In Hindsight...

Was the constitutional challenge launched by Bedford et.al a positive development?

  • Yes

    Votes: 11 23.9%
  • No

    Votes: 29 63.0%
  • Not Sure

    Votes: 6 13.0%

  • Total voters
    46

MPAsquared

www.musemassagespa.com
Yah, you're both right. We should have kept the laws against bawdy houses and living off the avails. Who needs incalls, bookers, drivers, etc. What the fuck, Bedford?!?
Now ur just being dramatic. No one (especially not me) said anything about the current laws being good. But this new bill is just as bad, and in many many ways much worse.
 

TeasePlease

Cockasian Brother
Aug 3, 2010
7,726
6
38
Now ur just being dramatic. No one (especially not me) said anything about the current laws being good. But this new bill is just as bad, and in many many ways much worse.
Where have I said that it wasn't?

But, it is fact that certain sexworkers (particularly, indy incall girls) who were jeopardized before are now no longer subject to criminal prosecution. Yes, the anti-John provisions create an incentive to go underground, but did that incentive not exist previously?
 

MPAsquared

www.musemassagespa.com
Where have I said that it wasn't?

But, it is fact that certain sexworkers (particularly, indy incall girls) who were jeopardized before are now no longer subject to criminal prosecution. Yes, the anti-John provisions create an incentive to go underground, but did that incentive not exist previously?
See the post I quoted.

True however there are dozens more risks now than before of other varieties. Its way more unsafe to work now. Alone. In strange 100%-child-less potential locations, as "criminals" buy their trade. Its awful.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts