AG stops prosecuting unlicensed massage

[Alvin Lee]

Basically here is the motivation behind this action :

NYC is broke - Covid broke the bank . Unemployment payments to a million people , loss of bridge and tunnel revenue in concert with subway and bus revenue all killing the city .

So what do you do when you need money ? You take a lesson from the Lucky Luciano playbook “ there is no such thing as good money or bad money , there is just money “

NYC is back in the sports betting business- the greatest and most growing source of constant revenue there is . This time the pros manage it . This kills the mob and illegal gaming

Next Weed is here - a billion dollar payday complete with product sales and tax revenue .

And now to my point - the AG dropped the bag on masseuses and prostitution because - drumroll - it’s going to be legalized - already on the state referendum. All the places in NYS will buy yearly state and city license , the places will pay payroll tax and a fee to operate - the state is going to get their vig. Things will be clean , all tested monthly and the sense of impending doom and the big bust will be over .

Now we truly will be Sin City —- I Love It

 

[pyt0109]

This is the key question. The new law says they will continue to prosecute individuals who pay for sex. So in theory, they can still raid AMPs, leave the girls alone, and arrest the customers. Sort of the opposite of what they did in the past

Then that means that the girls can also rat us out for money or something else. Why do I feel like this is making our situation worse? If anyone knows that this is definitely not the case please let me know.

 

[Alvin Lee]

Then that means that the girls can also rat us out for money or something else. Why do I feel like this is making our situation worse? If anyone knows that this is definitely not the case please let me know.

Totally incorrect clearly you do not understand - there’s nothing to rat - if it is legalized it’s ok to do it - there will be no law against it - make sense now ?

 

[BigBob]

But the article did say "The office will continue to prosecute other crimes related to prostitution, including patronizing sex workers and sex trafficking".

What is sex trafficking? I think the legal definition is extorinarily broad.

 

[Alvin Lee]

What is sex trafficking? I think the legal definition is extorinarily broad.[/QUOTE

look if it h cones legal there is no more sex trafficking - the state supervises it and removes the criminal element. NYS will make money not the criminals
the women will be licensed by NYS - the amp will pay for a license it’s going to be as legal as OTB was .... it’s a great thing for the AMPs and for us

They don’t want our names - they just want the names of the AMP , their employees and to pay the taxes —- like any other business

 

[pyt0109]

Totally incorrect clearly you do not understand - there’s nothing to rat - if it is legalized it’s ok to do it - there will be no law against it - make sense now ?

I thought what they are proposing is decriminalizing prostitution not patronizing prostitution?

 

[Alvin Lee]

I thought what they are proposing is decriminalizing prostitution not patronizing prostitution?

What’s the difference? If you tell people it’s legal that constitutes decriminalizing . If you as a government , state , or city run municipality, endorse engagement in an activity as long as you frequent establishments which are paying for the appropriate licenses, that’s patronizing - you answer is yes they are condoning both .

Think booze. Once upon a time it was illegal. Ask Elliot Ness. Then it became legal again - alcohol was decriminalized . Bars etc, require to this day an SLA- state liquor license , to operate . As long as they have an up to date license in good standing , they pay their taxes and don’t owe the state money , you may drink there - that is patronizing. Same deal and ditto when the weed shops pop up .

After the Spanish flu in 1920 then state was broke - leading to the depression of 1929 - they had to repeal the ban on booze for revenue .

 

[cool313]

What’s the difference? If you tell people it’s legal that constitutes decriminalizing . If you as a government , state , or city run municipality, endorse engagement in an activity as long as you frequent establishments which are paying for the appropriate licenses, that’s patronizing - you answer is yes they are condoning both .

Think booze. Once upon a time it was illegal. Ask Elliot Ness. Then it became legal again - alcohol was decriminalized . Bars etc, require to this day an SLA- state liquor license , to operate . As long as they have an up to date license in good standing , they pay their taxes and don’t owe the state money , you may drink there - that is patronizing. Same deal and ditto when the weed shops pop up .

After the Spanish flu in 1920 then state was broke - leading to the depression of 1929 - they had to repeal the ban on booze for revenue .

just because AG won't prosecute doesn't mean vice won't keep trying to harass these establishments

 

[Alvin Lee]

just because AG won't prosecute doesn't mean vice won't keep trying to harass these establishments

My friend there is only the law - there won’t be any vice when it’s legalized.

Why would vice harass a legal organization with a license? Do they harass bars beyond checking their license ? Sending in the health department to inspect ? No

Vice would in all probability be reduced to “ enhanced security “ in return for compensation - the old “ protection insurance” so popular with the mob

Going to an AMP is going to be legal soon. They are waiting for Covid vaccines to get a certain number first

 

[cool313]

My friend there is only the law - there won’t be any vice when it’s legalized.

Why would vice harass a legal organization with a license? Do they harass bars beyond checking their license ? Sending in the health department to inspect ? No

Vice would in all probability be reduced to “ enhanced security “ in return for compensation - the old “ protection insurance” so popular with the mob

Going to an AMP is going to be legal soon. They are waiting for Covid vaccines to get a certain number first

example: in SF the DA has stopped charging minor drug crimes. that hasn't stopped cops from hauling in people caught shooting up or purchasing fentanyl on the streets. "AG will not prosecute" does not equal "xyz activity is now legal" nor does it equal "cops will never again make an arrest for those caught doing xyz activity"

agree that if a law is in a place that fully legalizes the activities (hasn't happened yet) an arrest is much less likely. an AG/DA signaling they "will not prosecute" pushes in that direction. but in the meantime there is a time lag. still, what is "legal" has never stopped police from making arrests or issuing summons to juke their stats. there is a history in NY of cops ticketing individuals for "obstructing pedestrian traffic" and other trivial offenses. so, caution should be observed by all - on these boards and elsewhere

 

[captain.williams.2]

Nobody knows what the fuck is going to happen, everything stated is conjecture and pontification.

 

[Alvin Lee]

example: in SF the DA has stopped charging minor drug crimes. that hasn't stopped cops from hauling in people caught shooting up or purchasing fentanyl on the streets. "AG will not prosecute" does not equal "xyz activity is now legal" nor does it equal "cops will never again make an arrest for those caught doing xyz activity"

agree that if a law is in a place that fully legalizes the activities (hasn't happened yet) an arrest is much less likely. an AG/DA signaling they "will not prosecute" pushes in that direction. but in the meantime there is a time lag. still, what is "legal" has never stopped police from making arrests or issuing summons to juke their stats. there is a history in NY of cops ticketing individuals for "obstructing pedestrian traffic" and other trivial offenses. so, caution should be observed by all - on these boards and elsewhere

I’m in the legal profession - you are very incorrect . Neophytes sometimes personify the colloquialism that a little bit of knowledge is dangerous . Clearly you have a bias regarding the subject matter at hand. I will divert to not commenting further .If you truly feel the way you feel , perhaps this hobby is not a comfortable arena of participation for you .

Your statements regarding AG and DA are non factual - they work for either the city or the state . We are discussing NYC . The DA and the AG ultimately work for the state . One PP ultimately answers to the state as well. If the state says back off you back off or you are removed as AG or DA. They want the revenue? Get it ? Got it ? Good .

Not if but when it’s legalized that will be the story - till then if you are truly afraid of some shakedown - just don’t go , that is the best solution given your predisposition. Good luck - I’m bowing out of this conversation

 

[AmituofoNY]

example: in SF the DA has stopped charging minor drug crimes. that hasn't stopped cops from hauling in people caught shooting up or purchasing fentanyl on the streets. "AG will not prosecute" does not equal "xyz activity is now legal" nor does it equal "cops will never again make an arrest for those caught doing xyz activity"

Funny example, but in SF the cops don't even arrest the Fentanyl dealers they operate with impunity in the open next to all the other homeless services. Why? Because drug and property crime are not prosecuted. It's a very dirty city and completely different from NY and the East coast.
​

 

[cool313]

​

​

Funny example, but in SF the cops don't even arrest the Fentanyl dealers they operate with impunity in the open next to all the other homeless services. Why? Because drug and property crime are not prosecuted. It's a very dirty city and completely different from NY and the East coast.​

​

Thats part of the problem in SF. Arresting too many addicts and too few dealers.

 

[cool313]

I’m in the legal profession - you are very incorrect . Neophytes sometimes personify the colloquialism that a little bit of knowledge is dangerous . Clearly you have a bias regarding the subject matter at hand. I will divert to not commenting further .If you truly feel the way you feel , perhaps this hobby is not a comfortable arena of participation for you .

Your statements regarding AG and DA are non factual - they work for either the city or the state . We are discussing NYC . The DA and the AG ultimately work for the state . One PP ultimately answers to the state as well. If the state says back off you back off or you are removed as AG or DA. They want the revenue? Get it ? Got it ? Good .

Not if but when it’s legalized that will be the story - till then if you are truly afraid of some shakedown - just don’t go , that is the best solution given your predisposition. Good luck - I’m bowing out of this conversation

A smart lawyer as yourself should be able to spot the logical leaps you make in your statements above (including interpreting this one news piece that the state has already solidified it's stance on this hobby as a revenue producing mechanism).

I am simply urging caution to all.

I'm not sure what you're urging, other than trying to jerk yourself off by telling everyone you must be right because you have a JD.

 

[Alvin Lee]

A smart lawyer as yourself should be able to spot the logical leaps you make in your statements above (including interpreting this one news piece that the state has already solidified it's stance on this hobby as a revenue producing mechanism).

I am simply urging caution to all.

I'm not sure what you're urging, other than trying to jerk yourself off by telling everyone you must be right because you have a JD.

What I’m saying is that protection of prostitution is the first step . Think weed. Remember at first stores were allowed to sell it , however possession was still illegal . It made no sense . It was merely a stepping stone - that is how our governmental system works

This year Cuomo has had bills for legalization both gambling and weed sent through and both are approved. Now the setup is in motion .

Prostitution has cleared the first hurdle . Next will be dropping persecution of John’s for solicitation. That is how the wheels turn . After all who would it benefit if the AMP’s and indies Could operate with a license , and even now can no longer face prosecution, if all their clients can still go to jail .

This will be revamped for all the above reasons - the state wants all the money they can get their hands on ...

 

[SoFlFeet]

The real question is, will the prices go up? Mongers are still going to monger it just might cost more in NYC like other things in the city.

 

[Alvin Lee]

The real question is, will the prices go up? Mongers are still going to monger it just might cost more in NYC like other things in the city.

Tender balance - will the price of weed go up now that it’s legal - well now that it’s legal
More shops will pop up - more sources breed more competition ,,,, I would say carry that over to mongers -
more places open more competition- who knows maybe we go back to 2017 and catch k women like Chanel for 200 hr again . I think we all deserve a break - this might just get us one .

 

[Rustman]

example: in SF the DA has stopped charging minor drug crimes. that hasn't stopped cops from hauling in people caught shooting up or purchasing fentanyl on the streets. "AG will not prosecute" does not equal "xyz activity is now legal" nor does it equal "cops will never again make an arrest for those caught doing xyz activity"

agree that if a law is in a place that fully legalizes the activities (hasn't happened yet) an arrest is much less likely. an AG/DA signaling they "will not prosecute" pushes in that direction. but in the meantime there is a time lag. still, what is "legal" has never stopped police from making arrests or issuing summons to juke their stats. there is a history in NY of cops ticketing individuals for "obstructing pedestrian traffic" and other trivial offenses. so, caution should be observed by all - on these boards and elsewhere

Not a lawyer or paid spokesperson. But... If legal then hallelujah. I'll never leave NYC. until then, yes if LE wants to harass they can arrest even if they know case won't be tried. They'll get yelled at by a judge and maybe a supervisor? tho. Theoretically it could happen. Idk the odds tho. As for the girls ratting. Well, that's the surest way to destroy the business rep. If word got out unlikely anyone would ever go there. So it's a self destructive move. Without testimony there's no case on a John. So arresting a monger without the other party swearing there was money exchanged for sex wouldn't go anywhere. And that's less likely for above reasons and knowing that they won't themselves be prosecuted there shouldn't be any scare or intimidation tactics by LE to force them to rat. So seems unlikely. But legalization is the best option. Just leave consenting adults alone.

 

[jonmark1905]

Basically here is the motivation behind this action :

NYC is broke - Covid broke the bank . Unemployment payments to a million people , loss of bridge and tunnel revenue in concert with subway and bus revenue all killing the city .

So what do you do when you need money ? You take a lesson from the Lucky Luciano playbook “ there is no such thing as good money or bad money , there is just money “

NYC is back in the sports betting business- the greatest and most growing source of constant revenue there is . This time the pros manage it . This kills the mob and illegal gaming

Next Weed is here - a billion dollar payday complete with product sales and tax revenue .

And now to my point - the AG dropped the bag on masseuses and prostitution because - drumroll - it’s going to be legalized - already on the state referendum. All the places in NYS will buy yearly state and city license , the places will pay payroll tax and a fee to operate - the state is going to get their vig. Things will be clean , all tested monthly and the sense of impending doom and the big bust will be over .

Now we truly will be Sin City —- I Love It

I love your analysis. I couldn't agree more on all these points.