SF Redbook shut down by Feds

[lumberjack]

http://www.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/sf-based-escort-website-myredbook-siezed-by-fbi/Content?oid=2830030

Similar to crack down on Craigslist, this will solve nothing as traffic will move to other sites.

Not a legal expert, what do you think web site owners chances are of beating back the FBI. Charges seem a bit of a reach to me. Whenever the government says it's to protect the kids it means it's about the money, they want their cut of the action, so it's taken by force.

If this happened under a Republican administration, the wolves would be out and howling on this site.

[trish]

Whenever the government says it's to protect the kids it means it's about the moneyyeah, that's exactly what's behind all child labor laws, child pornograhy laws, child abuse laws, and mandatory education...the loads of money it makes for the government. No legislator ever gave a damn about children. Except in the article you posted law enforcement didn't say anything about the children. They said it was about prostitution and money laundering.

If you're against anti-prostitution laws, I'm with you (as long as we protect the children), but freedom loving, republican, fundamentalist Christian tea baggers might present a roadblock to your agenda.

That was fun. Please Mr. Troll, tell us another fairy tale.

[Prospero]

What a crass little political sideswipe in your post. I think I recognise your real agenda Lumberjack.

[broncofan]

So federal prosecutors are pursuing online prostitution because they want to fill the federal coffers? Both major political parties believe prostitution should be illegal and it's not a partisan issue. The federal government is also comprised of so many administrative agencies and interests that your theory, which suggests that the federal government acts as a cohesive unit to advance its financial interest, is implausible.

What is divided among political lines is whether pornographic materials can be constitutionally banned. Obscenity is unprotected by the first amendment and over the years many Republicans have claimed that pornography (depicting sexual acts between consenting adults) qualifies as obscene speech and can and should be banned by states.

But no, you're not going to get collective outrage that Democrats or Republicans enforce laws that have been duly passed and whose constitutionality is unquestioned.

[broncofan]

If you're against anti-prostitution laws, I'm with you (as long as we protect the children), but freedom loving, republican, fundamentalist Christian tea baggers might present a roadblock to your agenda.

I agree that the right would have the stronger objections. Right now I guess Democrats don't see any political advantage in advocating for the repeal of laws against prostitution and so it's not a partisan issue. But as you say, if it were, the balance is that the right would be more strongly opposed to adults transacting for sex (they'd also be more likely to partake but that's another story).

[lumberjack]

Here's another article that cites child trafficking as reason for shutdown:

http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2014/06/bay_area_escorting_website_myr.php

I only selected one article on the subject in the original posting. The government needs to go after the actual pimps and spend resources on that task, not flexing it's muscle on shutting down web sites. Yes, the government has seized all the assets of the web site owners, claiming that assets were gained through illicit means.

[Erika1487]

For now Backpage is still the gold standard if you want to find a ho in a hurry!!

[trish]

From your latest link,
CNN reports that two employees of MyRedbook were arrested as part of a nation-wide crackdown on child sex trafficking. And this seems farfetched to you? This you're upset about?? Yeah, those damn democrats are coming to take away our child prostitutes! And how are they doing it? They're going after the venues in which they're advertised and sold!! What fucking gall!!! Those God Damn communists!!!!!

What upsets me is that we have a current rise in the trafficking of children, not that the government is cracking down on it.

[lumberjack]

From your latest link, And this seems farfetched to you? This you're upset about?? Yeah, those damn democrats are coming to take away our child prostitutes! And how are they doing it? They're going after the venues in which they're advertised and sold!! What fucking gall!!! Those God Damn communists!!!!!

What upsets me is that we have a current rise in the trafficking of children, not that the government is cracking down on it.

Shutting down all the web sites accomplishes little, it drives business underground. It will just increase the amount of streetwalkers.

Go after the pimps & johns who engage in child trafficking, otherwise you're treating the symptoms.

So how would you react to this story if it were a republican administration? I think your nasty attitude tells it all.

[trish]

What? I called the Dems God Damned communists and your still not satisfied?

[natina]

Backpage.com and the prostitution law that could take down Twitter, YouTube, and Wikipedia

If you want to pay for sex in the United States — or offer sex services for a fee — and you’d rather not troll derelict city street corners late at night, chances are you’re going to use backpage.com.

Of course, Backpage’s adult classifieds are cloaked in the coy poetry of online sex advertising; you’re searching for an “escort” instead of a “prostitute” or a “full body sensual mutual touch” instead of something more crudely sexual. But recent studies from the Advanced Interactive Media Group (AIMG) cut through coyness to offer at least one blunt statistic: About 70 percent of the revenue generated from online sex transactions in the U.S. goes to Backpage. Last year, AIMG figured Backpage generated around $2 million in revenue every month from online sex sales.

To put it another way: The Village Voice Media-owned online classified ad service could be seen as the main source for online sex in the U.S.

And with Craigslist no longer offering sex services on any of its 700 sites around the world (Craigslist dropped its “adult classifieds” section in 2010), Backpage’s adult market share has nowhere to go but up.

But there’s a hitch. And that hitch not only threatens to put Backpage out of business. It also threatens to completely change the way websites handle third-party content.






While few government agencies seem particularly concerned about the criminal ramifications of adults offering sex with other adults for sale online (prostitution is legal only in some parts of Nevada), at least one high-profile case shined an unflattering light on Backpage for allowing users to traffic children for sex.

That high-profile case involved a 15-year-old from St. Louis identified only as “M.A.”


“Imagine Twitter without real-time posting,” he said. If Washington State’s law is allowed to pass, it “will destroy the user-generated content community.”


http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/18/3093146/backpage-com-prostitution-law-take-down-youtube-twitter-wikipedia

[thombergeron]

http://www.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/sf-based-escort-website-myredbook-siezed-by-fbi/Content?oid=2830030

Similar to crack down on Craigslist, this will solve nothing as traffic will move to other sites.

Not a legal expert, what do you think web site owners chances are of beating back the FBI. Charges seem a bit of a reach to me. Whenever the government says it's to protect the kids it means it's about the money, they want their cut of the action, so it's taken by force.

If this happened under a Republican administration, the wolves would be out and howling on this site.

For what it's worth, real live underage girls were rescued last week here in the Bay Area. Several of the adult pimps who were managing those underage girls had placed ads on SFRedbook.

So, my question to you is, once the FBI discovered that child sex traffickers were using a web site to advertise illegal services, should U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag have ordered them to ignore that web site because the President is a Democrat?

SFRedbook has been around for about 15 years. Given that it has largely been a self-moderating community strictly focused on law-breaking, it’s pretty remarkable that it lasted as long as it did. And I think part of the reason it did was that local authorities recognize that online sex ads are inevitable.

Red worked pretty hard to maintain certain standards that would lessen SFRedbook’s exposure to law enforcement. But he couldn’t watch everything, and eventually, SFRedbook came up in a context that the authorities couldn’t ignore.

So locally, there is some anger, but mostly resignation. SFRedbook was engaged in illegal activities. You break the law, you run the risk of getting arrested.

What any of that has to do with President’s party affiliation is totally beyond me.