Radley Balko makes a very strong case for legalized prostitution noting that in a study of legal prostitution in Nevada by A E Albert, D L Warner, R A Hatcher, J Trussell and C Bennett

Condoms were used for every act of vaginal intercourse with a brothel client during the study period, as well as in the previous year. In the prospective study phase, condoms were used in 353 acts of vaginal intercourse with clients. No condoms broke, and none fell off the penis during intercourse.

he also claims "and there hasn't been a single case of HIV since 1988." (citation needed).


In contrast in a study of illegal prostitution in Chicago by Steve Leavitt and Sudhir Venkatesh, (pdf) "Condoms only get used about 20 percent of the time, the authors estimate." I guess Leavitt is famous enough that he can report "estimates".

Balko does not address the question which is obvious to everyone living in an industrialized democracy other than the US and Malta (citation needed). If prostitution is a crime and prostitutes are obviously the victims, why do you make their problems worse by declaring them to be criminals ? In normal countries pimps are ciminals but prostitutes and johns aren't. In the semi normal UK Pimps and johns are criminals and prostitutes aren't. I think the US approach of punishing the victim was eliminated in other developed countries (where it ever existed) long ago (citation needed).

Now my guess is that, in Italy, prostitution is more similar to prostitution in Chicago than it is to prostitution in Nevada (I have no evidence) and I support legalization. Still mixing the obvious point that it is insane and depraved to punish the victims of prostitution with the controversial claim that it should be just plain legal is sloppy reasoning.