Originally Posted by
ninebitree
Your signature relating the number of attacks on sex workers paradoxically supports the case for criminalising clients.
No it doesn't.
It supports the case for allowing escorts to work together for safety, which is illegal at present.
It supports the case for encouraging sex workers to contact the police, something which client criminalisation will deter.
It supports the case for TORL, Ruhama and the DUP to stop lying to the media and the public about trafficking figures and be honest about their motives.
Only a tiny proportion of clients assault sex workers. Those individuals won't be deterred by a fine or a court appearance.
''If there are no clients, then no escorts then no trafficking pimping or other associated crime.''
Your statement is extremely naive. There isn't a single country on the planet (including those with the death penalty) that doesn't have sex workers and clients. The US have been trying to 'end demand' through criminalisation for over a century now, resulting in complete failure. There is no actual evidence that the Swedish Model has reduced demand at all.
The ideal system for sex workers is the New Zealand model where it is decriminalised and SWs have equal rights with other workers.
2014 in Northern Ireland:
Number of reported attacks on sex workers 70
Number of sex trafficking cases ZERO