Puritan Harper CONS to "fast track" prostitution bill

[fuji]

I'd happily take a 1 in 1000 chance of being caught lieing in court

I think you are naive about the risks, and maybe about the impact. You are also talking like a hero about a very scary choice and most people aren't that tough. Easy to act tough online, much harder to play chicken with a real prosecutor wielding a real threat of prison.

An SP could testify against a couple of johns and the overwhelming majority of her customers would never know. I can't see it stopping her from continuing to work. It would cost her a few customers. Nothing more.

 

[lenny2]

You guys are applying your logic to a narrow set of assumed circumstances and defined behaviour to conclude that this scenario is impossible. Like your assessment of odds, you're betting big on one outcome while ignoring the possibility of many others.

Many others? Let's hear a few of these.

 

[TeasePlease]

Many others? Let's hear a few of these.

Hmmm, let's see, off the top of my head, under what circumstances might an SP rat out a client....

The owner an agency or spa being charged for profiteering and cooperating with the police/crown in exchange for a lesser penalty.

A bitter or disgruntled SP who decides to take down some clients on her way out. (btw, did you notice how many witnesses before the house and senate committees happened to be ex-sex workers? Did you also notice how many aren't, um, happy hookers?)

An imbalanced SP with a god-complex decides to teach clients a lesson in morality. (cuz this has never happened)

A greedy SP tries to blackmail a client (money for silence); client calls her bluff. She makes the play. (again, cuz that's NEVER happened. Hint: Do a search for a thread in lounge.)

 

[oneshot8]

Hmmm, let's see, off the top of my head, under what circumstances might an SP rat out a client....

The owner an agency or spa being charged for profiteering and cooperating with the police/crown in exchange for a lesser penalty.

A bitter or disgruntled SP who decides to take down some clients on her way out. (btw, did you notice how many witnesses before the house and senate committees happened to be ex-sex workers? Did you also notice how many aren't, um, happy hookers?)

An imbalanced SP with a god-complex decides to teach clients a lesson in morality. (cuz this has never happened)

A greedy SP tries to blackmail a client (money for silence); client calls her bluff. She makes the play. (again, cuz that's NEVER happened. Hint: Do a search for a thread in lounge.)

This situations are true but if an Sp has this kind of malicious intent, they could have done this without bill c36. They could now go to the cops and say her client was violent and raped her. She could go around and try to out him to friends and family. The bill gives sps more tools for blackmail but it's not like they couldn't do it already if they wanted to.

 

[fuji]

The difference after c36 will be that the most obvious police tactic will be to lean on the SP to get a conviction against the client.

SP will get a subpoena to appear in court and an interrogation by the police. Police will try and get her to admit to prostitution with lines like "I am not here to charge you, I just want to understand whether you were in any danger?"

Crown will then serve a subpoena and threaten jail on perjury charges if she doesn't cooperate while being very understanding and saying she is not the target.

Some mature SP's may stand their ground and refuse to cooperate, but remember a lot of SP's are younger, or they are immigrants, and they have little experience fending off this sort of police/crown tactic.

Your 20 year old SP who may be here on a visitor visa may blurt something out or crack under pressure, or maybe she will stand her ground. It is really hard to tell in advance, over the phone, or from a review, who has the backbone to stand up for you, and who will cave.

Again the point is that this will naturally cause clients to limit the information the SP had so that even if she caves it doesn't matter unless the client was arrested in the act with, as opposed to picked up because of a line in an appointment book.

 

[Siocnarf]

The owner an agency or spa being charged for profiteering and cooperating with the police/crown in exchange for a lesser penalty.

What, the police have the opportunity to bust an actual pimp and they would make a deal to arrest some nobodies instead? Whatever the law says, arresting simple clients is a complete waste of time for the police.

 

[TeasePlease]

What, the police have the opportunity to bust an actual pimp and they would make a deal to arrest some nobodies instead? Whatever the law says, arresting simple clients is a complete waste of time for the police.

Few MP owners consider themselves to be actual pimps. LOL

But more to the point, you forget the big picture. The premise of C-36 and the entire legislative Save-A-Ho regime is that the John is the bad guy. In that context, there's tactical value to keeping the brothel open so 1. There's a place for these poor girls to work and 2. Snare those bastards (us) on an ongoing basis.

in other words, it's easier than setting up their own sting.

 

[MPAsquared]

Few MP owners consider themselves to be actual pimps. LOL

But more to the point, you forget the big picture. The premise of C-36 and the entire legislative Save-A-Ho regime is that the John is the bad guy. In that context, there's tactical value to keeping the brothel open so 1. There's a place for these poor girls to work and 2. Snare those bastards (us) on an ongoing basis.

in other words, it's easier than setting up their own sting.

Brothel??? Excuse me? Ok so now we have zero distinction between a common bawdy house & a spa? Are strip clubs brothels too? Holistics? Incalls? Dungeons? A webcam studio? Gimme a break. Yes, sometimes some girls blur lines or overstep boundaries but that does not mean the entire industry is one big sex shop. Poor girls? Really? Everyone? Yes, you've figured c36 out! The master plan is to sit outside every mp country wide to pick you guys off. That's what the 20million is for after all.

*rolling my eyes*

Let's dial down the drama.

Before you fire back that it's possible. So are a lot of things. The true facts are we don't know. We don't know what the final draft will look like. We don't know how the Premier will instruct. We don't know who the new mayor will be. We don't know who the new cop boss will be. We don't know what local municipalities or divisions or coppers will do.

We can guess 1000000 ways.

But we simply don't know yet. #fact

 

[Siocnarf]

But more to the point, you forget the big picture. The premise of C-36 and the entire legislative Save-A-Ho regime is that the John is the bad guy.

That's just ideological rubbish. Most LE don't care about that. They are not going to let MacKay tell them who's the bad guys. Like reverdy said, their objectives are very clear in their official policies and it does not include going after random clients just to make Harper happy.

Here's a funny story about MacKay saying top chief of police doesn't know anything about the dangers of pot.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/peter-mackay-disputes-bob-paulson-comment-downplaying-marijuana-risk-1.2776600

 

[joe_labatt]

I own property in the US and travel frequently, a criminal conviction would destroy me and my family. If this Bill passes, I will stop this "hobby" immediately and just yank it like a monkey in a tree.

+1. Agree with everything you said, except I don't own property in the US, but do travel there quite frequently.

 

[Titalian]

I can't believe the paranoia and drama I've heard hear, on this ignorant bill.
My gaud guys, get a grip. As for me, even if this bill passes or not,
I will continue seeing the women that I am comfortable with and TRUST, and enjoying myself.
Question is, what are you going to do???

 

[legmann]

just too much drama and doomsday's scenarios IMHO.

Many of the suggestions posted here about what LE will do, don't line up with strong hints already given by some police forces in terms of how they'll actually handle things (Victoria in B.C., and SPVM in Montreal, for instance).

TPS might do things differently, but they've been handling things similarly to Montreal for the last while. And they've been burned before with over the top enforcement of prostitution laws. They have learned their lesson, I believe.

Most LE don't care about that. They are not going to let MacKay tell them who's the bad guys. Like reverdy said, their objectives are very clear in their official policies and it does not include going after random clients just to make Harper happy.

By god, I hope you men are right.

Lots of armchair lawyers in here

This is what I am going to do once this piece-of-shit bill passes and is written into law: consult a (real) lawyer.

 

[Toronto`s Finest]

By god, I hope you men are right.


This is what I am going to do once this piece-of-shit bill passes and is written into law: consult a (real) lawyer.

No lawyer can advise you to do anything contrary to the Law that could get you arrested..... they could be sued by you as well as loose their licence.
REAL WOrld .... Look now .... any of the present laws enforced with Bawdy houses, seen , found in bawdy houses. ????

 

[Cobra Enorme]

I wonder if the prostitute that got this started feels like she's responsible for completely clusterfucking the entire adult industry in canada. Escorts, clients, massage parlors, strip joints, websites, newspapers, all getting fucked over now.

 

[TeasePlease]

Brothel??? Excuse me? Ok so now we have zero distinction between a common bawdy house & a spa? Are strip clubs brothels too? Holistics? Incalls? Dungeons? A webcam studio? Gimme a break. Yes, sometimes some girls blur lines or overstep boundaries but that does not mean the entire industry is one big sex shop. Poor girls? Really? Everyone? Yes, you've figured c36 out! The master plan is to sit outside every mp country wide to pick you guys off. That's what the 20million is for after all.

*rolling my eyes*

Let's dial down the drama.

Before you fire back that it's possible. So are a lot of things. The true facts are we don't know. We don't know what the final draft will look like. We don't know how the Premier will instruct. We don't know who the new mayor will be. We don't know who the new cop boss will be. We don't know what local municipalities or divisions or coppers will do.

We can guess 1000000 ways.

But we simply don't know yet. #fact

Lets assume for a moment that the world does not revolve around you/muse/massage parlours....

did it occur to you that c36 also applies to agencies?

btw, if Tory wins, I'll bet a large pho that Blair gets extended.

 

[TeasePlease]

That's just ideological rubbish. Most LE don't care about that. They are not going to let MacKay tell them who's the bad guys. Like reverdy said, their objectives are very clear in their official policies and it does not include going after random clients just to make Harper happy.

Here's a funny story about MacKay saying top chief of police doesn't know anything about the dangers of pot.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/pet...-comment-downplaying-marijuana-risk-1.2776600

Lmao. So you think Mackay and Harper are lone islands in the sea? I agree that it's ideological rubbish, but its not like there's no traction on the ideas. As I recall, the polls show fairly equal splits on the issue, particularly along gender divisions. It's not Mackay local politicians worry about. It's the voters.

 

[Siocnarf]

As I recall, the polls show fairly equal splits on the issue, particularly along gender divisions. It's not Mackay local politicians worry about. It's the voters.

Scientific poles show division, but those who are pro-crim are also mostly also in favor of criminalizing the sale. The % of people who favor this asymmetrical law is very small. It is an issue that most people don't even think about. So long as it's not directly bothering them they don't care. People are afraid of having big brothels open up in their neighborhood and things like that, but they don't care what happens in private.

What people want is for police to keep the peace and have things under control. So long as their neighborhood is fine they don't care about the details.

 

[bubble pop]

Hmmm, let's see, off the top of my head, under what circumstances might an SP rat out a client....

The owner an agency or spa being charged for profiteering and cooperating with the police/crown in exchange for a lesser penalty.

A bitter or disgruntled SP who decides to take down some clients on her way out. (btw, did you notice how many witnesses before the house and senate committees happened to be ex-sex workers? Did you also notice how many aren't, um, happy hookers?)

An imbalanced SP with a god-complex decides to teach clients a lesson in morality. (cuz this has never happened)

A greedy SP tries to blackmail a client (money for silence); client calls her bluff. She makes the play. (again, cuz that's NEVER happened. Hint: Do a search for a thread in lounge.)

These are all plausible. I will say that the "rescue industry" ex-SP witnesses seemed to have all been heavily street involved (and brutally, tragically Christian.) There's a bit of interface between that world and TERB but not much.

 

[fuji]

What, the police have the opportunity to bust an actual pimp and they would make a deal to arrest some nobodies instead? Whatever the law says, arresting simple clients is a complete waste of time for the police.

Objectively, that is not the view of a large number of police departments in Canada an the US, which do in fact run john sweeps, sting operations, etc., to arrest the little guy.

 

[TeasePlease]

Scientific poles show division, but those who are pro-crim are also mostly also in favor of criminalizing the sale. The % of people who favor this asymmetrical law is very small. It is an issue that most people don't even think about. So long as it's not directly bothering them they don't care. People are afraid of having big brothels open up in their neighborhood and things like that, but they don't care what happens in private.

What people want is for police to keep the peace and have things under control. So long as their neighborhood is fine they don't care about the details.

im also mindful of the polls asking about victimization.

Nimby is a major factor, of course. But let's extend this thinking.... If the sex trade is decriminalized, it must also be regulated. Aside from obvious health and safety matters, mundane details such as zoning need to be addressed. Nimby-ism will be rampant. As crazy as mammoliti is, he was right that it would make sense to create a specific zone for sex (note, York region already has). The concentration of sexy time make for a pretty compelling argument for tourism Even without designated zone am we are already known for our adult playgrounds. As others have said, our Yankee friends already come up for fun.

Do we want our city/country to become a sex tourism hotspot? Nimby on a macro scale?

thats one of the significa t social policy discussions that needs to happen along side the basic question of two consenting adults, etc. It's not that one should trump the other, but it's a reality that needs to be thought out and rationally planned for.

a long way of saying....you're very right. People are fine as long as they feel that things are under control.