Another politician seeks to outlaw the competition

One unidentified businessman claimed to be uncomfortable about relocating to a Nevada county where brothels are legal, so U.S. Sen. Harry Reid lectured state legislators in Carson City Wednesday (to a response of deafening silence) that Nevada should outlaw and close the 28 legal brothels that now pay local taxes and fees — some of them representing a hefty share of local tax revenues — in eight of Nevada’s rural counties.

Local brothel owners report the businessman in question finally decided to locate his business in Storey County, anyway. Meantime, I don’t believe it would be an exaggeration to say hundreds of complaints pour in here annually from tourists harassed by newly arrived Mexican “guest workers” earning some minimal income by aggressively handing out little cards with phone numbers and color photos of “direct to your room” naked babes to tourists strolling the Las Vegas Strip — the card-pushers showing no hesitation in pushing the cards on family groups including young children and ancient grannies.

Why don’t the hotels along the Strip solve this litter and harassment problem by simply asking these porn hawkers to put together stacks of plain manila envelopes, so the desk clerks could ask folks as they check in whether they’d like information about “confidential adult services”? Because they’d be seen as complicit with a huge and lucrative business which is still technically ILLEGAL in Clark County (Las Vegas) and in Reno, of course.

Reno and Las Vegas closed down their red light districts in 1951, meaning prostitutes in Las Vegas and Reno aren’t subject to inspections by the state health department (unlike ladies in the legal rural brothels.) Local police make virtually no efforts to enforce laws against “outcall” prostitution in Las Vegas, which means customers here theoretically also face less protection against being rolled, overcharged, ripped off, etc.

So which is a larger “problem,” senator? Legal brothels, or widespread illegal prostitution among the high-rise hotels of Las Vegas?

Actually, as a Libertarian and fan of the free market, I don’t see either as much of a problem. In fact, getting “rolled” while seeking entertainment in Vegas is highly uncommon, so long as you stay in your hotel room. It simply wouldn’t be good for business, and is thus (I must presume) “policed” quite effectively, even if very “unofficially.”

Besides, for every businessman who expresses concern about locating to a county with discreet local brothels, there must be hundreds who are concerned about locating to a state with widespread legal businesses offering working folk a “change to win” if only they’ll cash their paychecks inside the casino (the idea being, obviously, that said salarymen are unlikely to exit the joint without laying down at least SOME of those greenbacks.) Such ad campaigns are widespread in Nevada, giving the lie to the dated notion that the casinos are “only for the tourists.”

Does the senator believe Nevada should outlaw casinos and “quickie” marriage and divorce, as well, in order to also “replace them” with more upstanding and high-toned enterprises? Like what? Rattlesnake ranching?

I’m sure businessmen express concern about relocating to states where patients can now buy marijuana with a doctor’s recommendation (including California and Nevada), states where citizens can carry firearms openly on their hips (including Nevada and Arizona), etc.

Instead of suggesting we change our laws to more closely resemble Puritan New England, the correct reply is, “I guess you could go back to paying all those taxes that drove you out of Illinois or New Jersey or Massachusetts. Or, you could just get used to slightly less hypocrisy and slightly more freedom.”

# # #

I see where the Obama administration will no longer defend in court the constitutionality of a federal law that bans recognition of same-sex marriage.

What is it any law enforcement agent — from the cop on the beat to the U.S. attorney general — will tell you if you ask why they’re still harassing people about marijuana, peyote, and other non-addictive plants, even in states where local voters have said “Never mind”?

“We don’t get to pick and choose which laws we’re going to enforce,” they’ll bluster. “As long as they’re on the books we have to enforce them all equally …”

Yeah, right.

I’ve got nothing against gays getting hitched, if they find state law can thus help them clear up everything from inheritance to the right to visit their loved one in the hospital or even make end-of-life decisions instead of having some “official” call in an estranged cousin no one’s seen in years.

But if “the executive” (as in “We ‘execute’ the laws”) feels free to not bother enforcing this law, nor the immigration laws, while continuing to bulldoze the pot gardens of weeping California cancer patients, what theory remains to explain which laws they’re going to enforce and which they’re not? If Mr. Obama and Mr. Holder can no longer say they’re waiting for the Supreme Court to decide whether all our remaining “gun control” or asset seizure laws are unconstitutional — as they obviously are — how can they justify continuing to enforce them, or thousands of other extra-constitutional edicts?

Or are we back to “Atlas Shrugged,” in which Dr. Floyd Ferris asks: “Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed? …We want them broken… There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted — and you create a nation of law-breakers — and then you cash in on guilt”?

# # #

Do you live in Las Vegas or Henderson? On or about Feb. 14, did you find or receive a young, gray-spotted female Bengal housecat with a bit of orange to her belly, who answers to the name of “Fiona,” in or near the Walmart at Eastern and Russell?

Debbie Brown writes in that “We had carpet pad delivered Feb. 8; our little cat escaped during the delivery and got in the back of delivery truck. When we couldn’t find her we called the driver,” whose next delivery was near Eastern and Russell.

“On Feb. 14 a gentleman called us and he had just been at the Eastern/Russell Walmart and said a Walmart associate had found her in the store. … We went to Walmart Feb. 15 and contacted the Walmart employee who found her and he stated he had given her to some customers. … So, we know our cat is alive and someone has her. …

“We are in the process of relocating to California and the thought of going without her is devastating. We have her brother bengal cat who has never, ever been away from her and he is so depressed.”

If you believe you have Fiona, I can put you in touch with the Browns.

And no, I’m not promising to run every “lost pet” announcement in this space. Contact Classifieds at 383-0383.


RSS 2.0" title="Subscribe to this posts comments via RSS 2.0">RSS subscribe