Mikeyboy 27133 Report post Posted March 2, 2013 (edited) I have to agree with Boomer. I don't condone what these men did. It is clearly illegal and it is illegal for very good reasons. There is questionable judgment at this age, and these girls should wait until they are old enough to fully understand all of the implications of the decision. Not sure if 18 is even old enough for that. I still thought I knew everything at 18 and it took a lot of time to realize how wrong I was. That being said, lumping these men in with men who commit what in my opinion is one of the most heinous of crimes, sexually abusing defenseless young children, does a disservice to the term and perhaps lessens its impact by using it too broadly. I know we are talking semantics here, but that is just my opinion. I also find it disturbing that LE is taking this "sting" approach, but again, if they keep their sights set on the guys who are seeking underage girls, then I have no issues with that. I just hope that they don't use their success here as an excuse to start cracking down on men seeking in-call locations for example, which are still technically illegal. Likely not worth their time and perhaps I worry too easily, but one has to at times when there is so much at stake. Just my thoughts. Edited March 2, 2013 by Mikeyboy 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andee 220524 Report post Posted March 2, 2013 d The second issue is the age of consent debate. The age of consent in this country is 16. (it was only just raised from 14). That means, any personal moral issues aside, any person 16 years of age or older can have sex with anyone else regardless of the age. There are certain exceptions that all fall under the category of "exploitation". Despite peoples feelings on the issue, a 50 year old can sleep with a 16 year old legally, with no problems, provided the 50 year old does not hold a position of authority, is not using coercion, or does not pay them. That is the law plain and simple. Those acts are all listed as exploitation. So be aware that in this law the government classes "prostitution" as exploitation. I think there are many people on this board who would have issue with that if that generalization was applied to anyone over the age of 18. . Just to be absolutely clear: A 50 year man cannot legally have sex with a 16 year old prostitute. Check it out: As well, 16 and 17 year olds cannot consent to sexual activity that involves prostitution or pornography Source: http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/dept-min/clp/faq.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canuckhooker 19203 Report post Posted March 2, 2013 Just to be absolutely clear: A 50 year man cannot legally have sex with a 16 year old prostitute. Check it out: As well, 16 and 17 year olds cannot consent to sexual activity that involves prostitution or pornography Source: http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/dept-min/clp/faq.html Ummm I think that is what I said. It is legal except in cases of what is termed as exploitation. I explicitly said "does not pay them". 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SamanthaEvans 166767 Report post Posted March 2, 2013 I also find it disturbing that LE is taking this "sting" approach, but again, if they keep their sights set on the guys who are seeking underage girls, then I have no issues with that. I just hope that they don't use their success here as an excuse to start cracking down on men seeking in-call locations for example, which are still technically illegal. Likely not worth their time and perhaps I worry too easily, but one has to at times when there is so much at stake.Just my thoughts. I'm completely happy with LE using BP to target the men who seek out underage girls. If the ad or initial correspondence with the ad poster says that the girl is 16 years old, the man must end the correspondence, period. Even better would be to report the ad to BP or the police. It's not illegal to read or reply to an escort ad, so there's nothing to fear for taking action. Until the Supreme Court of Canada makes its decisions on the prostitution laws, which probably won't happen until 2015 or so, there's no reason to worry about LE targetting men who are looking for an in-call engagement. The police and judiciary are not interested in entertaining charges about independent companions working quietly. If someone is operating an in-call and creating a public nuisance, that could be a problem, but it would be a civic by-law matter in most cases, not a criminal one. Going after the people who are promoting underage prostitutes and the men who are seeking them, however, is perfectly fine with me. 7 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
roamingguy 300292 Report post Posted March 3, 2013 I also find it disturbing that LE is taking this "sting" approach, but again, if they keep their sights set on the guys who are seeking underage girls, then I have no issues with that. I just hope that they don't use their success here as an excuse to start cracking down on men seeking in-call locations for example, which are still technically illegal. Likely not worth their time and perhaps I worry too easily, but one has to at times when there is so much at stake. Just my thoughts. I'm not disturbed one bit by the police conducting such a sting. Police conduct stings because there are some individuals in society who deserve to be stung. Those "men" aren't the victims here, they are potential victimizers of underage girls, and had they in fact had arranged an "encounter" with real underage girls, the girls would have been IMHO vicitms RG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mikeyboy 27133 Report post Posted March 3, 2013 Those "men" aren't the victims here, they are potential victimizers of underage girls, and had they in fact had arranged an "encounter" with real underage girls, the girls would have been IMHO vicitms It certainly wasn't my intention to disagree with you on that point rg. That wasn't the intention of my post at all. I agree with you whole heartedly. It was more of a slippery slope argument when it comes to le. I have been accused of paranoia at times though. ;-) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nntsci 11076 Report post Posted March 3, 2013 Just note, the psychiatric definition of "pedifile" is sexual interest in a person who is prepubescent (typically under the age of 13) and LOOKS prepubesent. And the term refers to the psychiatric disorder, not whether the person acts on their desires. Most pedofiles do not engage in sex with minors (Dr. James Cantor at CAMH in Toronto calls them "gold star pedifiles), but those that do, tend to get the headlines. In the US very nasty laws make it nearly impossible for pedofiles to get help for their disorder. The term for a adult interested in sex with post pubesent girls 16 years old is "STUPID" (actually the term is Ephebophilia, but its not used very often and is typically not considered a psychiatric disorder). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reddog2402 2224 Report post Posted March 4, 2013 These men are starting to see some real consequences too... http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/838505-hockey-nova-scotia-cuts-referee-charged-with-online-child-luring http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/816396-man-charged-in-child-prostitution-sting-no-longer-at-halifax-school But from what I've heard, they knew the "girl" with whom they were making appointments was only 16 - I've read that in the course of making the arrangements, the "girl" was stating that she was only 16. So they can't claim ignorance or that she mislead them. These men are going to be paying a very high price for their lack of judgement. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest t****ster***ke Report post Posted March 4, 2013 i guess there is a difference between what is illegal and what is creepy, because i can't help but feel any man who wants to engage in sexual acts with an adolescent has a certain level of creepiness to him. i am glad to hear that the law is protecting 16 year olds from this sort of exploitation, but i am somewhat disturbed to learn there is nothing stopping a man in his 50's from having sex with a young teenager as long as there is no money or force involved. i imagine this law is to allow for teenage relationships of a sexual nature, but our government should strongly consider capping the age of the non-minor at 19 or 20. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oldblueeyez 15475 Report post Posted March 8, 2013 Read this and see if it doesn't send chills down your spine: "It turned out that one of those men, XXXXXXXXXXXX, worked with special-needs students at Oxford School. XXXXXXXXXX has also been charged with possessing a controlled substance." And OMG, OMG, OMG, OMG. I am truly shocked at one of these fellas... that's all I'm sayin'. :-0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DarksideHobbyist 1883 Report post Posted March 20, 2013 Please, Please, Please don't take this the wrong way, I am certainly not into looking for underage girls, but I'm wondering if the lady/officer posing as a 16 yr old posted pictures of herself or who she was pretending to be? The only reason I ask is that I'm wondering would a female police officer in general post pictures to begin with. I realize that no one can know for sure. This; however, may be something we can look for in the future? Comments? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CristyCurves 169032 Report post Posted March 20, 2013 (edited) Please, Please, Please don't take this the wrong way, I am certainly not into looking for underage girls, but I'm wondering if the lady/officer posing as a 16 yr old posted pictures of herself or who she was pretending to be? The only reason I ask is that I'm wondering would a female police officer in general post pictures to begin with. I realize that no one can know for sure. This; however, may be something we can look for in the future? Comments? For all of us who play and work in this field it's always best to stay on top of the laws, to know what is legal and illegal. The laws are easily explained when googled. I believe however if the police have anyone targeted they will get them, using whatever methods are available to them. But a sting is expensive and a big undertaking so they must have received alot of complaints to have warranted this latest one. Were the pictures the cop or just anyone, not sure. However I have heard of actual female officers interviewing at a service and then being hired. Then service then got busted, so as I said they can and will use whatever means to get who they set as their target, within the law. But I wouldn't become paranoid over this. As a hobbyist I think the only things to be concerned about would be dealing with someone underage, someone buying/selling drugs, someone who operates a visible very busy incall-avoid them and you should play without worry. Edited March 21, 2013 by cr**tyc***es spelling 8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eastcoasthobbiest 434 Report post Posted March 20, 2013 For all of us who play and work in this field it's always best to stay on top of the laws, to know what is legal and illegal. The laws are easily explained when googled. I believe however if the police have anyone targeted they will get them, using whatever methods are available to them. But a sting is expensive and a big undertaking so they must have received alot of complaints to have warranted this latest one. Were the pictures the cop or just anyone, not sure. However I have heard of actual female officers interviewing at a service and then being hired. Then service then got busted, so as I said they can and will use whatever means to get who they set as their target, within the law. But I wouldn't become paranoid over this. As a hobbyist I think the only things to be concerned about would be dealing with someone underage, someone also buying/selling drugs, someone who operates a visible very busy incall-avoid them and you should play without worry. I agree totally, especially about the incall location. I accepted an appointment at an SP's incall location once and I tend to avoid doing that overall. Aside from the problems people have reported, like getting robbed when they show up, it also puts the SP on that legally shaky ground of being accused of opperating a bawdy house. I prefer to host even if I pay a higher premium. It not only protects me, but it protects the SP too and as a responsible hobbiest, I feel it's the least I can do for the ladies I see. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rabrandle 110 Report post Posted March 21, 2013 It will be very helpful if someone explains legal boundaries in plain language. Thanks in advance. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eastcoasthobbiest 434 Report post Posted March 21, 2013 Incall is illegal from my understanding. Canadian law considers that maintaining a permanant residence for the purpose of prostitution. Outcall is perfectly legal. Communicating in public about arranging a meet is not legal (I believe) including talking in a car so streetwalkers are an illegal practice. On the same subject the "car-dates" that sometimes get advertised on BP or CL are illegal for those same reasons and for the public indecency charge that goes along with them. Canadian law is difficult to navigate on this subject because the laws are outdated and filled with grey areas, loopholes and as a result they're a minefield for the unwary. My advice on the whole matter to a new hobbiest would be to stay here and pick from the CERB ladies. The women (and men) here are serious about the business, enjoy what they do, are FAR less likely to have drug, disease or drama complications and will definitely leave you feeling happy, satisfied and fulfilled. Other sources of hobbying might not have quite the track record for positivity that you can find here. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SamanthaEvans 166767 Report post Posted March 21, 2013 Fear-mongering is NEVER helpful. While I don't want to get into a long discussion of the law, since several of us have done it extensively, many times, in other threads, I also don't want to leave some things hanging, here, because the misconceptions aren't tolerable and we never know when someone will read this thread later. So, I'll go through this quickly. It will be very helpful if someone explains legal boundaries in plain language. Thanks in advance. We have a forum for legal questions, cases and decisions. The laws and their current status is explained in simple, clear language there. Read it! I accepted an appointment at an SP's incall location once and I tend to avoid doing that overall. Aside from the problems people have reported, like getting robbed when they show up, it also puts the SP on that legally shaky ground of being accused of opperating a bawdy house. I prefer to host even if I pay a higher premium. It not only protects me, but it protects the SP too and as a responsible hobbiest, I feel it's the least I can do for the ladies I see. Incall is illegal from my understanding. Canadian law considers that maintaining a permanant residence for the purpose of prostitution. The likelihood that a client will be robbed if he sees an independent paid companion at her incall location is miniscule if he's seeing a well-recommended, reputable lady. If he's bargain-hunting on BP, CL and other free or cheap sites, he's taking risks. Buyer beware! Anytime something seems too good to be true, it probably is. Cut-rate prices can cost a lot. Paying a premium to a reputable paid companion will ensure your safety, security and confidentiality. Incalls are technically illegal, it's true, but it's also true that, until the Supreme Court of Canada makes its decisions about the prostitution laws, which will probably happen in 2015, no one is being charged with operating a bawdy house as long as she's working quietly, not creating a nuisance in the neighbourhood or disturbing the public. The police and judiciary are not entertaining bawdy house charges because there is a strong likelihood that the laws will be overturned. If someone were to be charged and/or convicted, the charges would probably be dropped and the convictions nullified by a change in the law. It's simply not worth the considerable time and expense. However, the bawdy house law is not about operating a permanent residence for the purpose of prostitution. It's about habitually engaging in prostitution anywhere, including a hotel room. "Habitual" means seeing several clients. It's perfectly okay for a prostitute or any woman to have sex with someone in her home or hotel room. If she's being paid for her time, seeing just one client is also okay. Problems arise when she sees several clients. It is absolutely legal to invite a prostitute to your home or hotel room and to pay her for her time, including sexual activities. In terms of safety, the safest thing for the SP is to operate a discrete incall location where she controls things like who may enter, what they may do when they're there and her access to emergency services if required. The next-safest thing is to engage in outcalls in reputable hotels--4 and 5-star hotels--where hotel security gives her a measure of protection. Women who do these outcalls are wise to check the room, the bathroom, the closets and the locks on doors to any adjoining rooms to ensure that no one else can arrive unexpectedly. Most independent ladies do not offer outcalls to private residences when they don't know the client because they are much less safe than a place the lady controls herself. At a strange house, she may not know where all the entrances and exits are and she may be surprised by other people arriving unexpectedly. Escort agencies frequently arrange outcalls to private homes, but they also provide drivers and they record the address to which the lady is going. Part of her security, then, is that she's not the only person who knows where she is: others are also looking out for her. Communicating in public about arranging a meet is not legal (I believe) including talking in a car so streetwalkers are an illegal practice. On the same subject the "car-dates" that sometimes get advertised on BP or CL are illegal for those same reasons and for the public indecency charge that goes along with them. Canadian law is difficult to navigate on this subject because the laws are outdated and filled with grey areas, loopholes and as a result they're a minefield for the unwary. Communicating in public is illegal. Cars are considered to be public places, which is why car dates are also illegal. There is nothing about these laws that is difficult to understand, nor are they full of loopholes. You cannot discuss exchanging sexual activities for money in a public place, period. You cannot engage in sex in a public place, either. Street-based sex workers are in compromising circumstances because they have to have these public discussions. But not only is it illegal for a sex worker to approach someone on the street or at an intersection and offer sex for money, it's also illegal for an ordinary person to approach someone on the street and offer to pay them for sex. The women (and men) here are serious about the business, enjoy what they do, are FAR less likely to have drug, disease or drama complications and will definitely leave you feeling happy, satisfied and fulfilled. Other sources of hobbying might not have quite the track record for positivity that you can find here.Independent paid companions who work indoors are not a significant source of sexually-transmissible infection. We are sexual health experts. We know that the great majority of our clients have never been tested for any kind of sexually transmissible infection, yet they may be the unknowing source of these diseases which they may have contracted from girlfriends, wives and other partners with whom they have engaged in unprotected sexual activities. You can trust us to know what the risks are and to protect our own health as well as yours. The principal issue in this thread, from the outset, has been engaging with underage SPs. This is absolutely, completely illegal. There is no excuse for doing it under any circumstances. If you don't know the age of the SP you're seeing, that's a problem. Presuming that she's a legal adult may be foolish because the laws related to consent will not allow you to wriggle around and claim you didn't know this was an underage person or a child. Ask for identification if there's the slightest doubt about her age. If she's underage, you have a legal and moral obligation to report what's going on to the authorities and you can do so without fear of being prosecuted yourself as long as you did not engage in sexual acts with her. 6 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bubbaman 355 Report post Posted March 21, 2013 myself i wont touch anything under the age of twenty and if i feel that they are under 20 I ask for id. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PoorGuy 1098 Report post Posted October 17, 2013 Ok people, the first sentence has been handed down. 100 days, no internet except for work and stay away from anyone under 18 years old for 2 years probationary period. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/native-leader-gets-100-days-in-jail-after-prostitute-sting-1.2101490 Even though this operation was launched in March of this year, there are EVEN MORE SP listings on Halifax BP, CL, and Escorts-Canada, so the demand for paid sex is increasing. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CristyCurves 169032 Report post Posted October 18, 2013 Ok people, the first sentence has been handed down. 100 days, no internet except for work and stay away from anyone under 18 years old for 2 years probationary period. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/native-leader-gets-100-days-in-jail-after-prostitute-sting-1.2101490 Even though this operation was launched in March of this year, there are EVEN MORE SP listings on Halifax BP, CL, and Escorts-Canada, so the demand for paid sex is increasing. Thank you for posting the update. I would say though that the number of listings hasn't increased. There has always been a lot of ads on all of those sites increases and decreases of ads has more to do with timing I think, such as seasons, holidays, etc. I wouldn't say the demand for paid sex is increasing either I just think it's become more obvious because of the internet, it's never decreased, not to my knowledge anyways:) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Samurai 7678 Report post Posted October 18, 2013 I've always been confused by these warnings. They are a contradiction in terms. If I hear about a sting on BP or CL that is attempting to catch people responding to underage ads I don't say a thing. The warning only reminds these people that they have to be more careful which makes it more difficult for the authorities to prevent the perpetrators from perpetuating the exploitation of these teens in the first place. Seriously though. WTF 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CristyCurves 169032 Report post Posted October 18, 2013 I've always been confused by these warnings. They are a contradiction in terms. If I hear about a sting on BP or CL that is attempting to catch people responding to underage ads I don't say a thing. The warning only reminds these people that they have to be more careful which makes it more difficult for the authorities to prevent the perpetrators from perpetuating the exploitation of these teens in the first place. Seriously though. WTF Great point, but I think and I know I shouldn't speak for others, but the intent of poorguy anyway was just to post an update of the sentences handed down and to comment on the amount of posts during those times?. As most would assume that when a site is being watched it may scare off some from advertising. Until all aspects of providing are legal there will always be paranoia and nervousness for some. Also just the presence of le makes some nervous even when they have nothing to feel guilty about:) I don't think anyone here-cerb- would want to help protect or warn anyone who is dealing with or doing anything they shouldn't be. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
