While I applaud Supervisor Aaron Peskin's initiative (oh my, did I just compliment Aaron Peskin? What's the world coming to?) to crackdown on prostitution in The City by seizing the cars of Johns who are convicted of soliciting prostitution, he and especially District Attorney Kamala Harris however seem to still be out in left field as to the correct solution. DA Harris states that "...the true perpetrators of prostitution [are] the Johns, the pimps and the traffickers...". Actually Kamala they (pimps, johns, etc) are guilty of a completely different crime and I would hope that you, as the District Attorney and all, would know that.

Yes, they are part of the problem, but people aren't cruising the streets looking for a pimp or a trafficker, they are looking for prostitutes. The so-called "working girls" are just as culpable as the Johns, the pimps and the traffickers. To say anything less is just plain silly. Here's a crazy idea, why not actually enforce all the laws equally? Like it or not, prostitution is a crime in San Francisco and should be treated as such.

The problem in San Francisco (and many cities) is one of inequity. The governmental bodies refuse to enforce the law as ordered by the people. As a nation of laws we must be beholden to the will of the people as evidenced in our laws. If a law is unpopular does that mean that the law should go unenforced? No. It means that it should be enforced until such time as it is changed. To do anything else lessens the power of the remaining laws as people can then pick and choose which laws to enforce (or obey). That is the whole point of being governed by law. We can't pick and choose which laws to obey, nor should the government pick and choose which laws to enforce. If a law is unpopular amongst a majority of people, then let the people decide to change it.