Hacker News Reader

Comment by nostrebored | Hacker News Reader

New Zealand actually decriminalized prostitution. Legalization is an entirely different system.

That's not correct - prostitution is fully legal here in New Zealand. Sex workers are covered by sex-work specific occupational health and safety regulations, pay taxes on their income, have government-mandated workplace conditions, can get insurance against workplace injury, etc. It really is "just another job", apart from societal stigma (which is gradually declining too).

See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_New_Zealand

http://www.business.govt.nz/worksafe/information-guidance/al...

Interesting. It seems like most reporting on it and a lot of the documents from the government report on it as decrim. Could you elaborate on why you think that is? (legitimately curious, not snark)

I think people are just not using the terms in the precise and somewhat pedantic way we're doing here. :) I think New Zealanders are pretty familiar with the legal situation here, so making the distinction clear at all times is just less important.

Here's the law... http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2003/0028/latest/D...

The laws re: brothels do make this appear like a partial decriminalization effort. For instance, operating an unlicensed brothel only causes you to incur a $10k fine rather than prison time. The same with health violations, where "not promoting safer sex practices" i.e. using condoms in sex acts, is a fine-able offense.

This is no different from any other business. You can be fined for operating a hairdressing salon without a license. This doesn't mean we've "partially decriminalised" hairdressing.

Honest question: What's the difference? I have no idea.

Decriminalizing means reducing the penalties for the crime, but it's still illegal. So it might mean you only pay a fine for offending, rather than jail time.

Citation?

Yes, you get a citation. :)

From 5 minutes of Googling, it seems this might be a regional difference. AU/NZ references I found seemed to be different than the typical US usage, which follows what GP said.

Massachusetts recently decriminalized THC.

Possession for Personal Use

Possession of 1 ounce or less of marijuana is decriminalized and is punishable as a civil offense. If the offender is over the age of 18 they must pay a fine of $100.

Source: http://norml.org/laws/item/massachusetts-penalties-2

The AU/NZ usage seems to use "decriminalized" to mean "removing all laws against", where the US tends to use "makes it into a civil violation". We (in the US) use legalization to mean "fully legal (and possibly regulated/licensed and taxed)"

Well, I'm Australian hence the confusion :-)

My understanding: Decriminalization is more sweepingly favorable to freedom for sex workers. Legalization tends to involve a lot of regulations. It is sometimes no better for sex workers than criminalizing it.

Decriminalization seems to be about making as few laws as possible concerning the matter. Legalization involves writing a bunch of laws about what you can and cannot do.

Based on the opinions of sex worker and political activist Dolores French, I have long been for decriminalization. If a legal adult wishes to take money for sexual services, I don't see why anyone should care.

If a legal adult wishes to take money for their kidney, we certainly care.

You know, that totally makes sense to me. I would hate to see poor people parted out because selling pieces of their body seemed like a good idea at the time.

I don't see any relevance to sex work though.

It's an industry that's shown demonstrable, long term harm for short term benefits?

https://www.collegium.ethz.ch/fileadmin/autoren/pdf_papers/1... http://www.prostitutionresearch.com/FarleyVAW.pdf

Like the repetitive strain injury I got during the first dot com boom that I have never recovered from?

You have this the wrong way round. Legalisation _does_ involve bringing something into the same set of regulations that applies to everything else, and that's a good thing. However, when we speak of "decriminalising" something, we usually mean removing criminal penalties for something that can still be against the law, and can still result in fines and other penalties. This means that the industry remains underground, which is usually worse for all involved. See the links I gave upthread for citations and the NZ context.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2015/10/differ...

Some clarification: under legalisation, sex work is controlled by the government and is legal only under certain state-specified conditions. Decriminalisation involves the removal of all prostitution-specific laws, although sex workers and sex work businesses must still operate within the laws of the land, as must any businesses.

Well, I can't speak for the New Statesman, but that's just not what decriminalisation means. Here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decriminalization

Decriminalisation usually means that some criminal penalties are removed, but an activity is still not "legal". Fines may still apply, and decriminalisation is usually partial (i.e. possession of drugs may be decriminalised, though you can still be fined, but dealing may still be fully criminalised).

Legalisation means going the whole hog - removing all fines and criminal penalties. This usually also means bringing an activity in the mainstream by, for example, taxing it like any other activity, or making it subject to workplace safety regulation. This is what New Zealand did with prostitution.

Wikipedia explains this reasonably well:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decriminalization

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalization

Reply on news.ycombinator.com