You are indeed wrong, stan, because 'the bill' (C36) is still just a proposal, not the law of the land. That is the Criminal Code of Canada, easily found in full on-line, and it says it is not a crime to buy or to sell sexual services. What is a crime is if you try to arrange either in a public place, or to profit from sexual services sold by someone else, or to operate, work in or be found in a place where such sales and services are performed. And it's all worse if the services are compelled or provided by a minmor.
In the hypothetical world where C36 is the law, all those crimes will all still be crimes, and those who buy, or try to buy sex will commit a crime by doing so, but it will still be legal to sell it. Kinda like legalizing the drug-trafficker, but making addiction a crime while claiming you're righteously curtailing drug abuse with your new law.
so I meet a girl for the purpose of sex at the Hilton. my self the Hilton and the cab that took me to the hotel get charged with a crime and the girls is free to go?
so I meet a girl for the purpose of sex at the Hilton. my self the Hilton and the cab that took me to the hotel get charged with a crime and the girls is free to go?
Emily, you called me a horse's ass the last time I was at Muse AND I did not get a hand job. So I have first hand experience to validate your statement :wink:
Funny. But seriously, it would take a judge or jury about two seconds to see through that and decide that there was a tacit understanding that the money was for sex. Everyone here got it. So will the judge.
Funny. But seriously, it would take a judge or jury about two seconds to see through that and decide that there was a tacit understanding that the money was for sex. Everyone here got it. So will the judge.
What Jury ???? What are you talking about? I think you just like dramatizing and staying on the so called safe side. Your a follower, like sheep. Good luck to you!
Emily, you called me a horse's ass the last time I was at Muse AND I did not get a hand job. So I have first hand experience to validate your statement :wink:
Funny. But seriously, it would take a judge or jury about two seconds to see through that and decide that there was a tacit understanding that the money was for sex. Everyone here got it. So will the judge.
First, this is a joke... LV isn't in the sex market or devaluing their brand.
Secondly, the its $68 (unknown currency) for a 12 pack and not $68 for one.
LVMH, ordered a cease and desist order to the guy behind this campaign to raise money for Aids Awareness Week
Your statement is not correct. The current law which was struck down and not currently being enforced has communicating for the purposes as being illegal by prostitute or john or both and does not make the exchange of money for sex illegal. In about ten weeks the law of the land will make the purchase of sex illegal and the term you use, "procure" which will mean obtaining the services of a prostitute by a john or providing a prostitute by a pimp a criminal offence.