prostitution

[robyn]

hey i begged that hooker to let me use a condom but she would have none of it.

[ppcock]

Originally Posted by tiedye

I think I'm going to name my daughter Chlamydia.

One of the best parts of Waiting for sure.

[tiedye]

Luckily that's one of those "fool me once" only scenarios.

Edit: outposted by a man-shark.

[ppcock]

am i the only one who thinks prostitutes are freakin cool as shit?

[miss.myra]

Um, there already is legal prostituition in this city, and there's lots of it

all of the legal places are usually operating as massage parlours/ escort agencies/ strip clubs, etc. and when a customer goes there they are REQUIRED to wear protection for everything or they are not getting anything.

[robyn]

Originally Posted by F*r*a*

not necessarily.
Testing them isn't going to do much more than educate them , rather than stop them from continuing that lifestyle....Im trying to fathom the idea of "smart whoring" ... Either way its going to cost us money as it is now , or its going to cost us even more because it needs to be done even more frequently to support a demeaning line of work.

Legalizing it would be a total mess. There would be WAY more work involved than just making em pay taxes and getting them tested. There's the drug factor , the illegal aspect of the drugs and making sure they don't do the drugs , thats more testing. Pimps need to be warded off and that can result in some violent endings as it has in previous scenarios , which involves more tax to pay for the security of sex trade workers.....

there's just too much involved and its going to cost us more I think to legalize it , rather than to rehabilitate them and get them off the streets and into a real working world.

i somehow doubt that the government is going to start paying for security in brothels. just because it's regulated doesn't mean OMG GOVT SUBSIDIZED EVERYTHING FREE WHORES!!!!

[j3rk]

i dont want to read this thread, but i'm sure it's already been brought up.

i think i've even posted in this thread already.

prostitution in canada is legal. public solicitation is illegal and so are bawdy houses.

[ppcock]

j3rk pimps out myles.

he's certified.

myles is a walking std treasure chest.

[j3rk]

no, but i've looked into running online whore houses.

i already had a list of dirty whoers to join my site.

PPCock is just upset his mom didn't make the cut.

[j3rk]

and remember kids. PERB.CA for all your WHOERING NEEDS.

[j3rk]

Originally Posted by miss.myra

Um, there already is legal prostituition in this city, and there's lots of it

all of the legal places are usually operating as massage parlours/ escort agencies/ strip clubs, etc. and when a customer goes there they are REQUIRED to wear protection for everything or they are not getting anything.

If sexual acts are being performed at these places, they are illegal. Which is why they run under the guise of "Massage Parlor". The law is just not enforced, much like Amsterdam cafe in this city.

The requirement is wearing protection is put into place by the owners of the joint. There are no city regulations or laws that require this...because as stated...if sexual acts being performed in a location they are considered bawdy houses and are illegal under the criminal code of canada.

The police know they have better things to deal with than running around dealing with prostitution and turn a blind eye unless they get complaints. IE. 24 Hour massage parlors on 3rd in Richmond which operate with out any problems Or madame cleo's on richards.

I have issues and concerns with foreigners being brought into this country to work in bawdy houses. This is exploitation to the fullest and should not be allowed to continue. I would assume most of these people are working under someone else, and the "someone else" is taking most of the profits from the exploitation of these workers. These types of places should be shut down, people punished and the workers counseled and assisted in any way we can. Regulations should be in place so that locals can open up their own shops to supply the needs of our domestic market.

and remember girls....if you ever really need to get into Gorgomish, just say your on Pinky's guest list.

[ppcock]

Originally Posted by j3rk

PPCock is just upset his mom didn't make the cut.

I can pimp my own mom thank you very much.

[robyn]

Originally Posted by F*r*a*

^ no obviously , but there's going to be a need for some type of control and someone to control them if there are mandatory testings going to be involved at the least...

You cant assume that if they leave it up to the whores to get tested , they'll go when the have to....because then what if they dont? They'll get fired? lol..
Whatever the case , having it regulated , controlled , assisted...WHATEVER , is not going to be a cheap or easy task.

If a brothel or prostitute requires a license, it would be in their best interest to get tested if it was a requirement of the license, or they would be getting fired. Furthermore, legalized sex workers could all start paying income tax and each transaction could be taxed as well.

[j3rk]

much like weed. i hear you. good idea.

but just because we can smoke weed openly in this city, doesn't mean that it's legal.

[j3rk]

CRIMINAL CODE
Legislationline Notice : see in particular sections 211, 212 and 213.


PART VII


DISORDERLY HOUSES, GAMING AND BETTING

Interpretation
Definitions

197. (1) In this Part,

"common bawdy-house" means a place that is

(a) kept or occupied, or
(b) resorted to by one or more persons

for the purpose of prostitution or the practice of acts of indecency;



"prostitute" means a person of either sex who engages in prostitution;

Keeping common bawdy-house

210. (1) Every one who keeps a common bawdy-house is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.





Transporting person to bawdy-house

211. Every one who knowingly takes, transports, directs, or offers to take, transport or direct, any other person to a common bawdy-house is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.





Procuring

212. (1) Every one who

(a) procures, attempts to procure or solicits a person to have illicit sexual intercourse with another person, whether in or out of Canada,


(b) inveigles or entices a person who is not a prostitute to a common bawdy-house for the purpose of illicit sexual intercourse or prostitution,


(c) knowingly conceals a person in a common bawdy-house,


(d) procures or attempts to procure a person to become, whether in or out of Canada, a prostitute,


(e) procures or attempts to procure a person to leave the usual place of abode of that person in Canada, if that place is not a common bawdy-house, with intent that the person may become an inmate or frequenter of a common bawdy-house, whether in or out of Canada,


(f) on the arrival of a person in Canada, directs or causes that person to be directed or takes or causes that person to be taken, to a common bawdy-house,


(g) procures a person to enter or leave Canada, for the purpose of prostitution,


(h) for the purposes of gain, exercises control, direction or influence over the movements of a person in such manner as to show that he is aiding, abetting or compelling that person to engage in or carry on prostitution with any person or generally,


(i) applies or administers to a person or causes that person to take any drug, intoxicating liquor, matter or thing with intent to stupefy or overpower that person in order thereby to enable any person to have illicit sexual intercourse with that person, or


(j) lives wholly or in part on the avails of prostitution of another person,

is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.



Idem (pimps)


(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1)(j), every person who lives wholly or in part on the avails of prostitution of another person who is under the age of eighteen years is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.
Aggravated offence in relation to living on the avails of prostitution of a person under the age of eighteen years


(2.1) Notwithstanding paragraph (1)(j) and subsection (2), every person who lives wholly or in part on the avails of prostitution of another person under the age of eighteen years, and who

(a) for the purposes of profit, aids, abets, counsels or compels the person under that age to engage in or carry on prostitution with any person or generally, and
(b) uses, threatens to use or attempts to use violence, intimidation or coercion in relation to the person under that age,

is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years but not less than five years.





Offence -- prostitution of person under eighteen

(4) Every person who, in any place, obtains for consideration, or communicates with anyone for the purpose of obtaining for consideration, the sexual services of a person who is under the age of eighteen years is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.




Offence in relation to prostitution
213. (1) Every person who in a public place or in any place open to public view

(a) stops or attempts to stop any motor vehicle,


(b) impedes the free flow of pedestrian or vehicular


traffic or ingress to or egress from premises adjacent to that place, or
(c) stops or attempts to stop any person or in any manner communicates or attempts to communicate with any person

for the purpose of engaging in prostitution or of obtaining the sexual services of a prostitute is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.





Definition of "public place"

(2) In this section, "public place" includes any place to which the public have access as of right or by invitation, express or implied, and any motor vehicle located in a public place or in any place open to public view.

[j3rk]

dont fuck with the LAWLs

[miss.myra]

Originally Posted by j3rk

I have issues and concerns with foreigners being brought into this country to work in bawdy houses. This is exploitation to the fullest and should not be allowed to continue. I would assume most of these people are working under someone else, and the "someone else" is taking most of the profits from the exploitation of these workers. These types of places should be shut down, people punished and the workers counseled and assisted in any way we can. Regulations should be in place so that locals can open up their own shops to supply the needs of our domestic market.

Yeah same here, as much as I support prostitution becoming legal, I definitely agree 100% with this part.

[-evil-duerr-]

Originally Posted by ppcock

myles is a walking std treasure chest.

probably the best quote I've seen around these dusty cow pastures for quite some time. *golf clap*

[Silverwinged]

i think the thing that most people are missing here, is it doesn't really if it is made "legal". its not going to completely solve the issues that many have brought up in this thread.

there will still be people that refuse to have a license, because they don't want to be taxed on their transactions/don't want to meet the requirements that may or may not be set out.
there will still be customers that would rather not follow guidelines and go and do as they please, rather than being taxed or having their name be on a file of a brothel that this person frequents.

Legalization would be a great thing for the general majority, but you cannot tell me that there wouldn't be a group of individuals that would rebel... Both prositutes and customers alike.

[ebbomega]

It's not a matter of solving the issues though. It's a matter of mitigation.

Think about it.
We can:
- do nothing about it, and the entire sex trade industry remains unregulated, underground and has no strict rules or guidelines involved with it
or
- legislate and legalize it, making it so that only a small section of the sex trade industry remains unregulated, underground and has no strict rules or guidelines involved with it.

So, do you want to clean up some of the industry, or none of the industry? Kinda seems like a no-brainer to me. Especially if we can make some public tax dollars off it in the meantime

edit: Third option - we step up enforcement on it, COSTING us more tax dollars, putting more people in prison for selling something that's perfectly legal to give away for free.

[ebbomega]

"With all the things you can do to a person, giving someone an orgasm is hardly the worst"
- Carlin

[FireWire]

There is no right or wrong... it's only what YOU make out of it.

So no matter WHAT the outcome of this is - some people will NEVER agree with it. Be it legal or not... there will always be people saying it should be the other way around. This is a never ending argument imo.

[ppcock]

it's talked a lot on the firewire family dinner table.


except its:
"so mom, how was work today?"


sorry.. stepped into it and i took advantage.

[FireWire]

Good one Marty. How old are you again? ;)

[ppcock]

old enough to become a man-whore