Bill C-36 tabled (New Prostitution Law)

[wilbur]

SCC ruled the status quo unconstitutional. So what was the government to do? Making provision and procurement of sex legal would be tantamount to legalizing prostitution, which this government (or any other) wasn't about to do. So the Nordic model was the best available option. Now, providers and consumers simply have to adapt to the new environment, which shouldn't be that difficult.

Terb should be able to continue operating but devoid of mention of any sexual activities. Advertisers can no longer post BBBJ, CIM and other activities. Agencies will offer only companionship and (yes) massage services by baked ladies. Reviews of sessions should be prohibited. Prolific posters who don't seem to hobby should have a field day for Terb will become a heart warming domain.

Like I said before, everybody just take a deep breath and relax. The world is not coming to an end. One thing: this coming bill is meant to intimidate clients. From the comments posted so far, the bill has already succeeded in that respect. Brilliant.

The government could have just done nothing and let the 3 CCC sections die. That would not have meant giving up on protecting vulnerable people as there are plenty of laws that take care of that.

The justice system works on dissuasion and deterrence. They arrest someone and make an example of them, so that others get the message. That forces people to conform to the law. Of course, criminals are not deterred or discouraged, and because of the lower supply but constant demand, it creates an opportunity for huge profits. It also promotes their other rackets like drug trafficking because involvement in providing illegal services gives them an expanded venue to spread their illegal activities that really harm society.


I'm sure that crime bosses are jumping up and down with joy at this. Stupid Conservatices; stupid MacKay!

 

[lovelatinas]

With respect latin lover, voting the CONS was better for my standard of living (which indirectly allows me to hobby). We don't vote based on single issues, but perhaps this will be the first time I do.

The Liberals might have done the same thing. Let's see how it's debated in Parliament.

I am pissed though at the CONS.

Who said anything about the Liberals. I am talking NDP.

 

[afterhours]

... One thing: this coming bill is meant to intimidate clients. From the comments posted so far, the bill has already succeeded in that respect. Brilliant.

The bill is meant to appease conservative voters. Nobody who worked on that bill gives a shit about collateral damage like clients or SPs or their fears or rights.

 

[wilbur]

there is nothing illegal about advertising my own services provided it's not in a public place where children might reasonably be expected to be. If I don't mention sex and show no nudity on that front page it then becomes an ad for companionship.

People you need to read the bill, and remember that it's not even a law yet.

You can bet that there will be overzealous police who will go out of their way to crack down.

It will not be illegal for you to advertise, but it will be illegal for someone to carry your ads if they are in Canada.

If your foreign ads are explicit, you will get cops hanging around your place and intercept your outbound customers. They will need your cooperation in order to get evidence to prosecute, but that will create an opportunity to harrass your customers and dry up your business.

Even if your ads are not explicit, since you already have a reputation for posting ads, theuy might use that as a pretext to put your front door under surveillance.

Paranoia? Not unless they wind up targeting your customers. the law works by deterrence, not by nailing everyone.

 

[elise]

SCC ruled the status quo unconstitutional. So what was the government to do? Making provision and procurement of sex legal would be tantamount to legalizing prostitution, which this government (or any other) wasn't about to do. So the Nordic model was the best available option. Now, providers and consumers simply have to adapt to the new environment, which shouldn't be that difficult.

Terb should be able to continue operating but devoid of mention of any sexual activities. Advertisers can no longer post BBBJ, CIM and other activities. Agencies will offer only companionship and (yes) massage services by naked ladies. Reviews of sessions should be prohibited. Prolific posters who don't seem to hobby should have a field day for Terb will become a heart warming domain.

Like I said before, everybody just take a deep breath and relax. The world is not coming to an end. One thing: this coming bill is meant to intimidate clients. From the comments posted so far, the bill has already succeeded in that respect. Brilliant.

It will really be interesting to see to what level it will be enforced. Being a casual hobbier it won't likely be worth the risk for me. For sure life goes on.
Didn't like the old law? You will like this one even less. Intimidation and maintaining the taboo of prostitution was paramount to this bill. It is flawed legislature which will buy lots of legal time before it can be challenged. It hits back at the SP industry much harder the the old law. It will make many of us sit back and watch how it shakes out.

Like you said… Brilliant.

 

[canada-man]

Canuck | Hilary ‏@PeopleOfCanada 1h
First reading is a long way from law, though, and I expect #billc36 will either be quite different at the end, or die altogether.


Miss Jessica Lee @JessicaLeeSP · 8m
during question period the gov't is being asked to send this bill directly to the SCC for assessment! Nice! #Picktonmodel #C36 #cdnpoli

 

[elise]

The bill is meant to appease conservative voters. Nobody who worked on that bill gives a shit about collateral damage like clients or SPs or their fears or rights.

Really? just conservatives? I can't hear the liberals or the ndp (along with all their voters) screaming at the top of their lungs. Nothing other than the usual opposition poo pooing.

Clients and SPs. I wonder how many of us there are 10000, maybe 100000 in all of Canada? Thats like 0.02% to 0.2% why should anyone care? NO ONE did until it hit the Supreme court and the ruling that forced a new law. Might have been nice but did you really think we would have red light districts like Amsterdam?

 

[afterhours]

Really? just conservatives? I can't hear the liberals or the ndp (along with all their voters) screaming at the top of their lungs. Nothing other than the usual opposition poo pooing.

Clients and SPs. I wonder how many of us there are 10000, maybe 100000 in all of Canada? Thats like 0.02% to 0.2% why should anyone care? NO ONE did until it hit the Supreme court and the ruling that forced a new law. Might have been nice but did you really think we would have red light districts like Amsterdam?

I actually said from day one that this boat should not have been rocked.
That being said, and FWIW, I spoke with a senior crown attorney today and she said there is no doubt that this law will not stand.

 

[elise]

then I guess you're not watching question period!! the NDP were screaming a few minutes ago to send the bill directly to the SCC for assessment!

You're right. I'm still staring at your baseball pics and drooling (won't say where)…. <insert sly grin>.

 

[elise]

I actually said from day one that this boat should not have been rocked.
That being said, and FWIW, I spoke with a senior crown attorney today and she said there is no doubt that this law will not stand.

This is one case where I refuse to TOFTT.

 

[lovelatinas]

I answered this elsewhere. I'm not a single issue advocate, but it's entirely okay to vote on a single issue if you want. Right now, I'm pissed. Fuck the Conservative Taliban Party.

Stephen Harper is your Daddy, he toke away your hobby for good but you still love him.

 

[GameBoy27]

It will not be illegal for you to advertise, but it will be illegal for someone to carry your ads if they are in Canada.

So that means all those ads in the back of NOW Magazine would be illegal. You can bet they already have their lawyers looking into it.

While I'm not up on Parliamentary affairs, doesn't this have to pass a couple readings then get voted on before it becomes law? Not to mention there'll likely be another election before then so this thing is by no means a done deal. But hey, what do I know.

I do think it's a stupid law but it doesn't affect me one way or another.

 

[Aardvark154]

None of us needs to out them self, by writing a letter to the Minister of Justice objecting to the pertinent provisions of Bill C-36.

I've already started drafting such a letter.

The Hon. Peter G. MacKay PC QC MP
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
284 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H8

 

[DB123]

Instead of wasting the very limited LE/police resources on consensual sex between adults they could have brought in targeted laws (which we had already but toughened up like they did with underage cases from 5 to 10 years in jail) so that this limited resources could have been allocated to crack down on those areas where the real harm is coming from, like pimps and traffickers and bad dates. The kind of idiots we are sending to represent us is mind boggling!!!!!

Ok, but really, politicians aren't politicians because of their intellect. Most are of average intelligence at best...at best It's not like whoever is in now beat out an actual genius who would have done things the right way. They beat out other simple minded morons

 

[DB123]

None of us needs to out them self, by writing a letter to the Minister of Justice objecting to the pertinent provisions of Bill C-36.

I've already started drafting such a letter.

The Hon. Peter G. MacKay PC QC MP
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
284 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H8

Let me guess, with latex gloves and letters cut out of magazines?

Better safe than sorry, right?

 

[afterhours]

Ok, but really, politicians aren't politicians because of their intellect. Most are of average intelligence at best...at best It's not like whoever is in now beat out an actual genius who would have done things the right way. They beat out other simple minded morons

it's not that they are not smart, it's that their goal is not to fight evil or represent the people, let alone the minority; their goal is to stay in power and they are being quite smart in achieving it

 

[DB123]

it's not that they are not smart, it's that their goal is not to fight evil or represent the people, let alone the minority; their goal is to stay in power and they are being quite smart in achieving it

We'll see. We won't know if that's true until the next election

 

[SchlongConery]

THIS

The bill is meant to appease conservative voters. Nobody who worked on that bill gives a shit about collateral damage like clients or SPs or their fears or rights.

and

it's not that they are not smart, it's that their goal is not to fight evil or represent the people, let alone the minority; their goal is to stay in power and they are being quite smart in achieving it

are the ONLY issues.

And that we have an evangelical, autocratic Bible Thumper calling the shots.

 

[Viggo Rasmussen]

And that we have an evangelical, autocratic Bible Thumper calling the shots.

Neither Harper or MacKay strike me as bible thumpers. I doubt they have serious problems with escorts as well.
But they LOVE an issue that makes the Opposition look like they're drug smoking sick perverts if they speak up too strongly.

 

[lovelatinas]

Neither Harper or MacKay strike me as bible thumpers. I doubt they have serious problems with escorts as well.
But they LOVE an issue that makes the Opposition look like they're drug smoking sick perverts if they speak up too strongly.

So that is what the Liberals and NDP MPs will look like if they vote against this bill. So bill will be passed.