> A law against buying sex (rather than selling)

Seriously? You buy into this kind of rhetoric? A law against buying something is a law against selling it too. That's just common sense.

The visible prostitution as you say, but it's just gone underground. Rape has also gone up. Even then, if it went away, this would mean it'd ruin perfectly fine and peaceful business between consenting adults... while granting the state the power to decide what you can or can't do with your body. How is that a victory. I wonder.

> In fact it seems to have worked so well that a similar law is proposed in France.

yeah, France is all over prohibition too and nany state. No surprise here.

> And you are surprised to hear this on HN why? Is this a libertarian haven of some kind?

As the article says, it's not a libertarian stance as in Germany green lefties support legal prostitution. It's a matter of freedom and not letting the state decide what you can do with your very own body. If you're fine with the state telling you what you can or can't do to your own body, good for you. But don't force it on others. That's just as bad as religious people forcing their opinion on others by law (prop 8, no Jews/atheists/women allowed in office etc).

It's a law written to limit it, so in that sense a law "against" something. But the whole point is who is the criminal in the transaction.

So: The premise of this öaw in Sweden is, basically, that there exists almost zero (or at least little enough to ignore) "fine and peaceful business between consenting adults", so that is a non-issue. I think it is due to several factors

1) only street prostitution is extensively investigated, and the street prostitution is basically trafficking victims, drug users and so on. 2) There is little or no "German" sex industry, i.e. no brothels or other "well organized" industry. 3) Few argue that it is an important human freedom to buy or sell sex, and very few would have a problem with the State having a say in it.

I don't know if there has been much research done on whether the prostitution has moved under ground, one can't simply assert it, and it is very hard to investigate (and to interpret the numbers! internet prostitution is way up between 1990 and 2010 because internet)

Btw. I don't think there is any research establishing the connection between increased levels of rape with stricter laws or reduced levels of prostitution?

I nearly forgot: one of the strongest arguments for having a law in general, and a making the purchase side criminal is this: The selling side knows its own consent, but it can be argued that the buying side can not tell wether the seller is consenting (as claimed consent can't be given any value).

If one accepts that problem as real, then one could also say that while there may be both consenting buyers and sellers out there, there are no buyers that can claim they are actually dealing with a consenting seller.

The argument is powerful because it dismisses the whole "consenting adults" idea by stating that there exists no pair of consenting adults where the buyer can actually know whether the seller is consenting.

In this case, buying in general (not only in prostitution) should be banned altogether as the seller might be forced and you're saying that it can't be proven that the seller is not being forced to sell. That doesn't make sense and you know it. Of course it can be proven up to a reasonable doubt that the seller is not being forced. That is how society and the civilized world works, not by removing 100% doubt but by trust between its citizens.