LEGAL question

[CisForCookie]

Aren't those sites that advertise costs per hour + what's on the menu posing a possible legal problem to themselves and to the advertiser who is advertising?

Paying a provider for her time, and what happens between two consenting adults in private is legal, but when you advertise costs per hour and list your menu offering then wouldn't that seem to be soliciting???

 

[uncleg]

Aren't those sites that advertise costs per hour + what's on the menu posing a possible legal problem to themselves and to the advertiser who is advertising?

Paying a provider for her time, and what happens between two consenting adults in private is legal, but when you advertise costs per hour and list your menu offering then wouldn't that seem to be soliciting???

Yes, but not in a "Public Place."

 

[susi]

but, is a web site considered private or public?it seems police are considering it public and so using "menu's" as described to bust people...

after the BBC bust i did tell everyone they should be a little more discreet or less overt with what they are offering in terms of menu's. i have also heard stories of overt menu's being used to prevent workers from entering the US as border services are connected some how to information about canadian sex workers and even printed out a workers web site to confront her on being a "prostitute" and as the info was very clear on her site and described in detail services she had no choice but to admit she was a worker. after 7 hours.....ugh....she was charged with prostitution.

so,my answer is yes, the legal system are considering web sites public communication when they include detailed info about services offered so if people are worried, sell time, not services.

love susie

 

[RacerCarl]

Web sites are not considered a 'public place', because you have to be specifically looking for that when you visit. A 'public place' is pretty much anywhere a random child might overhear your conversation.

 

[susi]

in my opinion,that is not how the authorities are choosing to see it and i am just saying if people are concerned they should take detailed menu's down.

in the end it is a metter of interpretation of law and some people are interpretingit to be public and that it constitutes proof of prostitution, in particular in a parlour on incall where "bawdy house" investigagtions are being targeted.

love susie

 

[Pantherdash]

On May 2, choose ABC on your ballot, Anything But Conservative. Preferably, vote for Iggy. Not that I'm TOO crazy about Iggy.

These fuckers are doing what they do now. Imagine a MAJORITY Conservative Government!?!?

Panther

 

[CisForCookie]

On May 2, choose ABC on your ballot, Anything But Conservative. Preferably, vote for Iggy. Not that I'm TOO crazy about Iggy.

These fuckers are doing what they do now. Imagine a MAJORITY Conservative Government!?!?

Panther

Conservatives not poon friendly?

 

[CisForCookie]

lol, I'm a Conservative and obviously I'm poon friendly. However, we do have religious nutcakes like Brad Trost who most definitely are not poon friendly. I wouldn't let "poon friendliness" be the determinate of which party to vote for this weekend or on May 2nd. The Liberals and NDP are also not poon friendly. In fact, they want Canadian law on prostitution to be similar to the Swedish laws. In Sweden, it's illegal to pay for sex - it's viewed as a form of rape, it's however, legal to sell sex.

Wasn't referring to specific individuals like a provider or a hobbyist. Was thinking more in terms of party lines and policy...

I'd vote for a party that would come out and say they'd decriminalize prostitution.

 

[the old maxx50]

Hope fully the courts will agree that the law as written is unconstitutional and they will have to go back to the draw up new laws. They won't leave it a lone because of there morel objections to selling sex..

Now the government could try to make it all illegal , that would be a big step backwards .. And again there would be a delay on quashing the existing laws .. to give the government time to pass knew ones ..

It still come down to the guys having the balls to stand up for the women right to sell sex .... I know it is self serving. That is the only flaw .

 

[vancity_cowboy]

Aren't those sites that advertise costs per hour + what's on the menu posing a possible legal problem to themselves and to the advertiser who is advertising?

Paying a provider for her time, and what happens between two consenting adults in private is legal, but when you advertise costs per hour and list your menu offering then wouldn't that seem to be soliciting???

and your point is?

 

[sevenofnine]

and wouldn't the owners of these sites who get paid for advertizing

wouldn't that be living of the avails.

 

[CisForCookie]

Hope fully the courts will agree that the law as written is unconstitutional and they will have to go back to the draw up new laws. They won't leave it a lone because of there morel objections to selling sex..

Now the government could try to make it all illegal , that would be a big step backwards .. And again there would be a delay on quashing the existing laws .. to give the government time to pass knew ones ..

It still come down to the guys having the balls to stand up for the women right to sell sex .... I know it is self serving. That is the only flaw .

You mean like take to the streets with signs and microphones? I don't see this happening though, a lot of hobbyists are married so they would have a lot of explaining to do to their SO or GF.

For the single guys, it's still not socially acceptable. So society shuns the men and shuns the women. I'd rather give money to causes or lobbyists who would push the issue.

 

[RacerCarl]

The funny thing about prostitution is that it was not considered immoral for thousands of years - even by the big religions. It was just another trade for unattached women. In fact, Saint Nicholas(Santa Claus) was the patron saint of prostitutes, because he spent most of his life saving prostitutes from mean pimps. The Catholic church itself used to tax prostitutes.

It wasn't until the Victorian era that it became frowned upon, as being prim and proper became all the rage. Virginity became the ultimate gift a woman could give to her husband. Suddenly, after thousands of years of prostitution being a respectable trade, it becomes an immoral trade. It has stuck around ever since.

 

[Pantherdash]

Hey Panther, I don't see that the Liberals are any different from the conservatives. Layton pointed out during the debates that in most situations the LIberals have supported the conservatives in the house and that is one of the main reasons that such an distasteful government has been able to remain in power. Igg has also been absent from the house for 70% of the votes. That suggests that he simply did not show up because he did not want to be held accountable for voting one way or another. The NDP on the other hand is very clear that they would decrmnlze the trade.

If you vote for Layton, you are casting one less vote for the Liberals. Remember, the NDP has never formed a Government in Canada. With the way things are going in Quebec, some may have their wish but it's too much of a stretch to see Layton sitting as Prime Minister of Canada any time soon.

Panther

 

[Ghostwalker]

In Canada, to be convicted of this charge, the person living off the avails of prostitution must be engaged in a parasitic relationship with the prostitute. A publisher or website enterprise does not have such a relationship and would never be charged with that offense in Canada. USA was first settled by religious zealots, and that informed it's attitude about all things sexual. In Canada prostitution itself was never illegal; it was addressed by at one time offended against vagrancy and now in the form of offended against public disorder, specifically against communicating in public the selling/buying of sexual services or the keeping of a bawdy house.