitely off the rails.

  3. Angie NK says:

    Would people who live in those neighborhoods get that letter every day? How much money would be spent on that? How much good could it possibly do? What kind of an idiot does one have to be to propose such a thing?

  4. NickM says:

    One of the main hooker strolls in Los Angeles (Nury Morontinez’s city) is Figueroa St. It is also the main alternative route heading south from downtown L.A. if the 110 Freeway is really slow (or closed for one of Caltrans’s late night repair jobs). It’s also the street that runs along the east side of the University of Southern California.

    Yeah. No chance this will get a lot of people sent letters who had nothing to do with prostitution.

  5. alpha4centauri says:

    This sounds like it could be called the “Gentrification Prevention Act.” Because you’ve literally red-lined the neighborhood in deciding where these cameras would be located.

%d bloggers like this: