What did you say to McKay?

[buttercup]

This is another NewLaw thread -- sorry!

If you filled in the consulting questionaire, or wrote something to someone in the government, post it here. (Obviously, it didn't work.)

Here's what I said:


Consultation Questions

1. Do you think that purchasing sexual services from an adult should be a criminal offence? Should there be any exceptions? Please explain.

Comment: No, it should not be criminal. If the lady wants to make a living by charging for sex, where's the harm? Only make those things criminal that actually harm someone. In my Canada, I do not want us to criminalize an act just because we find it distasteful.

2. Do you think that selling sexual services by an adult should be a criminal offence? Should there be any exceptions? Please explain.

Comment: No. This is Canada -- we should only criminalize those acts that do actual harm. If the lady is being forced to do something against her will, go after the people doing the forcing. Provided the lady freely chooses to make her living that way, fine. It's fashionable to think of all prostitutes as victims who need to be rescued, but I don't believe that, in modern Canada.

3. If you support allowing the sale or purchase of sexual services, what limitations should there be, if any, on where or how this can be conducted? Please explain.

Comment: Limitations? Yes, we should ban those acts that are or might be a public nuisance, like communicating in public. I don't want it to be legal for prostitutes to parade in the street outside my house. I don't want it to be legal for someone to run a brothel in the apartment next door to me. Also, we should ban advertising in public, including classified ads. But don't ban adverts on internet sites so long as they carry warnings about adult content -- i.e ban the public nuisance aspect, not the communicating aspect.

4. Do you think that it should be a criminal offence for a person to benefit economically from the prostitution of an adult? Should there be any exceptions? Please explain.

Comment: Direct pimping should be criminal, if the pimp is controlling the lady, and forcing her to do things against her will. Obviously, pimping underage girls must be criminal. Also, trafficking of any person against their will, for any reason, e.g by fraud/threats/trickery. But indirect things, like bodyguard /driver /landlord, or a person who answers the lady's phone or organizes her bookings as a service to her -- No.

5. Are there any other comments you wish to offer to inform the Government's response to the Bedford decision?

Comment: In Canada, we should not criminalize an act just because we find the act distasteful or because we disapprove of people who do it. It's the Canadian government's job to protect the rights of Canadians to act as they wish, so long as they cause no harm. If it is PROVED that an adult man will very likely harm someone, simply by his paying for sex, then make it a criminal offence -- as with any act that causes harm. Having sex outside marriage is not a criminal offence, although such an act can be extremely harmful to e.g the spouse. I cannot see why we should regard a man paying for sex as any more criminal than a man having sex outside marriage.

6. Are you are writing on behalf of an organization? If so, please identify the organization and your title or role:

Comment: NO

Date Modified:
2014-02-17

 

[legmann]

I'm sure your comments are fine, but I chose to go with the 'less that's said, the better'. These guys are lawyers; the more you say, the more they will have to poke holes through.

 

[nobody123]

What did you say to McKay?

I said, "Dude, when did you change the spelling of your name?"

 

[james t kirk]

I said, "Peter, Belinda told me you have a small penis and were a terrible lay and that's why she dumped your sorry ass."

 

[Dave - WebGuy]

The survey is generated to solicit expected responses so that the stats from the answers allow the data to be spun in whatever light that is chosen.

Your answers, when compared to the tabled bill, comply with your answers on the most part.

1. Only make those things criminal that actually harm someone.

2. If the lady is being forced to do something against her will, go after the people doing the forcing.

3. Yes, we should ban those acts that are or might be a public nuisance, like communicating in public.

4. Obviously, pimping underage girls must be criminal.

5. Having sex outside marriage is not a criminal offence, although such an act can be extremely harmful

I'm not suggesting you are part of the problem. The online survey was probably heavy solicited to card carrying Conservatives to ensure a more favorable response.



The bill as spun

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to, among other things,

(a) create an offence that prohibits purchasing sexual services or communicating in any place for that purpose;

(b) create an offence that prohibits receiving a material benefit that derived from the commission of an offence referred to in paragraph (a);

(c) create an offence that prohibits the advertisement of sexual services offered

The government did the online survey AFTER the results from the original one created some issues. The results from the initial survey are expected to be kept from being released until after the bill is dealt with.

The tabled bill has everything to do with politics and a pissing match within their arena, and almost nothing to do with laws that protect citizens.

 

[canada-man]

didn't Peter Mckay was accused of Calling Belinda Stronach a dog?

 

[Dave - WebGuy]

didn't Peter Mckay was accused of Calling Belinda Stronach a dog?

I think that was around the time she changed party alignment. Posturing and rhetoric.

I may not have the highest of standards, but she is definitely far from a dog lol