Topic: Christmas surveillance

[Nemesis]

Christmas surveillance on Stephen reveals:

He ran short on time to get all his presents and had to improvise.

[Nemesis]

Stephen goes out with friends and get a present from the reindeer.  Mystery lady shows up.

[Nemesis]

After going out with more friends the party started.  There were some gate crashers (at least I hope they were), how gate crashers survived is a mystery.

[Nemesis]

The party continued.  Later Stephen dressed for Christmas but the rowing had tired the reindeer so he had to substitute.

[Sirgod]

ROFL, I love it old friend.

See, now isn't this a better way to spend your time, now that the Canadian courts have legalized Prostitution!

Stephen

[Nemesis]

The courts did that long ago.  Then the legislature surrounded it with laws that defacto outlawed it again (how do you sell something without communicating?).  Over the last decade court after court has thrown out those blocks but then they held off on putting their judgement in to play to give the government time to either write new laws or appeal.  Then the appeals court did it again and again and again.  Finally the Supreme Court has repeated that cycle.  So for the next year these ruled (multiple times) unconstitutional laws are still "legal" and being enforced at least to a degree.  It really irks me that the courts are allowing people to be charged, tried, convicted and jailed over unconstitutional laws just to allow the government time to write new laws to do the same thing.  These new laws may well end up following the exact same course over the next decade while people keep going to jail for things that are not legitimate crimes under the constitution. 

I'm waiting for Harper to try passing the same laws but invoke the hated "not withstanding clause" which allows and unconstitutional law to be on the books for 5 years, at which point they just reinvoke the clause.  People have been bitching for years about Quebec doing that over their language laws. 

Harpers Conservatives are the amalgamation of the old Progressive Conservatives (who were basically a secular conservative party) which Mulrooney killed and the Reform Party which was much more tied to a religious base.  They went through multiple names after the amalgamation.  Believe it or not they briefly called themselves the Canadian Reform Alliance Party before the public and media immediately noticed what the initials spelled (C.R.A.P.).  That religious base cost them several elections before they managed to keep them quiet during the campaign.  That religious base is demanding that this be outlawed no matter the cost. 

[Sirgod]

See, I knew you where the guy to go to, about this topic, as I'm not as well versed on Canadian law (Or politics for that matter).

Still, I showed the wife the pics, and she is laughing as hard as I am. Thanks for that buddy.

Stephen

[Nemesis]

Giving you and others a chuckle or laugh was of course the whole point. 

All these laws really do is let organized crime and pimps prey on prostitutes.  When the serial killer Pickton was preying on them it was known that it was happening but the prostitutes couldn't band together or hire security because of these laws so more of them died when he might have been stopped much sooner.  If they had hired security the security would be classed as pimps under the law with penalties appropriate to it.  Just being employed by a prostitute without knowing it made you legally a pimp.  If the prostitute was paying to keep her parents in a nursing home  THEY were legally pimps as were any children she supported or room mates who she shared the rent with.

Prostitution can't be stopped.  History proves that.  All you can do is control it and keep out organized crime.  It is the same problem with drug laws.  Trying to stop them empowers criminal groups and feeds them wealth. 

[Nemesis]

Link to full article

Quote from the ruling

These appeals and the cross-appeal are not about whether prostitution should be legal or not. They are about whether the laws Parliament has enacted on how prostitution may be carried out pass constitutional muster. I conclude that they do not.

It was a panel of 9 judges 6 male 3 female and unanimous. 

The prospect that perhaps Canada might pursue a sane, grounded, and realistic approach to minimizing the dangers of sex work—both to its practitioners and its clients—seems frankly elusive, because you have to ask yourself: Do you really think Stephen Harper’s Tories are going to do that? Really? A party whose right-wing base, furious that ITS socially conservative ideals have not been upheld by its leadership, is now going to work to protect the rights of prostitutes?

From the article:  (McLachlin is the judge who wrote the ruling)

Remember that McLachlin was quite clear: the decision in Bedford does not say that prostitution itself must be legal. All it says is that while prostitution is legal, it must be regulated fairly and with respect for the rights of prostitutes. So which seems like the simpler option: undertaking the complex and difficult task of writing fair laws that will effectively regulate sex work without impeding the rights of its practitioners, or simply banning it entirely? Obviously, the latter is the easier one, especially from the point of view of a majority government with little investment or interest in upholding the rights of citizens who—let’s be honest—will never be part of its base, and whose base in fact is at least in part opposed to upholding those rights

[Nemesis]

One of the proposals is for the government to outlaw the purchase of sex.  So the prostitute could legally sell it (as has been ruled constitutional already) but the John could be arrested for buying it.  I don't think that will survive the inevitable constitutional challenge.

[Sirgod]

Nah, I don't think it would.  I recall Pickton as feeding his prey to his hogs, but I can't remember if he was arrested, or if he had died already? Seems to me, that their was some controversy over the harshest sentence at the time being 25 years? Now I'll have to look him up again.

On a side note, given my penchant for gallows Humor, I was asked by  a GM in WOW, to change the name of one of my gnome mages. her name was Gracie Budd. (Look up Albert Fish, for that sick story.)

As for prostitution , I guess, I really don't care one way or the other, outside, of I do wish the girls and boys now I suppose, had better protection. You always hear horror stories of abuse, even by those who are supposed to protect them. I saw a BBC documentary a few months ago, with this journalist going undercover in Londons asian prostitution area. It was an eye opener to the whole industry there.

Stephen

[Nemesis]

They could have hired security/drivers, worked together to do things like record images of who the other prostitutes went with and gone to the police with complaints without being arrested.  It shouldn't have taken nearly 50 women going missing to catch him.  But he preyed on prostitutes who were legally barred from most actions to protect themselves.  Now (and for a number of years) many use the internet to advertise and take bookings and charge by credit card and an address for them to go to.  They can have a driver take them there and see them enter the home/apartment.  All this makes it much easier to catch a guy like Pickton.  Only those who stayed illegal (HIV carriers for example) or didn't bother with records would be totally vulnerable to a guy like Pickton.

The maximum sentence is life without parole for 25 years.  However a criminal can be classed as a dangerous offender and never released.  If you check the link you will see that status does get periodic reviews.  Pickton should have been classified that way as a serial killer.  It is doubtful even without such classification that he will ever be granted parole.  It is most likely because the jury classed it as second degree rather than first degree murder that he avoided the dangerous offender classification.  During the trial one of the jurors was questioned over a report that she(?) had decided already that Pickton wasn't guilty of 1st degree but at most was an accomplice, it is possible that is why the 2nd degree conviction happened (the judge didn't have solid evidence to remove the juror). 

He was once charged with attempted murder of a prostitute but not tried.  The prostitute and Pickton both ended in hospital with stab wounds and the handcuffs on the prostitute were removed with a key in Picktons pocket.  But the prostitute was a junkie and the charges were dropped.  On another related accusation the police even had his consent to search the farm but didn't do so.  In that case there were accusations that he had human remains in a freezer, they didn't need to do a thorough search just look for and search freezers but couldn't be bothered.  Given his earlier charge of attempted murder they should have done so. 

[Nemesis]

One of the proposals is for the government to outlaw the purchase of sex.  So the prostitute could legally sell it (as has been ruled constitutional already) but the John could be arrested for buying it.  I don't think that will survive the inevitable constitutional challenge.

Looks like this is what they are going to do.  How they think that outlawing selling was unconstitutional but outlawing buying is not I can't figure.  The only thing that makes sense to me is if they think that it will hold up until after the next election and then they don't have to worry for another 5 years if there is a majority- just trying to avoid controversy on the run up to the next election.

There has been talk of strip joints expanding into the brothel business.  See the dancer on stage, get a lap dance then if you still like her off for sex.  Given the governments desire to find some way (any way legal or not) to keep it illegal the club owners shouldn't waste their money on this.