tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post114034457649179437..comments2024-03-29T10:51:27.752+13:00Comments on Not PC: Keep prostitution legalPeter Cresswellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1140661202992568812006-02-23T15:20:00.000+13:002006-02-23T15:20:00.000+13:00For my part, I never said I wanted prostitution re...For my part, I never said I wanted prostitution re-criminalised. <BR/><BR/>What I do object to to people like Cresswell holding up someone who starts a brothel as a poster child for property rights. This is akin to saying insider traders are poster children for the free market - which in fact he *has* said in the past.<BR/><BR/>No decent human being scores trite political points by exploiting others. We are talking about human beings here - women-not abstractions. At best the Libertarians reprehensible position is politically naive, at worst it is vicious and malevolent.<BR/><BR/>If I am puritanical I am proud to be - and if you think you are going to flay me with your self-righteous nonsense and tell me I don't understand you, and that I should go forth and sin no more, as you implied Peter, you can think again. <BR/><BR/>The proof of the pudding is in the eating anyways - as was proven in the last election.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1140658679888126082006-02-23T14:37:00.000+13:002006-02-23T14:37:00.000+13:00PC, did you hear Labour MP Mita Ririnui declaring ...PC, did you hear Labour MP Mita Ririnui declaring that property rights are equal to plunder?<BR/><BR/>You think that in such a climate ownership of footpaths will solve anything?<BR/><BR/>And on the postcard: I'm trying to extend my knowledge. So far I've not encountered many practical suggestions. I agree on the common law thing, but it will not work in this country, because even if the shopowners own the footpaths, I doubt they would get the police backup they need, especially because their shops are vandalized as well and the police appears unable to stop that.Berend de Boerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11433622686361556089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1140566822483077082006-02-22T13:07:00.000+13:002006-02-22T13:07:00.000+13:00"You really believe property owners can get to own...<i>"You really believe property owners can get to own the street in front of their stores???"</i><br /><br />As I said, Berend, start with the footpaths in Hunters Corner. Do I really believe property owners can get to own the footpath in front of their stores? Yes, I do. It happens elsewhere, why not in Papatoetoe?<br /><br />Or is it easier just to ban that which you don't like, and by calling for more bans give the government power to ban that which you <i>do</i> like?<br /><br /><i>"And there are also prostitutes who prefer the streets."</i> Indeed, and there are some who prefer to work inside, but who no doubt have found that councils have zoned suitable premises so as to make them unuseable.<br /><br /><i>"It might be good for the libertarianz to leave their white neighbourhoods once in a while."</i><br /><br />It seems that what you know about Libertarianz could be printed on a small postcard, Berend. ;^PPeter Cresswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1140565085089990422006-02-22T12:38:00.000+13:002006-02-22T12:38:00.000+13:00PC, you're living in a parallel universe. You real...PC, you're living in a parallel universe. You really believe property owners can get to own the street in front of their stores???<BR/><BR/>And there are also prostitutes who prefer the streets. It's not as if they're driven in every case.<BR/><BR/>It might be good for the libertarianz to leave their white neighbourhoods once in a while. I'm afraid the number of Libertarianz supports in Manukau is less than a handful.Berend de Boerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11433622686361556089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1140558523546349572006-02-22T10:48:00.000+13:002006-02-22T10:48:00.000+13:00Well, Berend, that's what it means when we say tha...Well, Berend, that's what it means when we say that freedom is indivisible. <BR/><BR/>If freedom is taken away from one area, then it will have implications elsewhere. Take the connection between property rights and the problems you cite.<BR/><BR/>In the case you're talking about, all the areas you're talking about are so-called public areas -- areas which are essentially unowned. As long as you allow state-owned or unowned property, then you have this argument: who gets to choose? And as long as you all allow local government to dictate what may and may not be done on private property, then you have the problem that they begin dictating other people's business.<BR/><BR/>It is not the state's job to choose, but the lack of private property and real property rights gives them the power to do so. <BR/><BR/>Specifically, council zoning has limited the number of private properties that my be used as brothels, so some poeple who have chosen this employment are forced out onto the streets. Perhaps you could argue that this illegitimate imposition be removed?<BR/><BR/>Also, as Scott says above, if the streets you've mentioned were, let's say, co-owned by neighbouring property owners in a body corporate arrangement, then the owners may choose whether or not they allow prostitution on their property or not.<BR/><BR/>What to do then? Why not begin by talking to property owners in the areas you mention. What about for example asking property owners in Hunters Corner what they think, and enlist their support for taking over ownership of the footpaths -- with perhaps each shop-owner owning the area of footpath in front of their shop, and organising the ownership through a body corporate?<BR/><BR/>That shouldn't be too difficult. It would be a start, and council might well be all too eager to hand the problem over.<BR/><BR/>So there's two things you can do rather than running off to get a ban in place.Peter Cresswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1140556715509420972006-02-22T10:18:00.000+13:002006-02-22T10:18:00.000+13:00PC, thanks, I agree that common law is the answer....PC, thanks, I agree that common law is the answer. What I don't see is how it can be applied NOW or in a libertarian society.<BR/><BR/>Take for example certain areas in Manukau which really have huge problems with prostitution. And all the problems that prostitution brings with it, drug abuse, crime, cars going on the whole night, etc.<BR/><BR/>Take for example the local bill for control of street prostitution: http://www.manukau.govt.nz/control.htm<BR/><BR/>I think I'm going to make a submission in favor (better hurry) by asking to give local councils the sole authority where and if prostitution is allowed. Deal with local problems locally.<BR/><BR/>However, I believe that Libertarianz usually come from an entirely different point of view: prostitution is ok, so any one who doesn't want it in their backyard is denounced. I seldom see constructive criticism how people with legitimate problems can get help in our CURRENT society. It's either wait for utopia, or you don't have a legitimate complaint because it's ok to sell your body.Berend de Boerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11433622686361556089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1140472710635292092006-02-21T10:58:00.000+13:002006-02-21T10:58:00.000+13:00Challenge yes, just don't use force.You could alwa...Challenge yes, just don't use force.<BR/><BR/>You could always refuse to sell your products to drug dealers or soliciting women, or not hire people who were, or rent a property to them - do that now and you are probably coming close to breaking laws on discrimination on grounds of employment. You can choose to not open your door and prohibit anyone on your property - if the local street was owned by the neighbouring property owners, it could be agreed to ban anyone.<BR/><BR/>Nobody forces you to accept any calls, you can have caller ID, refuse to answer the phone of people you don't know, avoid people you don't like - it doesn't mean you have the right to arrest them, anymore than arresting Seventh Day Adventists or scouts going door to door.Libertyscotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12741049550997300680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1140472393358024982006-02-21T10:53:00.000+13:002006-02-21T10:53:00.000+13:00There's two questions there Berend.The first is, '...There's two questions there Berend.<BR/><BR/><I>The first is, 'do you have a right to challenge certain activities in your neighbourhood?'</I><BR/><BR/>Well, no you don't. You don't have a right to use legal force to bar activities in youe neighbourhood just because you don't like them. HOwever, you do have the power of persuasion at your fingertips should you choose to exercise it; you have the right to boycott and to call for boybotts; and you also have (or should have) common law measures avilable to you to trade certain rights over another's property (see for example <A HREF="http://pc.blogspot.com/2005/09/right-to-view.html" REL="nofollow">my article on the 'right' to a view</A>.)<BR/><BR/><I>"Do Libertarianz think I have a right not to be soliticed?"</I> It all depends where you are. Not in yoru own home, of course. And not on private property, unless the owner allows it. I'll let you draw your own conlclusions about so-called 'public property' and who or what should be allowed there (including whether 'public property' itself should be allowed.) :-)Peter Cresswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1140470560149697952006-02-21T10:22:00.000+13:002006-02-21T10:22:00.000+13:00Do Libertarianz believe that people should be allo...Do Libertarianz believe that people should be allowed to challenge certain activities to occur in their neighbourhood?<BR/><BR/>Or should they, in a libertarian world, just put up with drugs dealers and soliciting women?<BR/><BR/>Do Libertarianz think I have a right not to be soliticed? Or should I be forced to accept anyone calling or talking to me who wants to offer services?Berend de Boerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11433622686361556089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1140457266045475602006-02-21T06:41:00.000+13:002006-02-21T06:41:00.000+13:00Well done, full of passion too! Timely as well.Well done, full of passion too! Timely as well.Libertyscotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12741049550997300680noreply@blogger.com