Puritan Harper CONS to "fast track" prostitution bill

[CapitalGuy]

Time to finally let the gf move in. NO FUCKING WAY am I going to risk arrest. Under the old laws, it was cheaper to spend many hundreds a month on the professionals than to commit to the little lady (as wonderful as she is). Now, the risks are just too great to continue as a hobbiest. Fuck. But, see my comments on arrest.

 

[Mikehorn]

What I'm getting to, either we stick together on this, or this thing of ours will fall apart. Jmt

"This thing of ours?" You make us sound like the mafia.

 

[Siocnarf]

3. Subpoena you as a hostile witness in the trial and force you to testify under oath as to whether your customer paid you for sex

In most cases, there will be no proof of the crime, except the woman's testimony. So she can easily say he only paid for company, whether that's true or not. Or just say she's seen so many clients recently she doesnt remember that guy too well.

But this is still all hypothetical. It's very unlikely it would get to court like that simply for a single escort and one client.

 

[Titalian]

"This thing of ours?" You make us sound like the mafia.

You've been watching too many docs or movies, but to answer your question, as the bill stands now, it is criminal.

 

[Titalian]

In most cases, there will be no proof of the crime, except the woman's testimony. So she can easily say he only paid for company, whether that's true or not. Or just say she's seen so many clients recently she doesnt remember that guy too well.

But this is still all hypothetical. It's very unlikely it would get to court like that simply for a single escort and one client.

This is what I believe as well and not "THE SKY IS FALLING" !

 

[GPIDEAL]

In most cases, there will be no proof of the crime, except the woman's testimony. So she can easily say he only paid for company, whether that's true or not. Or just say she's seen so many clients recently she doesnt remember that guy too well.

But this is still all hypothetical. It's very unlikely it would get to court like that simply for a single escort and one client.

Your response sounds practical and reasonable, but Fuji also painted a possible worst case scenario, and how many ladies would find it easier to tell the whole truth than to be cunning and evasive without looking like a liar?

 

[GPIDEAL]

Why are they coming to me with a warrent? First - I am not an SP, but if you are taking about police showing up at an escorts house with a warrent for her client list, why would she need to co-operate? She only has to say she doesn't keep records. She is not breaking the law now, what will they have to hold over her head to force her to comply?

The Canadian industry will NOT be destroyed by this bill while it stands. Sorry, but no one can stop the industry. It thrives in the US where both the buyer and the seller can be charge, it will thrive here. You are ignorant to think otherwise. Meet me here in a year and we will see who is right.

I'm going to play Devil's Advocate: Obstruction of justice. Just because an SP is immune from prosecution for selling sex doesn't mean that they won't know what she does for a living. However, to your credit, the rules will change where discretion will be the order of the day. A john will be calling an escort for 'company'. She can have a database but as long as there's no proof that a transaction for sex has occurred, it will be an uphill battle.

Johns and escorts will have to be very disciplined not to be intimidated. Mistakes will happen though, and people might cave or be tricked.

 

[DigitallyYours]

Let's not forget lying to the police is clearly a crime.

I have serious doubts whether any crown would call a prostitute as a witness because it means exposing her real name.

 

[vikingone1]

good grief...

you're apparently very concerned about me, thanks. I actually speak to my clients and ask them what they'd like to change for the future, and some have made changes. Some will only book actual dates, times and locations via phone call so there is no paper trail of any kind. Some will only do outcalls to their chosen location. Most aren't changing a single damn thing.

Maybe I'm not as concerned as you because maybe I've got my shit together, a good screening process, and a good list of regulars or something

Good for you!.... Do you have a boyfriend, husband.... or a bodyguard. or a chauffeur .. !
They will target these people... Natural, you will be fine..

 

[nobody123]

I'm with Jessica on this. Better for the girls!!

As for the Conservative bashers...go ahead and be small minded. The Liberals have offered nothing. The Conservatives have guided this country through MAJOR economic turmoil for years....and you guys are gonna swing your vote on small minded decisions about whether you can get your cock sucked! Small minds boys!

Frank, I don't know you and I don't like you. And I'm pretty sure that goes the other way around as well. But I gotta say,you are 100% bang-on with your main point. If someone who is inclined to support Harper and co. will vote against them solely on the basis of this one issue, then they are an idiot and too dumb to vote far as I'm concerned.

 

[GPIDEAL]

I find the government's actions to be quite surprising. The desire for physical companionship is one of the strongest human urges, perhaps second only to the need to react to hunger. People will go to great lengths to find companionship and people will also take great risks. From Cleopatra to Clinton, we see examples through history of powerful people (men and women) with much to lose pursuing physical companionship. From Elliot Spitzer to Barney Frank, we see examples of the same among government officials, among both straight and gay people. It is simply an undeniable expression of humanity.

Another very strong urge humans have is the urge to intoxicate. Whether it is shamans in far flung villages taking hallucinogens or diners enjoying wine at Canoe, people self medicate. Attempts to prohibit the expression of such urges has been a colossal waste of money and other resources ... witness Prohibition and the War on Drugs in the US.

Laws such as Prohibition or the upcoming C-36 simply create more criminals by defining normal human behavior as criminal.

Alcohol use has a huge cost on society - deaths from drunk driving, liver disease, incidence of date rape on university campuses, violence, workplace absenteeism, the list goes on an on and the impact and costs are staggering. The social cost is far higher than that of prostitution, but it has been accepted. Just as there is no reasonable way to prevent people from drinking, there is no reasonable way to prevent people from seeking companionship in exchange for pay.

Canada seemed to have had a very sensible and pragmatic take on sex services, but C-36 seems like a huge step backwards. Providers will be more at risk than before, and no rational person could think that it will eliminate the sex trade. It is called the worlds oldest profession for a reason.

Laws against trafficking or underage providers and patrons make a lot of sense. Just like laws against underage drinking or driving while intoxicated.

Perhaps even more surprising than the bill is the fact that it is coming from a "conservative" government. True conservative principles are about less government intrusion into the private lives of citizens and smaller government in general. Imposing ones "morals" on others is the type of conservatism that is more akin to the Taliban's approach to conservatism.

Excellent

 

[GPIDEAL]

:clap2:

incidentally, incalls are now legal, as long as they're far from children.

living off the avails is also now legal, as long as there is no exploitation.

indeed an improvement for me!! I'm sorry that you guys are being criminalized I really am, but I'm happy that my future is safer.

I'm not sure if you have to be 'far' from children. Perhaps out of site from children (say you live in an adult-only building, but a child visits grandma in a separate unit, without any chance whatsoever of coming into contact)?

 

[Titalian]

there is no fallout between myself and my clients ..... is there?

for the most part.... as far as I know, the disagreements I'm having are with people who have never and may never book me...

Well my Dear, thats their bad luck. :wink:

 

[GPIDEAL]

Let's not forget lying to the police is clearly a crime.

I have serious doubts whether any crown would call a prostitute as a witness because it means exposing her real name.

Don't we have the right to remain silent (including SPs)? Don't lie. Deny.

 

[GPIDEAL]

Frank, I don't know you and I don't like you. And I'm pretty sure that goes the other way around as well. But I gotta say,you are 100% bang-on with your main point. If someone who is inclined to support Harper and co. will vote against them solely on the basis of this one issue, then they are an idiot and too dumb to vote far as I'm concerned.

What are you smoking nobody123? You're usually anti-Harper.

I used to think like Fmahovalich, BUT it is perfectly democratic to vote on a single issue.

Frankly, if all hobbyists voted against Harper, I think it would reduce his margin of victory, but not sure if it will defeat his government. Lowering his margin would send a clear message. Fuck him!

 

[d_jedi]

As I'm reading through this thread and others I'm beginning to notice a trend, and its the tension within all of us,
as this bill slowly becomes law. Most who have commented have valid points for the most part.
Security in Job or career is one big one for the ones, deemed a criminal, which someone expressed on another thread.
As far as the providers on this board most are genuine in protecting their customer's integrity or at least the ones I have met.
Its become very apparent to me, that were beginning to argue more and more amongst each other. Why is this happening??
Because there's an inequality, in the way the bill has been written.
Its causing frustration and its going to get worse between provider and client as it becomes law,

If both parties were accountable for this so called crime, there would be no arguments,
in fact we would all be in unison in crushing this bill.

I'm going to through something out there..

Do you believe the government had an ulterior motive in creating the bill in this way?
and purposely manipulating its context in such a manner as to create this sort of fallout between client and provider.
To me, this was the only way, they could have an effect on every level of this industry, including our own.

When you create an inequality, in any circle whether it be race, colour, religion or in this case gender, you produce "detachment", of common grounds.

What I'm getting to, either we stick together on this, or this thing of ours will fall apart. Jmt

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.


Yes, I'm comparing the Conservatives to the fucking Nazis.
HEIL HARPER!

 

[d_jedi]

You don't get it. A crime is still being committed and the video, phone records, appointment book, etc, are evidence. Just because the SP's can't be prosecuted doesn't mean the police can't get a search warrant to seize evidence of a crime.

They will seize all that material and use it to prosecute customers. They will probably also easily get confessions from SP: "Did you engage in prostitution?" "Sure did pig, but you can't arrest me for that, I know my rights!". Statements like that can be used to convict the client, and will easily slip out of the mouths of many SP's, many of whom won't fully understand the law.

The law is not set up to enable prostitution, police will be expected to conduct raids, arrest customers, and divert SP's to rehabilitation programs.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but you are required to produce ID if asked for by an officer in the course of a criminal investigation.
Wouldn't it be a shame if that non-cooperating girl's friends and family found out about what she was doing? Oh, wait, you've decided to cooperate?

 

[GPIDEAL]

And correct me if I'm wrong, but you are required to produce ID if asked for by an officer in the course of a criminal investigation.
Wouldn't it be a shame if that non-cooperating girl's friends and family found out about what she was doing? Oh, wait, you've decided to cooperate?

Another good point. Immunity doesn't mean a guarantee of privacy, but that may be another reason to challenge the new law.

 

[legmann]

Do you believe the government had an ulterior motive in creating the bill in this way?
and purposely manipulating its context in such a manner as to create this sort of fallout between client and provider.
To me, this was the only way, they could have an effect on every level of this industry, including our own.

When you create an inequality, in any circle whether it be race, colour, religion or in this case gender, you produce "detachment", of common grounds.

What I'm getting to, either we stick together on this, or this thing of ours will fall apart.

I was beginning to think the same. Probably the most important point in this 'discussion'. Take heed.

 

[nobody123]

What are you smoking nobody123? You're usually anti-Harper.

I used to think like Fmahovalich, BUT it is perfectly democratic to vote on a single issue.

Frankly, if all hobbyists voted against Harper, I think it would reduce his margin of victory, but not sure if it will defeat his government. Lowering his margin would send a clear message. Fuck him!

Fuck him indeed. I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone more anti Harper than I am.

But I loath him based on a huge laundry list that includes but is not limited to: fucking over the poor, fucking over veterans, fucking over those who still serve in the military, fucking over Natives, fucking over immigrants, fucking over the environment, pandering to a Canadian tea-party lite crowd, slashing the CBC and the civil service to such an extent as to render them unable to fulfill their mandate, spending a BILLION motherfucking dollars to host a G8 summit in Toronto, spending so much on useless F35s as to make the previous item on my list look like chump change, muzzling scientists and civil servants so that they cannot speak publicly without a motherfucking ABSURD amount of vetting and filtering by PR flacks and weasels, ending 40 years of consistent and plottable census data by changing the nature of the long form census, shutting Kevin Page out because he actually tried to do his job instead of play the Tory lapdog, running a shitshow of a temporary foreign worker programme that cost Canadian jobs, stacking the senate with more partisan hacks than even Trudeau dreamed of, oh! and being so sleazy and corrupt that it makes the libs look downright pristine, (what with the patterns of electoral fraud and Harpo trying to buy his way out of a scandal with Mike fucking Duffy), and tarnishing our international reputation to such an extent that Canadian youth travelling abroad would be better served to have a USA patch sewn on their backpacks rather than the other way around.

You know what isn't on my list? Bill C36. Do I hate it? Fuck yeah. A lot. It will curtail my hobbying, maybe even end it, and that displeases me to no end. But there is so much more going on, so many issues that are bigger, more important, and more pressing, that anyone who makes their voting decision on that alone can't see past the tip of their cock.