cinelli

Too small a town for anyone to be discreet. Your best bet is driving in to Winnipeg, or asking an SP if she would drive out there.

Sad but true. The current government has no respect for experts in any field, be it science, elections, crime or prostitution. Not only do they disregard experts, they ridicule and insult them like childish bullies. The Tories claim openness and transparency as a core value. They misled everyone. I have tried writing my MP on this and other subjects, the only response he has are standard party platforms. Worse yet, I am now on the Tory mailing list and get "Dear Supporter" letters asking for donations to the PC party. Might as well argue with a lamp post.

Indeed, the damage is done. US Customs don't ask if you have ever been convicted, they ask if you have ever been arrested or fingerprinted. It's the same thing to them. Five years is reasonable. The court itself decides whether a case is worth hearing and how urgent it is. This may be heard sooner as the court itself may feel the new law is in contempt of the court's previous ruling on prostiotution law.

I like them too, I have plain black ones and plain white ones. Wouldn't wear anything else they are so much better.

Revenue Canada has completely different rules than criminal court. Don't mess with them ever. You will not win.

Police requests to telecom companies for information about customers is in the HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS per year. Seriously. McKay makes it sound like they are only going after a few "perverts" but in actual practice they are routinely fishing in people's email accounts and text message records, thousands of people a day.

US Border often ask if I have ever been fingerprinted. If you have that opens a big can of worms. Even if you are aquitted or pardoned you are still in that system! Re the Registry, I believe it is up to a judge to enter your name, not the police. Fortunately.

Both. Sure it is nice to be comfortable with someone who accepts you as you really are. Someone you can go to your favourite restaurant with, or sit out on your deck with and none of the neighbours notice. Someone you can REALLY talk to about everything that is going on. But every now and then it is nice to have a bit of a fantasy with a super-sexy girl in lingerie or some wild outfit. Neither of us being our normal selves. Obviously the ideal partner can be both as needed.

Sorry but when you go to court with Revenue Canada the onus is on you to prove it was not for sexual services. It would be hard for a guy to convince a judge that he gave an SP a thousand dollars out of the goodness of his heart. The Crown prosecutor would make mincemeat out of him. Also re financial reporting: any amount can be reported tro FINTRAK if the reporter deems it worthwhile. There is no limit in actual practice. Most reporting is on the basis of "suspiciousness" rather than amount. IE someone shows up at the bank to deposit $2500 in five dollar bills that smell of oregano.

Will definitely stick to a very very few ladies I trust.

Canadians as a whole tend to be politically clueless. I once had a talk with a unionised worker who was a staunch Tory supporter. His union was screwed over by the Tories but he was sticking with them because "that's what my family has always done". LOL Another time I talked to a 1%er biker. He too was going to vote Tory. I told him it wasn't in his interests given the Tory tough-on-crime platform. He just said he liked the way our local MP talks on TV. Critical thinking: a lost art. Additional Comments: Re Fortunate One's article. It left out the saving provision: 286.5 No person shall be prosecuted for a) an offence under section 286.2 if the benefit derived is from the provision of their own sexual services or b) an offence made under section 286.4 in relation to the advertisement of their own sexual services. Sooo...I would say SPs are allowed to do their own advertising and keep their own earnings.

Sadly any actual epidemiological studies from peer-reviewed journals are completely disregarded. The debate become one based on "gut feelings" and as such is essentially non-resolvable.

I have read the bill, it has what are called "saving provisions". I commented on them in the discussion thread about the bill. Quick C+P= 286.5 No person shall be prosecuted for a) an offence under section 286.2 if the benefit derived is from the provision of their own sexual services or b) an offence made under section 286.4 in relation to the advertisementr of their own sexual services. Sooo...I would say SPs are allowed to do their own advertising and keep their own earnings.

Now that is a better article than the stupid American one.

Did the person who wrote this read the bill? It does NOT make selling sex illegal. It makes PURCHASING sex illegal. Very poorly written article. Too many people are talking about it and have obviously not read it.

Please be careful with the co-op. Legally three people form a "gang" in the legal sense. You would be subject to extremely harsh penalties if the Crown went after you. Remember: even if you are right and win in the end, in the meantime they can ruin your life.

I was answering an inquiry in an earlier post.

Yes, my bad.

CRAP I forgot about Bill C-13 Protecting Canadians From Online Crime Act. They will have the ability to monitor your net use without a warrant. So no privacy on the net period.

Yeash it is shocking about those black folks. I have never heard of a white guy taking other people's money.

Lots of SPs are very specific about what services they offer and have specific price lists in their ads/websites. ie "Trip to Greece $100 extra". That doesn't fool anybody.

286.5 No person shall be prosecuted for a) an offence under section 286.2 if the benefit derived is from the provision of their own sexual services or b) an offence made under section 286.4 in relation to the advertisementr of their own sexual services. Sooo...I would say SPs are allowed to do their own advertising and keep their own earnings. Advertising a doubles partner is OUT! And guys posting ads on behalf of SPs is also OUT!

The Tories have a majority and will vote as a block so...100% chance.

1-There is nothing worse than having her say "We only have a minute or two left." Instant boner killer. 2-Constant fiddling with cellphones. I don't think the ladies even realise they are doing it. I had one girl check her phone and text almost constantly through a one hour session. As I left she asked when she'd see me again and I said never, because of the texting. She insisted she had only looked at it once or twice. 3-Perfume. A one ounce bottle is not a single serving size. 4-Respect for my time. Sat in a lobby once for half an hour past the agreed-on start time. But she wanted me out at the agreed on endtime. Another off the list. 5-Photos that look like centrefolds and when you get there they are in sweatpants and dirty t-shirt. This was the same girl in #4 above. And we had agreed that she would wear a specific set of lingerie that were in her ad photos. Her defence was that she "hadn't had time to unpack". The ones who really need to tune up are likely the ones who would never read this thread. Kinda sad eh? But there are some fabulous and professional ladies out there! The fails only make me appreciate the good ones even more.

Holy cow some guys need to learn about limits!