It is just as illegal to sell it on the street. Tougher law enforcement at least forces it off the street.
"Drunk stoned men looking for sex harass and come after innocent women..."
...and should be arrested and imprisoned for assault and maybe even attempted rape.
Even casual harassment, not rising to the level of assault, is enough to persuade people to avoid blighted areas.
Unless somebody has been coercively forced to participate in prostitution your "pimp slavemasters" argument is irrelevant. If somebody voluntarily subjects themselves to that kind of lifestyle then I'm afraid you have no cause to interfere.
Theoretical distinctions between coercive and voluntary don't apply so cleanly to vices like prostitution.
As for children, anyone having sex with children should be brought up on rape and molestation charges and put in prison.
Sure. Prevention is even better.
BTW, welcome to FR.
Thanks.
A moment ago you expressed your concern that prostitution..., "brings neighborhoods down and drives good people away. Drunk stoned men looking for sex harass and come after innocent women while addict hookers pester men."
This occurs because the criminalization of prostitution has created a criminal black-market which has nowhere to go but the streets. It belongs indoors. I realize that it is also illegal on the streets but exactly how much success do you think somebody would have opening a brothel or advertising in the phonebook while it's illegal?
Even casual harassment, not rising to the level of assault, is enough to persuade people to avoid blighted areas.
Well, I'm afraid there isn't much that can be done to completely eliminate casual harrassment wether it's from a street vendor, pedestrian, beggar, somebody passing out flyers, petition worker, city employee, or somebody else.
Theoretical distinctions between coercive and voluntary don't apply so cleanly to vices like prostitution.
Either somebody voluntarily participates in something or they are forced/defrauded into participating. There's nothing theoretical about it. One is a crime. The other is not.
Prevention is even better.
It depends on what the prevention is. Surely you wouldn't want to prevent movie-goers from yelling "fire" in a crowded theater by taping their mouths shut when they buy a ticket. Nor would you want to prevent cavities by forcing people to display their teeth to government oral hygiene inspectors to make sure they're brushing.
That kind of prevention is called prior-restraint which is incompatible with freedom.