No, the lady you're going to see will be grateful if you don't. Plus, the legislation has not been passed into law.
Bill C-36 tabled (New Prostitution Law)
- Thread starter DigitallyYours
- Start date
I was thinking occasional outcalls with selected indies would work and then I thought that there's a potential for blackmail there because after all, the client is now the one breaking the law, not the seller. So there went that idea.
Doesn't matter if porn becomes illegal or not under this law. The big question is the enforcement of the law. If they turn a blind eye towards it it isn't an issue. If they try to charge someone it becomes an issue.
There were laws in force before Bedford had them struck down. They were mostly being ignored by law enforcement. Now that they have a new set of tools and its in the public eye again they will want to give the laws a try to see how they fair in court. I don't want to be the sacrificial lamb that gets caught.
s. 213 is about communicating in public, not advertising. Unless you are referring to something else.
Not to turn this into a partisan discussion, but the conservatives under Harper have been 'vindictive' against those that are not identified as being their 'base'. For this reason, I believe enforcement will be a priority. If for no other reason then to pander further to their right-wing Evangelical supporters. I could be wrong. And I hope I am.
http://nationalmagazine.ca/Articles/June-2014/Not-quite-the-Nordic-model.aspx
Justice Minister Peter MacKay was asked to clarify, and he did: advertising sexual services publicly will be illegal. For everyone. “If there is a direct connection to the selling of sex that does not present itself in a public way, then it would be legal but if it is done so in a way that is perceived as public or as being available to those under the age of 18, it would be illegal,” he said in a press conference after tabling the bill.
“Any kind of advertising, which is by definition public, is going to get captured in this,” Cossman says.
That opens the door for police to go after magazines and websites that publish escort ads, according to several lawyers who spoke with National. <snip>
Advertising will be illegal once the legislation passes into law. For everyone. Although independents working alone are not breaking any law, their ability to communicate with their clients has been curtailed.
He did what I predicted, instructed a team of lawyers to study the SCC ruling and propose the most draconian legislation that might possibly pass the SCC.
They are OK with win a few, lose a few. Even if a few provisions are shot down what remains will be very repressive.
They are OK with win a few, lose a few. Even if a few provisions are shot down what remains will be very repressive.
Do you mean if you password protect your website you don't think it would be public, or do you mean you already think it's not public? Because as it stands right now, I think the crown would argue it's not private at all and I believe the crown would side with them.I'm talking about this article ... read itI don't think my website is a public place, nor do I think terb is (if you have to log in to access it).... what do you think?
I think that LE will go after the SP industry (Agencies in particular). Stopping porn on the web, even if they really wanted too, isn't high on their list and it would be too costly with no valuable publicity (and probably not possible). Nobody challenged the federal law on porn they challenged it on prostitution and thats what they hit back at. You can't easily challenge a law if nobody has been charged with breaking it.
National asked Cossman, who has followed the legal debate for years, what parts of C-36 are unconstitutional. “All of it,” she says. “All of it.”
Agencies are most visible, and would provide the most 'bang for the buck' given there are multiple women working for them. As for porn, any Canadian websites will no doubt be targeted. Sites from outside Canada could be blocked quite easily. Are you familiar with Turkey and how they blocked Twitter during the recent uprising? The government has decided that the internet needs to be monitored and censored, and sadly, they have the tools to do so. Not quite what Tim Berners-Lee had in mind when he developed it!
Maybe porn can be targeted by this bill/law that isn't what it is aimed at. Once SPs and their clients are gone... maybe then they would go after porn, but even the conservatives know that would be too much and they would gain little from it.
I was just repeating what Nikki Thomas had posted yesterday on Twitter. To be honest, I haven't read the entire bill.
This might not be bad at all for us. It’s says nothing about what we do in private.
I like the fact a pimp will no longer be able to have a couple of young girls, stuck in a days inn for days, seeing a revolving door of clients. Also, they will no longer be able to communicate via back page etc.
I also see reputable agencies creating individual WebPages for their girls and taking care of their logistics behind the scenes. Indies are fine.
I also anticipate a lot of girls simply hanging out in bars and hotel bars, similar to Vegas. These type of girls are not always street walkers, they are classier and discreet, we’ll be able to chat and go to a private place to discuss what mutual companionship works.
I like the fact a pimp will no longer be able to have a couple of young girls, stuck in a days inn for days, seeing a revolving door of clients. Also, they will no longer be able to communicate via back page etc.
I also see reputable agencies creating individual WebPages for their girls and taking care of their logistics behind the scenes. Indies are fine.
I also anticipate a lot of girls simply hanging out in bars and hotel bars, similar to Vegas. These type of girls are not always street walkers, they are classier and discreet, we’ll be able to chat and go to a private place to discuss what mutual companionship works.
Indy's can still have a web site and provide what they do. It is just 3rd parties can't like a pimp or an agency.
