10:00 p.m. on sunday at 7:00 a.m. andhappy. 7:00 p.m. happy friday, everyone. thank you foroi nijoining us.eel have a great weekend. we will see you back here on monday.

>> now it is time for john stossel. >> do you want to hve a drink? a cigarette? make a bet. a lot of people wan to keep here, protect you from yourself. the chch of england wanted to purify the church. also, they werbig on inviduals with plsure a luxury being snf. that is actually someone else's wife and i in that case they

were put to death. their new campaigns against all sorts of other vices. let's start with the law most all of you say is good and needed. the law against drunk driving. drunk drivers kill her into the federal government with a hard limit on how much alcoh you could have your bloo is it seat the right level? i asked special correspoent kennedy to drink and drive. >> we are going to o through the course sober and then with cohol and have you tried the drunk. >> it is mdream come true. >> under the supervision of the los angeles county sheriff's office, she had no trouble drivinbetween cones and parking between them. >> let the ames begin. >> she drank a mimosa and then a tequila and then another mimosa. >> it is really shocking how little alcohol takes you to be

considered junk. >>ennedy is not much of a drinker. it was clear she was feeling it. john: the detective gave her the breathalyzer test. >> she was at a 043. >> am i drunk? >> no, anything under 805 is not under the influence. joon: but she was feeling it leaves the buzz. >> buzzed driving is drunk driving, don't do it. johnthat kennedy did i, and she did pretty well. watching her driving, you would not know that she was impaired. so she drank mre. >> that s more than i ever drink in my life.

>> definitely impairment there. do you see her slain? john: this time she flunked the breathalyzer test, as well as the walking the line est. and when she drove, she was a mess. >> okay, there is a tone. >> there's definitely impairment there. definitely she wou be going to jail. >> you have sobered up. what have you learn? >> i learned that i felt more drunk than i actually was. after three drinks when i took the second breathalyzer, i felt hammered. i would never have gotten in the car. i was shocked that i only blew that much. >> that you could be different from normal people.

you are not a drinker. >> i drink a little bit. i am definitely a moderate drinker. seven drinks to be considered junk? >> we should be clear to the audience what the government calls a drink is 1. ounces. >> it would've been 4 ounces of champagne and 1.5 ounces of tequila or hard alcohol. so what you think is one drink could actually be closer to two. when you are for dris then, you sometimes think you have only had a couple. that is when people have problems. >> the government has limit and they keep playing with it, changi it. thpressure is always tighter and tigter. you live in los angeles where they have a lot of these checoints looking for drunk ivers and you become skeptical. >> yes, i'm skeptical after this because i realize that it really

is drinking twice as much in some cases, they could handle a car twice as well as i could in some cases. john: checkpoint have unintended consequences. >> they do. you artaking one horman off the street on busy olidays. but now people are using social media to let other drivers know where the checkpoints are. some critics say that encouraging people to dri drunk, others say no, it actually tells you. there are those out there that th do not rink and drive..3 hn: let's go back to the controversy ov the legal blood alcohol level and what should it be. it is currently .08 down from the earlier limit of .10. now, the fed does it is .05. the police are eager t punish drunk drivers. >> there is no way to hide it. if you drive drunk, cops

everywhere are stepping up enforcement in tracking you down like never before. >> overwhelmingl americans support this. but as journalist says if we really care about road safy and saving lives, we should abolish drunk driving laws. so what? >> well, the idea is not to encourage drunk driving, but the idea is to improve highway safety and ma the roads safer. i think that you do that by attacking reckless driving andd3 nowhatever it wa that was causing the reckless driving to begin with. my problem is saying that it should be illegal to have alcohol in your system while you are behind the wheel, even if you're not doing anythg wrong. only way you can enforce that is thugh these intrusive measures, includg having cops draw blood on the side of the road or these checkpoints.

so my point is that we should focus on the distraction. john: the government says that sleep deprivation can be as much of a cause or more than alhol. also having the kids in the backseat. the gps, eating. >> my lood alhol is .81. they are driving home at night. they get pulled over because, you know, they are driving a 2:00 a.m. and maybe they do a rolling stop instead of coming to a complete stop at a stop sign. basically, you know,tuins their lives in a lot of ways. they can be severely impacted. you get the fis come you have to go to alcohol rehab classes.

and then you get a person who hasn't slept in a long tme and may be a truckriver isn't here because the lack of sleep. do not truck driver blows a red light and hit somebody. that level of distraction is actually worse tha most. that person is not going to get the same sort of punishment that the unk driver gets. my point is that it should be the recklessness and if you want to tack on extr penalties because someone was drunk after you get them forrwhatever infraction they committed, that is another story. as kennedy pointed out, when the federal government lowered the tionallood alcohol level from the minimum lvel to .102.1 it had been in steep declinfor about 20 years. i think a good explanation for that woul be that when groups

like mothers against drunk drivinput on tse massive public relations campaign, saying that this is not a joke anymore. it was sort of amusing back in the day to see someone stumbling, they were successful and they change public advocacy about it. i think that has a lot more efct on the drop in fatalities than changing the laws to more aggressive enforcement. john: so let's bring jt griffin into our studio. what bradley is saying is that it's workflow close to the campaign. not your law. >> no, that is not true at all. bringing down thfatalities i actually strong law enforcement coupled with strong laws that are shown to bring down fatalities, especially in regard to drunk driving. what he said aboutt isrue. highway fatalities involving

drunk drivers have fallen by over 50%. that is due to trong laws that have been worked to pass. john: i don't seehow you know that. well, you can look at the laws that have bn studied. things like the .08, the zero-tolerance. righnow we have a new campaign to eliminate drunk driving, which is based on all convicted drk drivers, support for checkpoints and advanced technology that we think could actually stop a drunk iver from operating his or her vehicle. he wants a test of the guys drunk and you couldn't start the car? >> but sometimes it would misfire and sober people wouldn't get too dry. what the passenger is drunk? >> the technology is being

developed to focus on the passenger and the driver. it is being blamed for a third of all highway fatalities. john: drunk dving involved, meaning afterwards we found alcohol, but it didn't necessarily mean it was caused by that. >> i thinkhat you can look at what is happening across the country. can see that it is a cause. we know that wen someone is active, it is one of the most studied health laws in the country in the world. we know that when someone is at .08, they are too impaired to drive. john: bradley? last question? >> those are alcohol related fatalities. that is often interchanged wit drunk driving fatalities. alcohol-related just means tha somebody involved in the accident had alcohol in her system and it doesn't necessarily mean that someone was drunkr over the legal

limit. >> you can test if they hae alcohol in her system. you can't test if they are yelling at the kids were struggling with the dog in the car. it is harder to measure. thank you both fr being here. up next, i like to gamble, but some policians want that band. >> if your kids gamble, they are three or four more times to steal or get in ouble with the law. john: oh, my goodness. while my gambling make it worse? we will debate it coming up next [ larry ] younow throughout histy,

folks have suffered from frequent heartburn but now, thas to treating with priloseotc, we don't have to suffer like they used to. [ bell dings ] ♪ [ horse whinnies ] getting heartburn and then treating day after day

is a thing of the past. block the acid with prilosec otc, and n't get heartburn in the first pce. we've surcome a long way. ♪ [ le announcer ] one pill each morning. 24 hours. zero artburn.

>> what do you think? [cheers] john: i like to gamble, that is my periodic poker game. but i'd bet on all kinds of things, politics, sports, which green job will drop faster. fortunately, in my state, that ndf social gambling is legal. in most ofamerica, organized gambling is banned. and internet gambng is banned.

as one u.s. senator put it, it is the crack cocaine of gambling i thought they were supposed to take protections wth the u.s. department of homeland security and not be involved in gambling. our next guest says that he has testified beore congress on what gambling, especially internet gambng, why quiet must be banned. why is that? >> we are not talking about it

we libertaria issue. we arealking about fun and games. john: shouldn't people be fun and free? >> i like to play gams. everyone likes to playames. that we are talking about a potential of serious and strategic and economic national secuty issues. john: i think this is politicians that want to control people. how is ntiononal security at sk? >> it is the ecomic national security issue. widespread internet gambling would do exactly what the to commoditfutures did when they eliminated all the anti-gambling for wall street. because the debacle that we had

four years ago. widespread internet gambling destabilize financial systms, economic systems, it created a huge speculative bubble. it would look great for a while. but then it would all cllapse. john: michelle, this arument seems interesting to me. >> this isn't a fun and games issue. i agree with that. adults should be able to spend their money as long as they are not harmin another person if

you look at gambling in this country, it is less than 1%. andeven you had internet gambling come i don't see how this could increase that much to the point of a crisis of the professor is talking about. hn: the public service announcements to try to convey what john is worried about. >> i tried to persuade him, i try to help them. >> if your kids gamble, they are playing more than ust games. they are more than likely to drink d use drugs. john: give me a break.

peop already have a more adnturous system. >> to some extent, i would agree with you on that. but the way to think about this the study showed that when you have gambling facilities, electronic gambling in particular, whicis what the study commission called new addictive gamling, akin to crack and cocaine, when he put this on the internet, it will at every school desk work best and cell phone. john: michelle, do youay that this is entertainment? just like what is in the movie? >> there are benefits way beyond just the entertainment factor of gambling. espially especially we are talking about poker. it is social, it helps you run statistical analysis. i think some kids could benefit

greatly by playing games like poker that encourage focus and strategic thinki. >> we are talking about how ths is supported by the national gambling study commission. the 2006 unlawful internet gambling enfocement act. with ver 80% in the house. >> i get it. the politicians don't want us to do that. and they get to use fore. thank you, john and michelle. a similar debate about paying for sex. most americans say that this is bad.

john: should there be restrictio on violent video games? >> are videogames video games to blame for gun violence in this countr

>>, on. too bad for you. john: from a popular video ga but couldn't turn them into killers? whenever there is a mass shooting people say violent video games pbably inspired it. >> these ar people who have been trained on video games the industry is just like the tobacco industry when they faed to see there was a connection between smoking cigarettes and cancer. >> they have encouraged the killing of innocent people for sport. john: senator grassley from

iowa and he is right said the son of billy graham the took over his father's ministry. why is he right? >> first of all,, god understands violence. his son jesus christ was nailed to a tree for our sins and god understands violence. we see it all around us but in our country over the last or 40 years, of violence has come into our homes in the form of entertainment. when i was growing up, it was gunsmoke every time he pulled o his gun to protect life and the good guy always one but it is a far cry from the video games of today.

and then to make a glorified john: day want toan them? >> we have a constitution to do that but we certainly can tax them. and alcohol why not violence do give the money to the people who are the victims? john: the head of the nra agrees that video games business is a corrupt industry that sells violence agait his own people through vicious and violent videogames is an fantasizing about killing people to get your kicks really the filthiest form of pornography? john: he is right to defend ben wright's but there is no good evidence i pushed back

to both of you. i have had the guns all my life i got my first one in nine years old. everyone i grew up with had begun. we did not shoot people. and they want to dress like the actors they see on tv or the video games in the arm themselv and go out and commit killings. it is sicknd it is the crime our entire nation. john: no, no, no. you talk about all this stuff coming into our homes over t past 30 or 40 years. you are right. much more violence but crime is down. maybe it is good for kids. we don't know. >> i would say it is not good for anybody. these video games are murder

stimulators. >> in japan they watch twice as my viogames can fifire arm death in the united states and it causes people. >> vendor stand what you are saying and i agree that we do need evidence we do need a national study but we don't have one as far as i know. the press -- president and congress neeto find a way to curb violence. it is an epidemicin our country and how to restock this? we need god's help. we really do. john: the villain was the comic-book the senate

claimed it was causing juveni delinquency and forensic scientists said one comic per month sadistic fantasies for kids. that was superman. >> i don't know. maybe those books didave a negative impact. i don't know our government is not focusing on that. john: much more studies could we have that they are more popular and crime is down? but thanyou. move from violee to sex they can go on dates can do it but if the

john: i want to discourage a moralehavior but how should it be done? it is okay with friends and family, friends, butgovernment? its force you are not moral if you stay away f from san only because it is illegal and the law bans things like drugs or sex don't stop them from happening often they cause new problems because they create a black market. some politicians say they will not ban the activity but just tax and th is -hat billy graham's son said he wants to do t nudge people to good behavior but michael thomas says that is a bad idea he authored a study of the syntax. >> one of the obama as advisers has said libertarians should be 0k it is bter than banning3 thing. >> it is still paternalism

when you go from prohibition that is bad it creates a black market then we go to lou taxing that also causes a black market so this was to be an alternative but it is a contradiction of terms. john: and it causes problems india's people it incentive to break the law. >> the new was black market not drugs but cigarettes john: people smuggle cigarettes and in my state the tax alone is $5.34 per pack and that makes for the $11 a pack the taxation and used to collect cigarette packs and most of them were illegal? >> they went to pick up cigarette packs all over the year accidie but 61 percent had no tax the about all or we're from another state.

john: my mayor said you cannot buy soda in bottles this big the court has stopped him but it is just as much sugar i apple juice >> the idea is the harm coming from the sugar you want to tax that you would change behavior by people could get anywhere they once and that is called substitutes in economics. >> indiana forces convience stores to sell beer that is warm. >> thesay if the kids see the bier in the cooler and next to the coup they then they will somehow equate the too walng by it in the aisle when it is warm ds not have the same impact. >> and then you don't drk it in the car? >> people that e highly motivated to drink i don't think they will be discouraged and those of patients by it ahead of time. john: with the steady what is the bottom line?

>> it is certainly an improvement over pohibition but it would be better to educate to give people a choice. john: monday is okay in america and sex for many is forbidden. working at the moonlite bunnyranch one of zero legal brothels america. dennis hof is her boss. >> you are a pimp. >> i have a license john: you are a licensed tampa@í0x;ñt

john: sex r many or prostitution is legal in much of the world but not america if the woman wants to be paid for sex the police could locker up in reporters say this. >> tale may be the safest place the gh and hookers have never been. john: really? the safest place they have never been? i doubt that. also where it is legal there is little danger. here in nevada it is safe. >> if we have a problem the sheriff comes. johnbrooke taylor ins us now along with her friend to

works out moonlite bunnyranch owned by dennis hof. is legal in las vegas with the restt is not? >> from virginia city until 19 but then they tell us we don't want it in las vegas or read note of populaon of since it is the goal and a 15 year-old counties. john: so you have your brothel the moonlite bunnyranch and 500 licensed sex workers. john: 50 workingat a time. this is dgusting to people >> to view? we have a right. is a hypocrite politicians would wake up every state would have a moonlite bunnyranch. john: you are selling your body. that just feels sleazy and dedemeaning to people.

>> really i.m. renting get. i still owe myself. the beauty is that i could live my life based on my morals and values. john: only a few counties of nevada. >> i moved fm the midwest to do it within the confines of the loss of my choices are on me. i don't find it disgusting i can respect somody else's opinion but i don't tell them what to do with their body. john: krissy summer i am told to do because you don't have other options. >> i have a uble major from university of miss it -- miigan. year both college graduates. i could leave tomorrow and be fined. but before i came to the bunny ranch my student loans almost went into default so i contacted dennis. why not? john: it i gross. >> is completely safe. >> to some pple. that is the biggest problem that we've you sexuality as

being grossi and it is not. hn: paying for it is. >> to some but not to all. if it was arrested everyone we wouldn't be in business. john: let's bring in an opponent. of fred tecce who used to be a prosecutor in philadelphia at. you have heardthese women. how are they wrong? >> i will not judge them but as a prosecutor and someone who has done as i think the law should make it more difficuut outside of where they are to make it illegal. >> i apprecte that. because i dislike is legal prostitution that is your frame reference but people will do this and tried to google's search philadelphia? trafficking and we don't have them in the county where it is legal in nevada because the men ha a place to go instead of getting with illegal trafficking

typicay with underage children. john: that is a good point*. it doesn't make it go away. >> people will kill people but. john: that is a big difference that is taking aw somebody else's freedom >> it will help then one negative owe have been one where the other vehicle like drugs or pimp if they take the money they put it back into other criminal enterprises more than anybody. >> i hear what youay that is the same argument about @%galizing drugs. john: what about alcohol? go back to prohibition. >> exactly. with those illegal operations should be shut down. and i will tell you i don't need business guys. i could walk into a woman's prison. >> but you could at the but

the ranch. >> i hear you. but to make it legal is to add the temptation for anybody out there to regain to an ever they want. john: shoull we restore prohibition? >> no. john: i would think it is the same argument that we are out of time. [laughter] >> come visit us. john: a new law mandates that porn stars must wear condoms. wi this protect people with just another dumbdea from the puritans? to make that will likely explain

john: paying 49 is illegal but paying to watch it is not. pornography is a huge business and for years it was centered in los angeles but that has changed because last year was the angeles passed a law requiring all porn stars to wear condoms. that is a gre thing says professor of public health at ucla, a dr. jeffrey klausner. paul cambria represents those companies that make the form. -- born. >> superficially it sounds logical but the problem is in the past there was testing involved in los

anges, rigorous testing of all adult porn stars. john: for sexually transmitted diseas? >> no case of hiv. not since 2004. what is happening now instead of having a testing process that makes sense with rules and regulations they have driven the business underground or to other states with no rules. if the goal was to protect the workers it is the opposite result. >> the customersdon't want to watch sex films ready actors wear condoms? >> no doubt. after the initial aids scare and a number of companies nt to condoms and over 30 percent of the market disappeared. john: what about that? it sounds like you're moving it to other places and found

that 25 percent of all adultt workers so the current tear it testing system is n adequate and it is the legal industry in people and making money off the activities than they are continuouuly being exposed on a daily basis but as part of a reasonable approach there is the additional measures to protect the health of the worker. >> the industry has a lesser percentage of its tv than the population as a whole. >> that is completelfalse. >> as a result of testing testing, he has no statistics that demonstrate that any of these diseas are occurri as a result of

the adult industry. they may be discovered of those initial industry and the polation as a whole and do they gee them in their private life? he tries to make it look like they got them with the adult industry. that did not happen. t they have moved out of california so the protections that were there are gone. john: thatoesn't seem to solve much but we have this clip. >> that could like explain the fil boom in ventura county. 90% of it is shot in sid fernandez valley brinng in $30 biion of revenue. -ohn: they think it just makes people better but people of los angeles are losing money. >> 57% of thooe approved it so the people of fosse angeles saide want condoms

in our adult films to protect workers and it went to the people. this is governmt for the people and by the people. john: so what? it is not a tyranny of the people in white jaakets should be incarcerated? should we have the freedom to take her own risk? >> the option is that it could d.c. area and business need to comply with the law had to protect when it moves to a different place? >> that is th choice instry but there is talent of us angeles and resources and ut effo by the industryo scare people but

it will continue and thrived and i am sure it will stay and try been los angeles. john: debut. to sots what people call sin and from the famous dead people. ralph waldo emerson ote that wich we call sid and others is experiment for us. john: experiments are good we want more of that. another way as when we have too many laws and italy is hurting oohers al others are invented nonsense. he is right. for those who shouldave no bi agast assaultg people? no. the liberrians don't say no bob

but government has the right or duty to punish the otherwise government should leave us alone to do anythingthat is peaceful. that is ou t t t t t t t t t t . thanks a lot, have a great weekend. gerri: hello, everybody. tonight on "the willis report." the bks are at it again. they figured out another way to squeeze you. at t atm. also, how do you do that, the best way to travel with your pet. in fashion's nit unique way for consumers to buy d give a little back as well. we are watching out for you night on "thwillis report." ♪ rri: all that and more comg up, but first our top story tonight, is recovery housing