Comments

Legalize It wrote on Nov 12, 2009 11:04 AM:

" A better solution would be to legalize prostitution in a similar fashion to Nevada. Its not legal within any city limits but is outside of the city limits. This would solve many problems. First its never going to stop. But if you legalize it, regulate it, and of course tax it it will free up all the vice cops to go on to bigger crimes and bring in revenue. Plus if they can only perform their services at a "Ranch" the girls themselves can be protected from the sickos such as Ridgeway and Robert Hansen. "




Fact of the matter is wrote on Nov 11, 2009 11:54 AM:

" Tthat in this country you are guilty until you prove yourself innocent. Whether you are a DA, Public defender, or just a private defense attorney your primary obligation is first and foremost to the court system and it's State hired stooge known as the judge. It is a lose lose propostion for any defendant as the game is fixed. It is a profit center where the black skirted person sits on a bench (like a river bench) and directs the flow of currency (like river bench directs water) from you to them. "




to who cares wrote on Nov 10, 2009 1:39 PM:

" Legalizing prostitution has many pros and cons and has been considered in the past. There are many places in the world where prostitution is legal. You and I don't live in those locations and are governed by our current laws. Your opinion is yours and for what its worth, I believe legalizing prostitution would be a safer choice because of STDs and AIDS. For now, it's illegal and really isn't driven by the tax angle. Good luck to you. Be safe. "




who cares wrote on Nov 10, 2009 12:02 PM:

" Its your body, If a woman wants to have sex and have people pay her for it then more power to her, if a man wants to get laid and pay a woman for it, more power to him, who cares, people are doing it all the time for FREEEEE. It's only a problem because they havent figured out a way to tax it. Sex is sex free or not. "




alaskaveritas wrote on Nov 9, 2009 3:42 AM:

" the Dateline NBC sting operations relating to sexual predators could be construed as entrapment. However just like this law enforcement operation, the Dateline NBC program recorded a similar strategy that is effective and well tested in the courts..

I suspect that many of the critics of the prostitution operation would be less likely to be critical of the Dateline NBC project. Probably because sexual predators of children are (and should be) considered a more serious crime. But prostitution is also a crime. This prostitution sting was effective in stopping as well as detering criminal behavior. "




byhoi wrote on Nov 8, 2009 10:06 PM:

" i know one of these man hes and awsome guy and he would never do something like this .... "




David wrote on Nov 8, 2009 3:49 PM:

" JP, think about it if one of these men would have got caught shoplifting the article would've started out like this....In a Wasilla store so-and-so was picked up for shoplifting...and then the story would continue with details of the incident. Alleged criminals names are always released unless they are a juvenile. Again these men should've thought of their families before making the trip to have sex. Innocent until proven guilty in totally agree, but stop blaming the paper for these sicko's mistake. Its always someone else's fault. "




jp wrote on Nov 8, 2009 12:48 PM:

" David, i was not trying to defend these people, i was just stating that one should not be found guilty by all others, until they have their day in court.
then, and only then, should it be fair game for the papers and television.
because, after their names are released and found guilty by the newspapers, and tv, is there really any need for a court? "




David wrote on Nov 7, 2009 1:50 PM:

" To JP, I think the act of showing up with the intention to pay for sex is actually a crime. Right? I might be wrong. I'm asking. But to defend a 'John' is dispickable. Am I wrong to think that? But you are right let the system do its job. I am a strong believer in our rights so I should not jump to guilt. "




wrench wrote on Nov 7, 2009 12:24 PM:

" Prihibition breeds crime. If they could catch real criminals ( burglers, rapist, vandals, thiefs ect ect) to earn their paychecks, maybe we would feel safer in our own homes. Have the law enforcement caught the home invaders from last week? "




We shall see wrote on Nov 6, 2009 9:27 AM:

" To Kristin, Craigslist users are asked to police the content, read the rules. If Craigslist allowed the police to post an add which violated their own policy then they are discriminating against others who post adds for the same service. I think if you look at some of the adds it will become obvious Craigslist is not policing their site. "




jp wrote on Nov 6, 2009 9:21 AM:

" Jake, the possible lawsuit i was referring to was not just about the names, it was what followed, they gave an liablous opinion:
They may be found not guilty, but they won’t be found innocent. In their hearts and minds, they planned to pay a woman to have sex. Those 10 men are not victims.
this is what could be held against them. "




Jake Smyth wrote on Nov 5, 2009 11:30 PM:

" To JP. I don't know how many times this has to be said but the paper will never be held liable for printing the names. They are public record. Police departments make these records available to anyone who wants them so stop with the lets sue attitude. It just won't happen. "




come on... wrote on Nov 5, 2009 10:28 PM:

" Leagilize it and then sin tax it. It is the "New" American way. It has been going on since bibical times, and always been against the law. Can't any politicians out there see the possibilities of a new tax revenue? "




To Greg Hutchins wrote on Nov 5, 2009 5:59 PM:

" If this was really you writing what you wrote then all I have to say is you are a big man. It takes a big man to admit guilt and admit that you have turned to God. May God bless you and heal your family. "




to Kristin wrote on Nov 5, 2009 12:16 PM:

" Sex sting nets 50 people: Craigslist suspect on officers' minds
Publication: Telegram & Gazette (Worcester, MA)
Date: Monday, April 20 2009
Police Capt. Paul B. Saucier, head of the vice squad which spearheaded the sting, said police targeted men looking to meet women for sex through Craigslist postings and also women offering sex for cash over the Web site.
Twenty people were arrested in the Craigslist sting, where police set up at a city hotel and either arrested women there to meet a man or men who responded to the undercover officer's post.

Not a new technique. "




Greg Hutchins wrote on Nov 5, 2009 10:36 AM:

" I am a victim,a victim of my OWN poor choices and bad Judgement. I don't care if the sting opperation was legal or not. I was guilty before I ever made the call. God judges the heart of a man and that is where the actions are born. Jesus has forgiven me, now as I work thru the fall out, redifine my priorities, get more God and less greg, then you as a community will see the walk and hopefully reduce the talk. My wife, children and familiy deserve you respect on their own merit not my actions. "




kristin wrote on Nov 5, 2009 9:42 AM:

" Who ever is We Shall See? They worked with Craigslist to get it posted. It got approved by Craigslist. Wake up. "




jp wrote on Nov 5, 2009 8:56 AM:

" David, did they break the law? you know this to be fact? or are you assuming so because it was in the paper?
they are innocent until they are proven guilty in a court of law.
this is something that cannot, and should not be infringed upon.
sadly, it seems that the police, and others have taken this upon themselves to be judge, jury, and executioner on this subject.
no names should be publicized until after their day in court.
i believe it leaves the police and paper liable for a lawsuit. "




VALLEY MAN wrote on Nov 5, 2009 7:41 AM:

" IT'S INTERESTING TO ME, THE WIDE RANGE OF OPINIONS THAT EVERY ONE HAS. JUST ABOUT EVERY PERSON I KNOW HAS SEEN DATE LINE "TO CATCH A PREDITOR" GRANTED THAT IS FOR UNDERAGED YOUTH, BUT THE CONCEPT IS STILL THERE, THEY CANT SAY THEY DIDNT SUSPECT. "




To We shall see wrote on Nov 5, 2009 7:38 AM:

" By MARCUS FRANKLIN Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK May 20, 2009 (AP)

Seven New York residents have been indicted on charges of running a prostitution ring on Craigslist.

The five are scheduled to appear in court Wednesday in Queens. That's where officials say the operation was based.

Cuomo's office says the group operated a ring called Room Service Entertainment in the "erotic services" section of Craigslist from June 2007 through December 2008.

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Rethink your defense!!!! "




indigo wrote on Nov 5, 2009 1:01 AM:

" It's rather simple. Stick with your wife, take care of your family, leave the smoke and the grog alone, use common sense in all things, and you will never see yourself on the police beat. The only people who should be worried are the folks who believe their own way a doing things is better. lover or leaver. "




David wrote on Nov 4, 2009 11:43 PM:

" Am I reading this right? You people are actually defending a crime? These poor men just wanted sex and there names were published, give me a fricken break. Names are always published. They broke the law. Dont break the law. Its just that simple. These idiots should have thought about their families embarassment before they showed up at the house. I'm glad we have forward thinking police that actually do their job and keep our town safe. You all should shake a cops hand everytime you see one. "




No No NO wrote on Nov 3, 2009 9:58 PM:

" No, the frontiersman is not capable of unbiased press and neither is the Daily News. Just ask any politician or any person running for a political office. Yes, some politicians receive favorable press others don't. It is simply because the Frontiersman is not capable of unbiased press and neither is any other "rag" or news show you see on the boob tube. "




We shall see wrote on Nov 3, 2009 7:48 PM:

" One small detail which is being over looked here is that the police violated Craigslist terms of use to entrap these poor in need fellows. Look for yourself under #7. Conduct. Had the cops chose not to impersonate, falsely mislead, deceive, and advertise an illegal activity there would not have been a crime committed. It's called entrapment. So hold on to your milk money. "




they wont be found innocent wrote on Nov 3, 2009 4:28 PM:

" Watch 20/20. This happens all the time. Our police caught 10 John's purchasing SEX. Chances of them being innocent are very slim with a sting (returning a hammer wouldn't have gotten them a citation). Unfortunately for these 10 the police was ready for them- all legal- all above board.

The reporter took liberties, but I'll bet my milk money that they will all be prosecuted; with pleadings ranging the gamut depending on the depth of their pocketbooks. State appointed attorneys receiving the stiffest penalties and pleas. "




Nothing new wrote on Nov 3, 2009 3:32 PM:

" Nov. 3rd- Associated Press Writer:
"Capt. Mark Hamilton was charged Tuesday with 31 violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
The announcement does not provide details of the alleged offenses, which also include fraud, adultery, indecent language and soliciting another to commit an offense."
The press reported a citation and offenders name- how embarrassing to his family and friends.
Note: reporting is done all over this world and is not something "trendy" and new. "




to disgusted wrote on Nov 3, 2009 3:11 PM:

" You are incorrect... shame does reduce crime. If these 10 men thought ahead about their names appearing in the news, some wouldn't have gather their dollars and driven to this woman's home- that's called humility/embarrassment.

The police didn't create a crime. . . they took the business away from another prostitute. FYI they're out there: MSB population 98,000, prostitution- oldest industry in the world.

This is an opinion article, key word opinion. "




Have you been sleeping wrote on Nov 3, 2009 2:49 PM:

" These 10 johns wouldn't have been charged if it wouldn't hold up in court.

Police release names/citations every week.

Embarrassing crime? Not any more embarrassing than a DWI or sexual assault.

If you think this is a waste of tax dollars than you probably think a speeding ticket is too.

Society dictates what's law. Police enforces law. The news publishes violators.

Always has, always will.

If you don't want your name in the paper follow the letter of the law. "




Palmer Farm wrote on Nov 3, 2009 1:22 PM:

" I generally agreed with this article right up until I read the line "They may be found not guilty, but they won't be found innocent". You're a newspaper; not the police, not a jury, not a judge. No matter how strong the evidence, that's not your call to make. Statements like that reinforce the perception by many of the arrogance of the media. They also underscore the opinion that those names were printed primarily for the purpose of entertaining the muck-lovers. I'm not impressed. "




A Little Decency wrote on Nov 3, 2009 1:05 PM:

" It's called an opinion piece for a reason, but when your opionon goes after the readers for expressing their thoughts and feelings, you may want to rethink your approach. We understand the constitutional value you put on your ability to report the news, however most would just ask for you to have a fiber of decency when doing it. In my opionion it has become beyond ridiculous how we treat the accused in this country. Because something is allowed, doesn't make it right. "




think-for-yourself wrote on Nov 3, 2009 12:54 PM:

" "In their hearts and minds" --- its my heart and my mind and it is no ones business what i do with them. especially some sanctimonious holier than thou newspaper editor. "




allen wrote on Nov 3, 2009 12:49 PM:

" I for one approve of the police sting and the the Froniersman coverage. From some of the letters, I think a few guys don't want anybody messing with their "fun". "




MAXKATT from NY wrote on Nov 3, 2009 12:44 PM:

" "our reporter plans to see how these 10 men are treated in the judicial system."....."they won’t be found innocent. In their hearts and minds, they planned to pay a woman to have sex." Sound like we are jumping the gun a bit here. What about due process and "innocent until proven guilty" for these alleged Johns. Perhaps one was just returning a hammer he had borrowed? "




Oops wrote on Nov 3, 2009 12:31 PM:

" Bravo keep this kind of reporting coming the Valley needs to wake up and stop the cover-up. "




Hey Disgusted wrote on Nov 3, 2009 11:42 AM:

" I bet the publisher and editors would like to thank you for the web hits and comments. If your disgusted don't read or comment. How many people have you talked with about this story. I bet they all went to the web site as well. It is called human interest and that is what the newspaper does. Inform, expose, cover, explain, exploit, ect... If we didn't care there wouldn't be news. Place blame where it is due on the ten men. And society as a whole including yourself. "




Jeff baxter wrote on Nov 3, 2009 11:36 AM:

" To think for yourself. You should do the same but then again maybe you need help. This is an editorial piece. Which means of course there is going to be some judgment passed. That is what an editorial does. I am sure you would have no objection to the editor penning a piece about legalizing drugs. What is the matter don't like it when a paper writes what you don't like. Do you really think it is a good idea to repeal all prohibitions. Heroine, LSD, Cocaine, Crack, PCP Angel Dust. How about the prohibition of killing. "




Confused wrote on Nov 3, 2009 11:31 AM:

" So where were the prostitutes? Are there any? or did the police just test the waters for potential customers. Did any businesses complain about prostitutes? I'm a female and disgusted by trade in women but this just seems silly. "




Jeff Baxter wrote on Nov 3, 2009 11:28 AM:

" Oh please pre judgement. Fact 1. Cops set up a fake ad adverting prostitution on Craig's List. Fact 2. 10 men responded. fact 3. Illegal under current law. Fact 4. No one held a gun to their head. Fact 5. There is no other other place but the public forum. Case in point you are judging the same people by these comments and the cops actions as well as the newspapers coverage. Fact 5. The fact that you are commenting only goes to show that you are fueling the fire just as much. "




Disgusted wrote on Nov 3, 2009 9:38 AM:

" OK, fine. The ten are not victims. But that does change that this police action is an irresponsible waste of tax dollars. There is enough real crime for law enforcement to go after without creating crime where there otherwise would be none. "




PreJudgement wrote on Nov 3, 2009 9:11 AM:

" They may be found not guilty, but they won't be found innocent? Are you capable of unbiased press? How do you know they paid for sex? I am assuming that you were not in the room. Your "reporter" will see how the judicial system deals with this matter?Does your publication intend to try the case in the press as well?It may be wise at this point to step back and evaluate your stance in this matter.Are you reporting facts or persecuting at this point?Does the community benefit from the press fueling and breeding condemnation.Police your own conduct. "




We shall see wrote on Nov 3, 2009 9:08 AM:

" "They may be found not guilty, but they won’t be found innocent. In their hearts and minds, they planned to pay a woman to have sex. Those 10 men are not victims."

I say they are victims of entrapment and will be found not guilty. If Palmer and Wasilla police departments hadn't conspired and violated Craigslist policy a crime would not have been committed.

However, I agree they are not innocent. "




think-for-yourself wrote on Nov 3, 2009 8:57 AM:

" the writer of this "opinion" is imposing their moral judgment on this issue . "They may be found not guilty, but they won’t be found innocent. " it is not the place of a newspaper or its reporters to pass judgment on anybody. plus they miss point completely that this is a value or moral being imposed on others. it should not be illegal in the first place. like drugs and all prohibitions it only creates more crime,harm, and costs to us all by keeping it illegal. propaganda piece "




disgusted wrote on Nov 3, 2009 8:51 AM:

" I'm disgusted with the self-righteous attitude of this papers editors. Publishing the names of these men created a greater ripple effect of victimization as families - wives, children, parents, siblings were forced to participate in their shame. Shame doesn't reduce crime. The argument that people want to read about it so we should print it makes about as much sense as saying people want to buy sex so we should legalize the purchase of iit. How does that justify the printing when you now are participants in the victimization of family and friends? "




kudos wrote on Nov 3, 2009 6:14 AM:

" Kudos to the staff of the
frontiersman for standing up for the right to publish what they want. It's an amendment to the constitution ya know. The one that you embrace as an American. You don't have to agree with them, you don't even have to like what they say. You do however have to give them the freedom to print what they feel is fair and equitable, in return, you get to speak your peace as well. Kudos Frontiersman, Kudos. "




Thank you Frontiersman wrote on Nov 2, 2009 10:29 PM:

" for being honest about a crime, albeit distasteful to the community, especially due to the fact the net drew in a familiar name or two. "




out of the box wrote on Nov 2, 2009 10:12 PM:

" It is hard to believe that our police do not have anyhting better to do than harrass men sitting around messing with their computer.

What if this make belive sex was offered free, what would they do, tryu to get the married ones for adultry.

Go after the pimps who live off of and abuse these women. "