Prostitution is legal in Canada, sort of, well, “more sort of than before” (lolwut) in a landmark decision by the Court of Appeal of Ontario decided that prostitutes can freely operate, but subject to a number of lawyer constructed conditions, uh, for the second time (discussed later).
Prostitutes can hire drivers, bodyguards, staff and “indoor workers” (my guess is servers, actual massage therapists, blogging lawyers who need free wi-fi connections while blogging, etc.) but pimps are not allowed. You know what I’m saying?
Further, prostitutes can’t approach potential clients and solicit sex directly, must rely on the customer coming to them (FREE SEX and 300 dollar chicken!! What? You don’t like sex?) – the article explains that the reason being that the government needs to come up with some sort of boundary to save face for a rather big social change.
The case arose when three sex workers wished to hire additional assistance for their business – they wanted bodyguards to protect them, for instance so that they wouldn’t have to operate without fear. However, Canada allowed them to operate legally as sex workers but the bodyguards would be considered in violation of the law, preventing the women from being protected from serial killers (which happened eventually).
Story is HERE.
Prostitution has been around for ages, and societies have dealt with successful ways to handle that market. Let’s face it, everything is a market and a business, the question is what’s legal and what isn’t and who gets the final say as to how that is to be.
If mainstream media is reprinting the same old hat story repeatedly, you bet it’s most likely common knowledge that if you want to get some, you go to this place, and people will pay and travel if it’s available. Thus, the best way to deal with an issue such as prostitution is probably to make it safe and workable.
As to the decision, it’s politicians in black robes writing an opinion, that’s what it is. The politicians are lawyers. The judges are lawyers. The committee members and bar associations and rules making bodies are lawyers. So, they took the political road out, not the legal – the legal way is the pretext, rather, pay attention to actions, not the words.
What’s really the hilarious thing is now there are laws where the government is figuring out ways just to take your money by “decriminalizing” things like marijuana and just charging a fine instead. If it’s bad and you made it a crime, why is it that you have to pay several hundred dollars to have it and it’s no longer a crime? Is it less bad? Is it less good? I’m not sure. It makes no sense.
Also, the Knicks really need to start playing better on the post.