Log in

View Full Version : Ohio Stripcubs Soon To Close?



Pages : 1 2 [3] 4 5

laplover69
07-09-2007, 05:48 PM
The CCV is challenging the wording of the "Citizens for Community Standards" interesting...
http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070709/NEWS01/707090372

laplover69
07-20-2007, 03:48 AM
Just more B.S. from the CCV

http://www.ccv.org/press_releases.aspx

http://www.statenews.org/story_page.cfm?ID=10332&year=2007&month=7

Melonie
07-20-2007, 09:46 AM
actually, the most telling information comes from a link referenced within your link ...



(snip)" 1. by a margin of 65-24%, Ohioans would ask their legislators to vote for provisions similar to those of S.B.16, the Community Defense Act;
2. by a margin of 60-27%, Ohioans support requiring sexually oriented businesses to close between midnight and 6:00am;
3. by a margin of 68-23%, Ohioans support mandating that nude or semi-nude employees avoid any physical contact with patrons.

In spite of overwhelming bi-partisan support for such regulations, as well as current case law and court decisions supporting the two regulations of S.B.16, Representative Lou Blessing (R-Cincinnati), who chairs the House Judiciary Committee to which S.B.16 has been assigned, has indicated that a substitute bill, which would significantly alter the original version, is among options under consideration.

Specifically, Chairman Blessing suggested:

(1) that any limitation on hours of operation might be removed from the bill;

(2) that any measurable distance might be eliminated and replaced with a simple no-touching rule, a solution that law enforcement officials have testified would be problematic.

S.B.16 was passed by the Senate exactly as it was presented to the Legislature by initiative petition of 220,000 Ohioans. The bill calls for midnight to 6:00am closing and a distance of six feet between nude or semi-nude employees and patrons.

Citizens for Community Values, who organized the initiative petition effort, opposes the complete removal of a measurable distance, but would support reduction to a two-foot distance requirement - a distance already supported by a decision of the 9th Circuit Federal Court. The organization also opposes removing closing hours, a regulation supported by decisions in six federal courts, including the 6th Circuit."(snip)


... so even if the bill's provisions are altered to remove the potentially appealable 6ft rule in favor of a 2ft rule, and even if the potentially appealable mandatory closing time provisions are also removed, it would appear that a wide majority of Ohio registered voters are prepared to support the bill. As such, this will be the end of contact lap dances (or at least legal ones) in Ohio !

Deogol
07-20-2007, 01:02 PM
I would take CCV's statistics with a grain of salt. Not only would I wonder about the population they took the sample from... but also the questions posed... and the interpretation of the results.

laplover69
07-20-2007, 03:53 PM
actually, the most telling information comes from a link referenced within your link ...

http://www.ccv.org/ohio_cda_poll.aspx

(snip)" 1. by a margin of 65-24%, Ohioans would ask their legislators to vote for provisions similar to those of S.B.16, the Community Defense Act;
2. by a margin of 60-27%, Ohioans support requiring sexually oriented businesses to close between midnight and 6:00am;
3. by a margin of 68-23%, Ohioans support mandating that nude or semi-nude employees avoid any physical contact with patrons.

In spite of overwhelming bi-partisan support for such regulations, as well as current case law and court decisions supporting the two regulations of S.B.16, Representative Lou Blessing (R-Cincinnati), who chairs the House Judiciary Committee to which S.B.16 has been assigned, has indicated that a substitute bill, which would significantly alter the original version, is among options under consideration.

Specifically, Chairman Blessing suggested:

(1) that any limitation on hours of operation might be removed from the bill;

(2) that any measurable distance might be eliminated and replaced with a simple no-touching rule, a solution that law enforcement officials have testified would be problematic.

S.B.16 was passed by the Senate exactly as it was presented to the Legislature by initiative petition of 220,000 Ohioans. The bill calls for midnight to 6:00am closing and a distance of six feet between nude or semi-nude employees and patrons.

Citizens for Community Values, who organized the initiative petition effort, opposes the complete removal of a measurable distance, but would support reduction to a two-foot distance requirement - a distance already supported by a decision of the 9th Circuit Federal Court. The organization also opposes removing closing hours, a regulation supported by decisions in six federal courts, including the 6th Circuit."(snip)


... so even if the bill's provisions are altered to remove the potentially appealable 6ft rule in favor of a 2ft rule, and even if the potentially appealable mandatory closing time provisions are also removed, it would appear that a wide majority of Ohio registered voters are prepared to support the bill. As such, this will be the end of contact lap dances (or at least legal ones) in Ohio !

I don't think the court systems are stacked against the clubs as much as you think Melonie. It all depends upon the courts and the clubs have a recent WIN here: http://www.gazette.net/stories/071907/busiplo150746_32356.shtml

laplover69
07-21-2007, 02:44 AM
Interesting that this judge applied the "OBSCENITY STANDARDS" for the proposed conduct rules i.e. LAP DANCING is NOT considered "obscene" in his book. However, the licensing requirement for dancers kind of hollows this mild victory for the clubs/dancers and patrons.

Melonie
07-21-2007, 04:16 AM
^^^ all I can say is that the local political views and judicial 'viewpoint' which exist in Maryland is likely to be FAR different from local political views and judicial 'viewpoint' which exist in Ohio !!! This is especially true when the federal circuit for Maryland also includes Washington DC !!!

I would also comment that the Maryland judge's peculiar choice of establishing a criterion of 'obscenity' to limit Maryland strip club dancer activities may in fact be a Phyrric Victory. Traditionally the legal definition of 'obscenity' has always been problematic - a famous supreme court judge once defined 'obscenity' as "I know it when I see it". It is arguable that local Maryland LE / judges / juries could have more of a 'field day' with obscenity based dancer busts than they could have had with dancer busts based on clear definitions of what dancer activities are and are not 'legal'. Two things are clear though, that the Maryland judge's ruling will keep lots of lawyers busy in the future, and Maryland dancers need to be setting money aside to pay them !!!

laplover69
07-22-2007, 04:36 AM
UPDATE ON THE CCV vs. CCS "CITIZENS FOR COMMUNITY STANDARDS" DEBATE. CCS HAS 100,000 SIGNATURES ALREADY & STILL NEED 140,000 MORE BY 9-3-07. LETS HELP IF WE CAN!
http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070720/NEWS01/707200361

Melonie
07-22-2007, 06:28 AM
look, I don't want to rain on anybody's parade here, BUT ...

It has been six weeks since the petition drive was started, and they have only managed to collect about 40% of the necessary signatures. These signatures were obtained from Ohio voters who were 'low hanging fruit' for the organizers i.e. strip club customers, organized liberal groups, college campuses etc. However, there are only six weeks remaining for the organizers to obtain the other 60% of required signatures in order to stop the already passed and enacted law from taking effect on September 4th. With the 'low hanging fruit' having already been 'picked', it is going to require FAR more effort and FAR more organization for the organizers to have any serious chance of gathering the remaining required signatures.

The factoid of the matter is that the majority of 'regular' Ohio voters really don't give a shit one way or the other. But many 'regular' Ohio voters will be concerned about the possible ramifications of their name appearing on a public record petition in support of strip clubs. A minority of Ohio voters likely support the bible thumpers. Thus the organizers are likely to meet with extremely little success trying to peddle their petition in suburban shopping malls if you get my drift.

About the ONLY chance they have to actually gather another 140,000 signatures is to start combing the streets in the heart of big Ohio cities, where local residents are not likely to worry about ramifications, and where local residents may wish to take advantage of an opportunity to 'stick it to the man'. But this brings on two new problems ... A. finding volunteers willing to work the inner cities, and B. proving that the signatures they gather are actually from legal residents (vs illegal aliens) who are also legally entitled to vote (vs convicted felons who are NOT entitled to vote).

IMHO this simply ain't gonna happen. The new law is going to take effect September 4th. Ohio LE is going to stage some high profile busts in order to reinforce the existance of the new law and send a message to clubowners and dancers. Perhaps more importantly these high profile busts and the subsequent publicity will send a message to some would-be Ohio strip club customers that going to strip clubs may now involve a risk for themselves as well. As a result, Ohio strip clubs that do follow the new law, and dancers working in such clubs, will gradually go broke. Also as a result, Ohio strip clubs that do not follow the new law in order to remain profitable , and the dancers working in such clubs, will face a rising tide of high contact and 'extras' expectations from customers (since the legal penalty for dancing too close to a customer will now be the same as it is for giving the customer a HJ or BJ !).

Again, my advice to Ohio dancers who are not comfortable with the idea of high contact + 'extras' + legal fees is this ..... DO NOT WAIT until September 4th to consider moving / dancing outside of Ohio. Once the negative financial effects of this new law become obvious, there will be a stampede of Ohio dancers seeking work in clubs across the PA / IN / WV / MI / KY borders, and no dancer openings to accomodate them.

Deogol
07-22-2007, 08:56 AM
Don't bother going to MI!

laplover69
07-22-2007, 01:58 PM
Don't bother going to MI!

Are the Michigan laws changing also?

Deogol
07-22-2007, 03:13 PM
Are the Michigan laws changing also?

Michigan is broke. Number 50 in jobs creation. Number 1 in job losses.

laplover69
08-06-2007, 03:03 PM
Updated info here:
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070806/NEWS01/308060036/1056/COL02

Melonie
08-06-2007, 04:06 PM
^^^ publicity stunt, pure and simple. Even if the 5,000 signatures a day claim were true, and even if the signature gathering rate could be maintained every weekday between now and the September 4th deadline, they'll still be 50,000 signatures short.

Plus the petition pushers have publicly admitted that they already have problems on previously gathered signatures ( which I assume means they signed up illegal aliens, convicted felons etc.) opening the door to stall tactics from the bible thumpers even if by some miracle they do manage to cough up the necessary 240,000 signatures.

And even if by a double miracle, this issue does get put in front of the total Ohio electorate in November's election, having this much difficulty gathering signatures from just 6% of Ohio's population provides a pretty good idea as to how the November vote results will likely come out.

If I lived in Ohio I would have already moved to a different state !!!!!

Emmy777
08-06-2007, 11:17 PM
I worked in a Toledo, OH club and have been at the same club since I started dancing (I did work in MI from time to time, in addition to Toledo). Since the pressure from the CCV, I've been concerned. This past Spring and Summer, I've asked managers and anyone whom I thought should know anything about the law what's happening. My response was "don't worry, many before like this and no effect, etc,..." Everyone is in denial. It's frustrating and scary.

Anyway, I've kept my place in Toledo since I have connections there, but I decided to be proactive instead of sitting and worrying. I looked on Craig's List, got a nice room for rent in NW Indiana, and am planning to work at a club there instead of feeling vulnerable in OH. I was hired at the club I was hoping to work, but I MISS my regulars and my home club so much! I really hope for everyone affected by the mess in OH (including me) that things get back to normal. That's my heart speaking, but facts are facts....

laplover69
08-07-2007, 04:37 AM
My thoughts are even if the CC(S) gathers enough signatures before the deadline of 9-4-07, chances are 50-50 at best for the clubs/dancers if the issue is put on the ballot. Constitutionally speaking even if the CCS gathers enough signatures and the voters choose to leave the clubs alone, it DOESN'T mean the CC(V) cannot challenge in court. Regardless of whether CC(S) DOES or doesn't gather enough signatures, there is still a chance the CCS could challenge and win this through the court system. This is not a slam dunk either way.

Melonie
08-07-2007, 09:28 AM
This past Spring and Summer, I've asked managers and anyone whom I thought should know anything about the law what's happening. My response was "don't worry, many before like this and no effect, etc,..." Everyone is in denial. It's frustrating and scary.

Well, from the point of view of the clubowners, they are actually correct. Even if this law goes into effect, and even if dancers choose to break the law in order to maintain any semblance of a reasonable earnings potential, and even if those dancers are busted, no charges will be levelled against the clubowner because club staff can plead 'honest, officer, I had no idea what was going on back there'. At worst the clubowners are out a few hundred bucks in bail money and legal fees for the club's attorney to get busted dancers released on a plea bargain.

However, from the standpoint of an Ohio dancer, the situation will be very different. Being busted for violating the new law carries the exact same legal penalties and black marks on your permanent record as being busted for prostitution. So while it is highly probable that attempts to enforce this new law will result in a 'revolving door' of dancer busts, in essence the dancers will be back to work the next night and won't have to worry about out of pocket legal fees as long as they accept the club attorney's plea bargains. Of course this also means that from a legal standpoint that the dancer is pleading guilty to a 'sex' crime, which could have serious ramifications upon retirement from dancing if the girl wants to pursue certain 'straight job' careers.

As I have also mentioned several times, this new law also creates a 'moral hazard' in that it legally equates dancing too close to a customer with giving that customer a HJ or BJ or FS. Undoubtedly some dancers will reach the obvious conclusion that if the legal penalties are the same, and if their earnings potential will be 5 times higher, they might just as well start offering HJ or BJ or FS as dance too close ! Ironically, with a 5 times higher earnings potential, girls who do decide to offer HJ or BJ or FS will be LESS likely to wind up with black marks on their permanent records after a bust, since they will be able to afford to retain a high powered attorney to represent them and also will be able to afford to file an appeals court case to overturn a local court conviction.

lildreamer316
08-08-2007, 05:58 AM
^^^^ In other words, what you are saying Melonie, is that they have effetively sacntioned brothels.

I'd laugh if it wasn't so idiotic. And sad for our fellow dancers.

Melonie
08-08-2007, 04:07 PM
^^^ no they have not sanctioned brothels. However, as has happened in lots of other cities which have enacted anti-strip club laws which equate the legal penalty for doing a contact lap dance with the legal penalty for giving a blow job, some girls are quickly going to figure out that ...

A. dancers are not able to make decent money while operating on a 100% legal basis, because customers are simply not going to pony up for air dances

B. dancers who cannot survive on the meager earnings while staying 100% legal and who are willing to bend the law to provide contact lap dances face exactly the same legal consequences if busted as girls who throw the law out the window entirely (and the state prostitution law along with it) - a sex crime related misdemeanor

C. after a dancer is busted, the ability to escape a guilty verdict from local housewives, retirees and bible thumpers is dependent on her ability to finance an appeal to a higher court. The clubowner is certainly not going to pay for this. Thus in order to file and appeal thus having a pretty good chance to avoid being found guilty on the 'opinion' of jealous housewives, straight-laced retirees and politically motivated bible thumpers, the dancer needs to pony up somewhere between $5000 and $10000 in legal fees out of her own pocket. The earnings potential derived from contact lap dances will probably not support this. However the earnings potential derived from giving HJ's, BJ's and FS will definitely cover these sort of costs. Thus in the final analysis, dancers who decide to give HJ's and BJ's stand a much lower risk of having a sex crime conviction on their record than dancers who decide to 'only' give contact lap dances.

Thus this law creates a 'moral hazard' for dancers. If they're willing to bend the law at all, there are no additional penalties but a whole lot of potential benefits by ignoring the law entirely (along with state prostitution laws). The usual result is that a handful of upscale clubs in a handful of big cities will be able to operate within the law and still attract decent money from upscale customers. This handful of clubs will be essentially bust-free. But these upscale clubs will attract the best of the best dancers from around the state as the only places that they can still earn decent money without risking a bust, making it extremely difficult for any dancer who is less than 'perfect' to get hired in one of the few upscale 'clean' clubs (since the clubowners will have 20-30-50 dancers to choose from for every available opening).

Then there will be a larger number of clubs where the clubowner and dancers decide to operate illegally to the max, earn the big bucks, and when the inevitable busts happen pay the necessary attorney's fees out of their high earnings. Some number of dancers will gravitate toward these clubs as the only source of decent earnings potential after they discover that they don't 'measure up' to get hired at the handful of upscale 'clean' clubs.

However, the largest number of clubs and dancers will find themselves caught in the middle. These clubs won't have the upscale customer base to provide acceptable dancer earnings potential while operating 100% within the law. These clubs also won't be able to retain the best of the best dancers, who will head for the handful of upscale big city clubs. Then the clubowner and/or dancers decide to bend the law slightly in order to make enough money to stay in business ... which exposes them to the same bust risk as the 'dirty' clubs, but with far less money to mount an effective legal defense when that bust finally happens. Typically these middle of the road clubs must then decide whether to stay within the law and go bankrupt or go big time 'dirty' and make lots of money between busts.

Deogol
08-08-2007, 11:22 PM
Or dancers drop the price to meet the expectations of an air dance's value.

It is getting to be a moot point regarding the viability of strip clubs anyhow. Between middle wages stagnating with costs of energy and ARMs increasing/kicking in ... the amount of people in poverty rising yearly ... thrown in with free porn on the internet ... strip clubs are going the way of the buggy whip. I have read about three or four of them closing in the past year on this site alone.

Melonie
08-09-2007, 04:47 PM
^^^ much of your position depends on your definition of the 'product' that strip clubs are selling. 'Dirty' clubs and dancers that are selling HJ's BJ's and FS are doing very well ! Super upscale clubs that attract millionaire rich and famous customers by offering playboy/penthouse quality girls as arm candy are doing better than ever ( or at least they were until the recent CDO / stock market turnaround). But the clubs between these two extremes, and the dancers that work in them, are definitely at risk of going the way of the buggy whip.

laplover69
08-13-2007, 04:55 PM
Sounds like the CC(S) has enough signatures to put this issue on the ballot...

http://www.columbusdispatch.com/dispatch/content/local_news/stories/2007/08/13/B7836758Z.1_200708131842200000.html

Melonie
08-14-2007, 02:58 AM
^^^ assuming that the signature lists survive a challenge , meaning that there are still 241,000 valid signatures left after the CCV weeds out the names of illegal aliens, convicted felons, non-residents, under 18's etc., at best this would grant a two month 'reprieve' until election day in November.

Again going back to basics, the petition drive requires that 6% of Ohio voters support the strip club position. The November election requires that 50.1% of Ohio voters support the strip club position. Based on the struggling response during the petition drive, IMHO carrying the issue on election day just ain't gonna happen - and here's a major reason why.

Up until now, this issue has pitted all of Ohio's clubowners against ONE bible thumping organization. If the petition drive is actually successful, then the issue will go state-wide in terms of publicity. Maybe the clubowners will pick up a little bit of extra support here and there. But the bible thumpers are going to pick up extra support from practically EVERY religious group in the state, plus support from local politicians running for election, plus support from police unions, teachers' unions and neighborhood groups as well.

laplover69
08-14-2007, 03:34 AM
^^^ assuming that the signature lists survive a challenge , meaning that there are still 241,000 valid signatures left after the CCV weeds out the names of illegal aliens, convicted felons, non-residents, under 18's etc., at best this would grant a two month 'reprieve' until election day in November.

Again going back to basics, the petition drive requires that 6% of Ohio voters support the strip club position. The November election requires that 50.1% of Ohio voters support the strip club position. Based on the struggling response during the petition drive, IMHO carrying the issue on election day just ain't gonna happen - and here's a major reason why.

Up until now, this issue has pitted all of Ohio's clubowners against ONE bible thumping organization. If the petition drive is actually successful, then the issue will go state-wide in terms of publicity. Maybe the clubowners will pick up a little bit of extra support here and there. But the bible thumpers are going to pick up extra support from practically EVERY religious group in the state, plus support from local politicians running for election, plus support from police unions, teachers' unions and neighborhood groups as well.

Maybe so Melonie, but there are plenty of local politicians, police union, teachers union citizens who privately & publicly believe in SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE that hold beliefs which are contrary to that of a FASCIST-BASED THEOCRACY group such as the CCV. Even if this gets on the ballot and the clubs lose at the voting booths, it still doesn't mean the clubs will ultimately lose in the courts...

Melonie
08-14-2007, 09:39 AM
^^^ hey, you don't need to sell ME on this argument. I'm not registered to vote in Ohio !

You are correct about the federal courts having the 'hammer' even if the petition drive is successful and the ballot initiative loses in November. However the federal court you're talking about is the 6th circuit ... that has issued decisions striking down minority set-asides, a decision against pharmacological abortion, a decision affirming the use of lethal injections for executing prisoners, even a decision against union member plaintiffs vs employers in state courts. This ain't California we're talking about !!!

laplover69
08-14-2007, 03:58 PM
Yes the 6th circuit is unfortunately composed of mostly Antonin Scalia & Clarence Thomas Clones. This case may ultimately end up at the US Supreme Court where the chances for the clubs winning are probably better there than at the 6th circuit. There seems to be a number issues that could be argued here such as how broad the PRIVACY implications of Lawrence vs Texas can reach? SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE issues which I know this can be debated, but clearly this issue was brought about by a FASCIST-BASED THEOCRACY group (CCV) and they in essence are imposing/dictating their unique morality onto others whom don't share their views. Then you have the "Community Standards" which in many jurisdictions leaves "obscenity" prosecution up to a LOCAL prosecutor to pursue NOT a STATEWIDE BLANKET POLICY. In one recent court case a judge APPLIED "OBSCENITY STANDARDS" TO PROTECT LAP DANCING AS A FORM OF FREE EXPRESSION. http://www.gazette.net/stories/071907/busiplo150746_32356.shtml

Finally, the often bogus irrelevant and outdated perceived "negative secondary effects" theories used by the religious right SOLELY as a guise to conform to their unique ideas of morality can usually be refuted based upon LOCAL Police runs and independent "secondary effects" experts such as Daniel Linz. If indeed there are REAL problems (secondary effects) in certain cities/areas then the government and CCV can CONSTITUTIONALLY regulate the time, place and manner of the clubs. However, I tend to believe while there maybe isolated areas of REAL "secondary effects" the vast majority of Ohio clubs have no more real "secondary effects" than that of the local convenient stores, thus the blanket STATEWIDE proposed law maybe (and should be) ruled UNCONSTITUTIONAL by many courts.

Melonie
08-14-2007, 05:13 PM
^^^ again you don't have to try and sell me. The ones that you have to sell are the Ohio club owners who must first come up with a million dollars or so in legal fees to take their appeal before the 6th circuit. When that appeal fails, the Ohio club owners must then come up with a few more million dollars or so in legal fees to take their appeal before the US supreme court. I'm betting that, compared to a multi-million dollar legal bill with no guaranteed chance of success, the Ohio clubowners will be content to let the dancers bend and break the new law and spend a few thousand on bail and fines for those dancers when they are busted.

Deogol
08-14-2007, 06:21 PM
Not to mention the Supreme Court may opt to not even review the case leaving the lower court's judgment in play. They are not obligated to take cases.

While the separation of church and state may be obvious to you -- it may not be so obvious to others. There are plenty of "dry" counties and "dry" cities regarding alcohol sales bans. This is very much like that.

laplover69
08-15-2007, 01:29 AM
True, The Supremes may refuse to hear a case and let a lower court ruling stand, but if this is put on the ballot and the clubs LOSE at the voting booths; the Ohio club owners should hire attorneys like Luke Lirot, & Paul Cambria to argue the very points I made in the above post i.e. Lawrence vs Texas implications, "Community "Obscenity" Standards", Separation of Church & State-Free expression, and debunking the often mythical, bogus and outdated perceived negative "secondary effects" garbage.

Melonie
08-15-2007, 03:51 AM
^^^ again, you are in a forum where that argument can be made for 'free'. But in order for that argument to be made 'where it counts' it is going to cost Ohio clubowners millions. I'm not challenging the validity of your argument in any way. But I AM pointing out that Ohio Clubowners are extremely unlikely to invest those millions because, even if they won, it would take many years worth of addional club profits to recoup the investment. Obviously if they lose, those millions would simply be pissed away.

With Ohio clubs we're not talking NYC or Vegas or Florida where killer amounts of tourist dollars or high roller dollars are flowing into clubs on a regular basis. We're talking about a rust belt state whose industrial base continues to shrink and whose white collar population is leaving for greener pastures.

laplover69
08-15-2007, 04:10 AM
Maybe the clubs will get some donations from some rich celebrities? Scary thing is if the clubs ultimately LOSE, this may set a PRECEDENT for other states to attempt the same or similiar laws. Maybe donations need to come in from ALL club owners in states which are especially vulnerable if this proposed law passes constitutional muster in Ohio?...

Melonie
08-15-2007, 03:38 PM
^^^ well, the donations from rich celebrities usually wind up being channeled to the ACLU ... a legal organization whose very existance is supposedly linked to supporting free speech / constitutional rights issues. However the ACLU has been conspicuously absent from all 'strip club' related court battles since the Erie vs PAPS decision was handed down by the US supreme court. One can only speculate that, like the Ohio clubowners, they know that investing resources into a 'strip club' related appeal is a very low probability bet in comparison to the expense.

laplover69
09-01-2007, 02:15 AM
Maybe the 6th circuit of appeals isn't too bad after all...?
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070831/METRO/708310360/1003

Melonie
09-01-2007, 02:44 AM
from your article ...

(snip)"Strip club lawyers say they are advising their clients not switch to nude overnight. Corey Silverstein, a Bingham Farms attorney, said Thursday he got a call from a Detroit strip club client asking if the dancers could go nude Thursday night.

He said no because he thinks the eventual injunction will be "short-lived."

"The courts have consistently upheld these bans," Silverstein said. "The state will very quickly respond."

Horvath agreed, saying the courts "are likely to uphold the nudity ban."(snip)


... this advice by the club's attorneys pretty much puts this ruling in perspective. Without reading the case it's impossible to be sure, but it certainly would appear that this court granted a specific injunction based on some legal 'flaw' in a specific anti-strip club law. The club attorney points out that, in his opinion, the court's decision will be appealed by the state of MI and reversed in short order. The trial judge also specifically stated that his ruling in favor of the injunction did NOT bring into question the rights of the state of MI to regulate public nudity, to regulate conditions for the retail sales of alcohol etc.

I would love to see further info in regard to the judge's decision re 'simulated sex acts' though. That precedent, if there really was one, could be EXTREMELY helpful in combating the most frequent and most 'damaging' sort of charges brought against dancers i.e. bogus prostitution charges

kelster
09-01-2007, 08:46 PM
That is super LAME if it were to happen. What happens to the economy when men can't get close and women make no money...

Melonie
09-01-2007, 09:15 PM
Option #1 - women stop working as exotic dancers because the check-out counter at Walmart now pays just as well, plus Walmart provides unemployment and worker's comp insurance !

Option #2 - some dancers will simply decide to bend the law by doing contact lap dances, earn what money hey can until they are busted, cop a plea, pay the fines, and go back to work.

Option #3 - since the legal penalty for doing a contact lap dance will now be exactly the same as the legal penalty for prostitution, some dancers will decide to offer serious 'extras'. This will make it virtually impossible for 'legal' dancers to earn any reasonable amount of money trying to sell non-contact lap dances. This will also make it virtually impossible for girls to sell 'illegal' full contact lap dances as well. The 'extras' girls will earn a great deal of money from HJ's, BJ's and FS. When they are busted, those extra earnings can be used to engage a high powered attorney - which ironically actually improves the chances that their charges will be dismissed vs a dancer who was not offering 'extras' but simply continued to dance too close to customers.

miabella
09-01-2007, 11:53 PM
or option 4: clubs close down and girls with not enough job skills to make money non-naked go straight to prostitution, do not pass go.

laplover69
09-03-2007, 03:18 AM
More updates here: http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2007/09/stripclub_group_could_force_a.html

Melonie
09-03-2007, 09:34 AM
If all they've managed to raise so far is $128k, this is over before it starts. A couple of bible thumper challenges and appeals in Ohio courts will wipe out their 'legal fund'. If this goes to the Ohio Supreme Court you're talking a cool million in legal fees. If this goes to Federal Court you're talking multi-million in legal fees.

When you break that down, it comes out to $100k apiece for every strip club owner in the state, plus about $500 apiece from every dancer. I'm betting that the clubowners are NOT going to pony up much more money out of their soon to be decreasing profits. I'm also betting that very few dancers are going to voluntarily contribute to this legal appeal, as they will need all the cash they can get their hands on between a decrease in business and an increase in club busts. I'm betting that the clubowners will settle for letting dancers break the law, take the club's 'cut' of dancer's earnings, and when the dancers are busted claim 'gee, officer, I had no idea what was going on back there !".

laplover69
09-10-2007, 11:56 PM
http://www.columbusdispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2007/09/09/CLASH.ART_ART_09-09-07_B1_EL7RN7Q.html?sid=101

laplover69
09-21-2007, 03:54 AM
http://www.columbusdispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2007/09/20/strip.html

laplover69
09-21-2007, 06:20 PM
Not enough valid signatures? http://www.columbusdispatch.com/live...s_lacking.html

laplover69
09-26-2007, 10:43 AM
http://www.recordpub.com/news/article/2592052

laplover69
09-27-2007, 03:02 PM
http://uweekly.com/newsmag/09-26-2007/6527

laplover69
10-04-2007, 08:04 PM
http://www.wkyc.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=75517&provider=gnews

Deogol
10-04-2007, 08:54 PM
Best people be ready to take a break in pay. This law is going to happen.

Next time the hat goes around to dancers asking to contribute, perhaps they will think about it instead of buying a new pair of shoes!

The church group probably has thousands of people contributing to their little offering pans and thousands of people willing to write letters and badger legislators.

Dancers? Most don't even vote.

Melonie
10-05-2007, 08:00 PM
^^^ agreed ... today was the 'second' deadline for petitions, and there is simply no way that 100,000+ additional 'legitimate' signatures were acquired in the last 10 days. At this point, it will take perhaps one more week for the petition motion to be officially struck down, at which point the 'stay of enforcement' on the already enacted law will be immediately lifted.

Additionally, as soon as the 'stay' is lifted, Ohio dancers can probably count on some very high profile club busts between then and the 1st week of November i.e. free publicity for local politicians just before the election. You may seriously want to take a few weeks off to avoid possible bogus legal problems. From my own very limited experience with Ohio LE, it seemed that once busted you are guilty until proven innocent.

Hey, at least Ohio dancers got 2-3 months of 'delay' on the new law going into effect as a result of the petition drive !

FBR
10-05-2007, 08:04 PM
I give Miss D money for doing nothing in the club. But I feel bad for the dancers that have to work for a living in terms of LD 's and so forth.

I don't understand how a tiny right wing religious minority are now calling the shots.

FBR

Melonie
10-05-2007, 08:10 PM
I don't understand how a tiny right wing religious minority are now calling the shots.

A. their political contributions aren't tiny
B. their 'free publicity' in local media isn't tiny
C. their potential sway over important segments of Ohio voters (i.e. churchgoers, retirees, Amish/Mennonites) isn't tiny either

laplover69
10-06-2007, 04:17 PM
http://blog.cleveland.com/wideopen/2007/10/strip_club_referendum_backers.html
http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071006/NEWS24/71006002