A state lawmaker wants to tax in-room adult movies ordered at hotels to help fund child sex-abuse investigations.
The current version of House Bill 1086, sponsored by Rep. Amy Stephens, R-Monument, would impose a 99-cent fee on all in-room movies ordered at hotels. Stephens, though, said she plans to narrow her proposal to apply to just adult movies.
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_8088696
What does adult porno have to do with child sexual abuse? Most adults have viewed porno and are not child molesters.
The people who are likely to be negatively affected by this law are probably not people typically involved in child abuse. I expect it is businessmen traveling into the state for conferences or other work related reasons who are the main users of hotel porn. Does Rep. Stephens have any statistics that say users of hotel porn are somehow more likely to abuse children than others? She makes the claim that "Most of our sexual predators in prison are addicted to pornography", but what does this mean? Does this mean that most consumers of pornography are sexual predators? Is it a case that people likely to be involved in sexually predatory activity are also consumers of porno, but those people would likely be sexual predators even if they had never viewed a single bit of pornography? That is what I think the case is, and if I am correct then the proposed tax makes even less sense.
I think we already give the police plenty of our money to investigate crime. If they need to direct more resources towards child sex crimes, then they should direct fewer resources to all of these prostitution stings they have been getting in trouble for lately.
Recent Comments