Teen prostitutes pimped out by gang members

[Sliverfern]

Teen prostitutes pimped out by gang members
5:00AM Friday January 25, 2008
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=217&objectid=10488728
By Elizabeth Binning

Some of the teenage girls caught in a South Auckland underage prostitution operation this week were being pimped out by gang members who offered them accommodation and drugs in return for sex.

The two-week operation saw 25 arrests on charges including engaging in sexual activity with teenage girls.

It also saw 16 young people - including a 15-year-old boy and girls as young as 13 - being removed from the streets and returned to their families. Some were placed into the care of Child, Youth and Family.

Detective Senior Sergeant Dave Pizzini said the operation - which finished on Wednesday with the execution of a number of search warrants - followed six weeks of intelligence gathering.

"We have known anecdotally that underage prostitution has been alive and well and we know that through some historic sexual abuse investigations."

One of those cases involved the abduction and rape of a 12-year-old prostitute, which was solved a few months ago when the offender gave a voluntary DNA sample.


During the intelligence gathering period, police found a number of young people working on the streets and a large number of people prepared to pay for underage sex. They became familiar with who was organising the teens, who was frequently picking them up and who in particular was looking for underage prostitutes.

Mr Pizzini said that during the operation police arrested 25 people of varying ages on a wide variety of charges. They are all before the courts.

The 16 young people who were picked up were "all actively engaged in offering commercial sexual services on the streets".

Mr Pizzini said some were also living in gang homes where they were controlled by pimps who exchanged sex for accommodation, food and drugs.

He said the last two weeks was "just the start" of a crackdown.

CRACKDOWN CLEARS CORNER

It appeared last night that the police underage prostitution crackdown had scared off the working girls of South Auckland.

Hunters Corner - a stretch of shops in Papatoetoe which is a favourite hangout for prostitutes soliciting business - had only teenage street gangs patrolling the suburb.

And in Otara there were no obvious sex workers on the streets.

However, sitting outside public toilets, opposite the RSA in the Manurewa shopping centre carpark, two women - aged in their 30s and 40s respectively - told the Herald that they hadn't heard about the crackdown but they didn't let young girls on their turf anyway.

"We don't want them around here," one of the women said.

"We're allowed to bash them if they come round here."

However, the pair didn't elaborate on who gave them the right to get rid of the girls.

- Alanah May Eriksen

Great the more left New Zealand becomes the more the gangs take over. Half Cast morals being inflicted on to what is left of white society. Its a shame New Zealand is losing its civilized culture.

[whydoyouwanttoknow]

Why are you advocating pimping out teen prostitutes?

[Sliverfern]

Why are you advocating pimping out teen prostitutes?
I need a new car.

[cerberus]

Drugs , money and power over people.
Funny how a 12 year old can be described a prostitute and not a child ?

[Larrikin]

Great the more left New Zealand becomes the more the gangs take over. Half Cast morals being inflicted on to what is left of white society. Its a shame New Zealand is losing its civilized culture.
http://www.rockhoppers.net/acgs/common/logo.gif

[Ahknaton]

Great the more left New Zealand becomes the more the gangs take over. Half Cast morals being inflicted on to what is left of white society. Its a shame New Zealand is losing its civilized culture.
A few weeks ago I was stalking around Palmerston North making a nuisance of myself and walked past this new bar that's opened there named "Detroit" (which sucks, thanks for asking. Trust some Palmy try-hard to to name a nightspot after one of America's most decrepit cities). They have a kind of open bar where they slide up a roller-wall so that as you walk past it along the footpath you are pretty much only metres away from the patrons drinking an playing pool inside. These two guys were in there having this loud conversation about banging these hoes in South Auckland for 60 bucks a pop, and didn't seem at all embarrassed or ashamed about it. Stuff like this is just becoming normal.

[whydoyouwanttoknow]

A few weeks ago I was stalking around Palmerston North making a nuisance of myself and walked past this new bar that's opened there named "Detroit" (which sucks, thanks for asking. Trust some Palmy try-hard to to name a nightspot after one of America's most decrepit cities). They have a kind of open bar where they slide up a roller-wall so that as you walk past it along the footpath you are pretty much only metres away from the patrons drinking an playing pool inside. These two guys were in there having this loud conversation about banging these hoes in South Auckland for 60 bucks a pop, and didn't seem at all embarrassed or ashamed about it. Stuff like this is just becoming normal.

Why should they be ashamed of what they choose to spend their own money on that harms no one?

[Sliverfern]

A few weeks ago I was stalking around Palmerston North making a nuisance of myself and walked past this new bar that's opened there named "Detroit" (which sucks, thanks for asking. Trust some Palmy try-hard to to name a nightspot after one of America's most decrepit cities). They have a kind of open bar where they slide up a roller-wall so that as you walk past it along the footpath you are pretty much only metres away from the patrons drinking an playing pool inside. These two guys were in there having this loud conversation about banging these hoes in South Auckland for 60 bucks a pop, and didn't seem at all embarrassed or ashamed about it. Stuff like this is just becoming normal.

I never like Auckland I found it very rough, I liked the Wellington much better.
I remember then people were respected, and quite franky growing up, we never had the idea of prostitutes. Hell cops still didn't carry gun's. But then again times change. I left in the late 80's because there was no future for us. I can see how many would fall into a life style, when they clearly have no real option otherwise.
Back then it was not uncommon to have street kids as young as 7 and 8.
New Zealand is fallen from grace, and I think its no longer Gods own country.

[Geist]

In more moral times, such as the Victorian era, child prostitution was rife. Wherever there are children on the streets there will be people who exploit them for sex. Its folly to assume we live in the declining age. Decline from what? The image of genteel morality existed only for the aristocratic class. The second our ancestors were uprooted from the country to the city the rot set in, buts its old rot. Nothing to be shocked about.

[Hakluyt]

In more moral times, such as the Victorian era, child prostitution was rife. Wherever there are children on the streets there will be people who exploit them for sex. Its folly to assume we live in the declining age. Decline from what? The image of genteel morality existed only for the aristocratic class. The second our ancestors were uprooted from the country to the city the rot set in, buts its old rot. Nothing to be shocked about.
If anything there is more genuine, visceral disgust at such things today. The assumption that the lower classes were inherently degenerate negated a lot of moral outrage; without such conceptions today people are more confused and offended by the natural inclinations of the human.

[Ahknaton]

In more moral times, such as the Victorian era, child prostitution was rife. Wherever there are children on the streets there will be people who exploit them for sex. Its folly to assume we live in the declining age. Decline from what? The image of genteel morality existed only for the aristocratic class. The second our ancestors were uprooted from the country to the city the rot set in, buts its old rot. Nothing to be shocked about.
I dislike this kind of argument, because for anything that varies up and down over time you can almost always find some earlier point at which it was at the same level as it is now, and then dismiss it as nothing to get worked up about. For example, I could point to poverty amongst the working classes in any first world country and say it isn't any worse compared to Victorian times (in fact it's significantly better). However, what about compared to, say, 20 or 50 years ago? That might be more relevant when discussing current policies, especially if they have changed during that timeframe. A lot of social gains were made in New Zealand in the mid 20th century (particularly since the 1930s), and it's no consolation when watching them unravel to say that we aren't any worse off than when we started. It's like trying to console someone who's just lost a winning lottery ticket by pointing out he's no poorer than before he bought it.

[whydoyouwanttoknow]

I dislike this kind of argument, because for anything that varies up and down over time you can almost always find some earlier point at which it was at the same level as it is now, and then dismiss it as nothing to get worked up about. For example, I could point to poverty amongst the working classes in any first world country and say it isn't any worse compared to Victorian times (in fact it's significantly better). However, what about compared to, say, 20 or 50 years ago? That might be more relevant when discussing current policies, especially if they have changed during that timeframe. A lot of social gains were made in New Zealand in the mid 20th century (particularly since the 1930s), and it's no consolation when watching them unravel to say that we aren't any worse off than when we started. It's like trying to console someone who's just lost a winning lottery ticket by pointing out he's no poorer than before he bought it.

You live in poverty now if you live on what, under $700 a week. People in poverty have never had it so good.

[Sliverfern]

Don't you think regardless of what period of time we function in, there are still men wanting and having sex with children.

Being grossly turned off with the idea that any man would find a child sexually pleasing, rather than a adult woman, I will put that aside and look at what it comes down to, supply and demand.

Basic economics, it is not about limiting supply, that only pushes the value up, its about limiting demand. Then the product is not marketable and the industry goes out of business.

Basically men need to learn to keep their twig and berrys in their pants.

I am sorry if I offended any of the fine gentlemen of this forum.

[Geist]

I dislike this kind of argument, because for anything that varies up and down over time you can almost always find some earlier point at which it was at the same level as it is now, and then dismiss it as nothing to get worked up about. For example, I could point to poverty amongst the working classes in any first world country and say it isn't any worse compared to Victorian times (in fact it's significantly better). However, what about compared to, say, 20 or 50 years ago? That might be more relevant when discussing current policies, especially if they have changed during that timeframe. A lot of social gains were made in New Zealand in the mid 20th century (particularly since the 1930s), and it's no consolation when watching them unravel to say that we aren't any worse off than when we started. It's like trying to console someone who's just lost a winning lottery ticket by pointing out he's no poorer than before he bought it.

Just a couple of things: I mean to suggest that this is always the case. The example pf the Victorian era is used only because it is commonly associated with prudence on a very superficial level. I actually think there are only slight differences between epochs with only the veneer or masks changing. As for 50 years ago in New Zealand? Who knows. I bet if you check out the editorials and articles at the time you will find people lamenting the collapse of society, the moral degeneracy and probably even some discussion of immigrants. I'm not taking much of a position here and I know the thrust of the argument annoys people, but the more I think on it the more it seems like 'eternal recurrence' of the same for want of a better phrase.

[or progressivism is a myth..]

[Geist]

Don't you think regardless of what period of time we function in, there are still men wanting and having sex with children.



Not only this, but a vast proportion of marriages in the past would come under modern sexual abuse although the caveat of relative life expectancy takes some sting out of it. One cannot deny that the male/female age difference of the past would be seen as odd now. Pedophiles probably had a far easier time of it in the past (especially aristocratic ones), but one also imagines there were more proactive responses to pedophiles on behalf of the everyman.