In this debate I intend to show that prostitution, when properly regulated, can be a victim less crime. One of the major reasons for prostitution's negative status is the world of crime that surrounds the business. This negative side of prostitution could be easily removed through government regulation. I intend to prove this in the course of this debate.
I do not believe prostitution can be regulated, due to it's personal and broad problems and activities that need to be regulated. Not only this, but pimps prostitutes, and other people affected by this regulation, may try to avoid and work around the law. This may cause an illegal, expensive, harmful, yet more profitable form of prostitution. Like modern day moon shiners, people may do what is profitable, not what is legal or safe.
People, no matter their background, have built societies were prostitution plays some part. Anywhere you go you will find "working girls" with plenty of business. Certainly this practice is considered horrible and dirty by many, but we have not been able to stop it for the entirety of human history. Since we cannot stop the problem, and since we cannot ignore the problem, we must regulate the problem. When regulated brothels may be taxed, inspected, and/or shutdown if necessary. Under the current system of anarchy nothing can be done, but shutdown prostitution rings. And to currently shutdown a ring, police must work for months or years in order to properly take down such syndicates. Certainly most would prefer to live in a world where prostitution does not exist, but we do not live in that world and we cannot eliminate the problem. Therefore we must pick the best of two evils and regulate the industry.
Due to the scandalous nature or prostitution, the people in the business may not want to be regulated. Many will believe the can make a better and more profitable business without the government interfering. Criminal organizations also would keep their prostitution rings active due to their large profit margins and little upkeep. They would not obey these regulations simply because they don't obey other regulations and would harshly decrease their profit. even though prostitutes would benefit from these regulations. Many, if not most, would oppose these regulations to protect their privacy, and to profit more. If a prostitute has a day job, regulations may ask them to announce their part time profession, exposing and harming their day time job.
Certainly the government will have to intervene if and when groups oppose the regulation. An unfortunate side effect of this is that the criminal organizations will only become more determined. However, when the consumer is presented with either an illegal good or the same good but legal they will nine time out of ten choose the legal good. Over time the illegal prostitution groups will run out of business and have to shutdown or incur major losses. In an ideal world there would be no industry for prostitution, but since that is not possible we must make the best of the situation and try and regulate the industry.
Reasons for voting decision: Neither side used sources, and both had equal conduct as well as S&G. Arguments go to Pro because Con never adequately overcame the lesser of two evils argument. Pro's assessment that customers prefer legal rather than illegal product when given the choice seems right on target. It is not clear why Con thinks that illegal rackets would be able to successfully demand higher prices from consumers for a more hazardous product and more dangerous transaction.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.