Amazon.com Widgets

Do you consider prostitution stings and similar strategies as being forms of entrapment?

  • Where is the data supporting entrapment and arrest without offer of rehabilitation or simply a citation is the better course of action

    Why is the focus on the supplier? If the issue is to cut down on sexual assault or sex trafficking shouldn't the focus be on the trafficker and not the one being trafficked? Shouldn't the focus be on the one paying for sex and not the one being forced to provide it?

  • Prostitution stings are entrapment!

    I have witnessed a number of stings where law enforcement has used prostitutes, pimps, and drug dealers, to set people up for arrest. I often wonder when people will start asking law enforcement how many victims of sex traffickers have they arrested instead of rescuing them from the pimps. Also It goes to show the lack of good sense that people have if they don't realize that voluntary, consensual sex for financial benefits is no different than working any so called legitimate job for a paycheck.

  • Absolutely it is

    No law against dialing a number. No law against walking into a hotel room and sitting down. Entrapment is encouraging someone to do something the otherwise would not do. If ads were not placed the person may or may not call someone thus not a predisposition to commit a crime. Then they use calculated word play to trick people into something or saying something and bust into a room with 10 officers. 100% entrapment

  • Absolutely it is

    No law against dialing a number. No law against walking into a hotel room and sitting down. Entrapment is encouraging someone to do something the otherwise would not do. If ads were not placed the person may or may not call someone thus not a predisposition to commit a crime. Then they use calculated word play to trick people into something or saying something and bust into a room with 10 officers. 100% entrapment

  • Absolutely it is

    No law against dialing a number. No law against walking into a hotel room and sitting down. Entrapment is encouraging someone to do something the otherwise would not do. If ads were not placed the person may or may not call someone thus not a predisposition to commit a crime. Then they use calculated word play to trick people into something or saying something and bust into a room with 10 officers. 100% entrapment

  • Absolutely it is

    No law against dialing a number. No law against walking into a hotel room and sitting down. Entrapment is encouraging someone to do something the otherwise would not do. If ads were not placed the person may or may not call someone thus not a predisposition to commit a crime. Then they use calculated word play to trick people into something or saying something and bust into a room with 10 officers. 100% entrapment

  • Absolutely it is

    No law against dialing a number. No law against walking into a hotel room and sitting down. Entrapment is encouraging someone to do something the otherwise would not do. If ads were not placed the person may or may not call someone thus not a predisposition to commit a crime. Then they use calculated word play to trick people into something or saying something and bust into a room with 10 officers. 100% entrapment

  • Absolutely it is

    No law against dialing a number. No law against walking into a hotel room and sitting down. Entrapment is encouraging someone to do something the otherwise would not do. If ads were not placed the person may or may not call someone thus not a predisposition to commit a crime. Then they use calculated word play to trick people into something or saying something and bust into a room with 10 officers. 100% entrapment

  • Absolutely it is

    No law against dialing a number. No law against walking into a hotel room and sitting down. Entrapment is encouraging someone to do something the otherwise would not do. If ads were not placed the person may or may not call someone thus not a predisposition to commit a crime. Then they use calculated word play to trick people into something or saying something and bust into a room with 10 officers. 100% entrapment

  • Addiction For Addiction

    Most people who use a prostitute are suffering sex addicts. So the pro and john are helping feed each others addiction. So far, no harm. This also keeps rape in check. When a man makes a decision to hire a hooker, its one less potential rape. Running stings is a waste of valuable resources to fight real crime of murder or other more serious crimes.

  • They may border on entrapment, but as long as they don't cross the line then they are fine.

    Stings get very close to entrapment, but as long as they are done right, there is nothing wrong with them. It is when the sting approaches and convinces the party to do the criminal act that it crosses the line into entrapment. Allowing a person to follow through with a criminal act they would have already done is not entrapment.

    Posted by: KnownEvan
  • Prostitution is illegal and, therefore, sting operations are perfectly justified.

    The law enforcement community should be allowed to use whatever means necessary to stop prostitution. Sting operations should not be considered entrapment. The illegal activity is taking place, so the law enforcement officers should have to right to seize the opportunity and put a stop to this activity. Sting operations are a very effective way to accomplish this.

    Posted by: PiquantByron94
  • I believe entrapment only occurs when a person is "entrapped" into doing something they would otherwise NOT have done.

    The strategies used in what is often viewed as entrapment seem to be essential if we are to apprehend those who are breaking the law.

    However, there are serious problems with the use of these strategies. If a person is presented with a situation that tempts them to break a law, when he would never have encountered such a situation without the "encouragement" of a law enforcement agent, that is definitely entrapment of the worst kind and should not be allowed.

    If a person is already committing a crime and a law enforcement agent poses as either a fellow offender or a victim, this seems to be a reasonable strategy for law enforcement to use.

    It seems that without some degree of "entrapment" no law enforcement officer would ever be able to apprehend a criminal until after the crime had been committed; this seems inefficient and ineffective. Perhaps entrapment is one of the few methods available for officers to use in order to prevent crimes from occurring.

    In the case of prostitution, since it is rarely the male "offender" who is charged or convicted, it seems pointless, time-consuming and counter productive to continually arrest the prostitutes, whether or not they were "entrapped."

    Posted by: CI3Iike
  • They only entrap by appealing to baser (crude) human nature.

    Technically it probably is entrapment, but I think it's acceptable to entrap criminals by appealing to their baser nature. If the trap is something that honest, law-abiding people would innately avoid, then I think it's legitimate. So if someone falls for a trap involving bribes, illicit sexual favors, etc. - they had it coming.

    Posted by: Th4Fire
  • No, the police aren't enticing anyone, the criminal's are out there looking.

    There is this idea that police should only be out in uniform where they can be clearly identified and avoided. If a neighborhood decides that prostitution should be illegal, then officers should be able to use reasonable means to eliminate it. Going undercover as a hooker to find those people who are looking to hire a sex worker is reasonable. They do not go into your home and try and get you to engage in their service, the people go to them.

    A better question is whether criminalizing sex workers is good idea. Why criminalize consensual sexual relationships between adults? If that happens to involve cash, so be it.

    Posted by: Qu4yI3TaI
  • No, I think it's called catching someone in the act of committing a crime.

    If you are a prostitute and you are doing your thing, plying your trade (which is illegal) and you get busted by the cops, it's not entrapment. If you are prostituting yourself, it is against the law. If you get busted for breaking the law by a sting operation of any kind, it is because you are breaking the law, and you got caught. It's pretty clear cut.

    Posted by: PinkMych
  • Prostitution is against the law and if someone is breaking the law they should be caught no matter what it takes.

    Prostitution is against the law, and law enforcement should be able to use all means necessary to arrest those in violation of the law. While consenting adults should be able to do their own thing, this type of "business" is crime ridden as the people involved such as pimps often recruit young girls and enslave them. I believe prostitution needs to be stopped to help protect our younger citizens.

    Posted by: EantDirty
  • I do not believe prostitution stings on their face are entrapment because the person is engaging in an illegal activity.

    Prostitution stings are not entrapment on their face, although there may be some that cross that line. I do not believe you are being entrapped by making the choice when given the opportunity to commit a crime. Just because someone else suggests or offers a criminal activity does not mean the person has to agree; therefore, it is not entrapment.

    Posted by: SascM0n
  • No, I do not consider prostitution stings and similar strategies as being forms of entrapment, because people who are indulging in these things are doing something wrong, and there is nothing wrong in catching them red handed.

    If someone is caught in a prostitution or similar sting, then they are doing something they are not supposed to. It maybe morally or ethically wrong or even something criminal. So there is nothing wrong in penalizing them by catching them at it. The end justifies the means in this situation.

    Posted by: danoneeno

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.