What is going on out there?

[Phaedrus 209521]

itd131, I have to say I'm not really sure what your point is here. Your original point was that under the new laws, spas were just too risky... and certainly moreso than they were before.

 

Your last post gives us a very good summary of how spas have evolved to become more widespread and to offer more varied and higher quality services, and how they've perhaps become a little less discreet in their advertizing... and how all this happened prior to the Bedford SCC ruling last year, when both MAs and clients risked being hit with the bawdy-house law, and the spa itself risked being hit with living off the avails too. So far, so good.

 

What you haven't explained is how the new legal environment is any worse for us, as clients. Sure, paying for a sexual service is illegal... but I think that's no worse than the previous bawdy-house law, and it's a lot harder to prove. They'd have to demonstrate that you actually handed money over *and* received a sexual service, which is a lot harder than just proving you were in a particular place. And for the spas and MAs... sure, the new advertizing rules suck, but people seem to be working around that reasonably well, and the new laws aimed at pimping are a *lot* less restrictive than the old living-off-the-avails law was.

 

So... why the panic? I know damn well that the new laws have been written to intimidate, but there isn't actually any rational reason to let them succeed. And quite apart from the law as it stands at any given time, the really significant factor in all this is local LE and what they may or may not choose to do. They had tools to persecute people under the old laws; they have tools to persecute people under the new ones. But their desire to actually do anything is generally driven by local factors, not by anything that happens in Parliament.

[itd131 954]

Phaedrus, in my opinion it is quite likely things will be worse if we do end up in a "new legal environment." The old law was about controlling how prostitution took place. The new law seeks to eliminate it. I don't have the time or desire to explain all the many possibilities that come to mind but as a starting point I would look at the details of the technical paper, as well as the tone taken by the department of injustice, here:

 

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/other-autre/protect/p1.html

 

Just to give one quick example, it lists "masturbation of a client in the context of a massage parlour" as an illegal act of prostitution. Do you really want to be found in a place that openly offers or advertises this service?

 

To be clear, I'm not suggesting panic, I'm simply adapting to what may be ahead. Again, many of the better run businesses and indies are doing the same.

 

I hope you are correct that nothing will change and I am encouraged by the response of some local and provincial governments to the new law. Having said that, I think the logic in your third paragraph may not stand up to reality. Again, do what you are comfortable with, as will I.

 

You make the point that we don't know what local LE may or may not choose to do. The key here is we don't know how the law will be interpreted or enforced. The one thing I'm sure of is the approach taken by the Harper CONS is concerning. Personally, I'm preparing for the worst and hoping for the best.

[WealthyCowboy 5281]

My experiences with the legal system have led me to believe that the amendments to the Criminal Code the legislators drafted up as a result of political pressure do not dictate the decision to lay charges on someone who is arrested by LE. Crown prosecutors make that decision. The enforcement of this law has always, and will always, be decided by lawyers.

 

I know lawyers, many lawyers. Too many, actually. They have a mind of their own. Crown Prosecutors are no different. If it's a waste of their time, they will not pursue it. If it's a petty offence, they'll plea bargain it down to nothing. Honestly, no one cares about masturbation on a massage table... as long as the hands doing it are free of shackles.

 

Life is full of risks. You can get hit by a car walking your doggie on any given morning. Just be thankful that lawyers in the trenches are the ones running the show... and when that fails, a group of 9 SCC judges can even the playing field (which they did in the Bedford case).

 

On that note, I'll be heading out now to go to one of those massage tables.