Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Negative Secondary Effects Case

  1. #1
    Veteran Member Jo Weldon's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Location
    New York, New York
    Posts
    348
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Negative Secondary Effects Case

    EDIT: Oops, sorry, I had two windows open when I posted this and I meant to put it in the general forum.

    When I was stripping full time (in the 1980s and 1990s), Fulton County is the county in which I did over ten thousand table dances.

    Text from the Free Speech X-Press
    http://www.freespeechcoalition.com

    'FULTON COUNTY, GA -- Fulton County is well known in First Amendment circles as the scene of an important victory in the U.S. Eleventh Circuit, in which Fulton County’s own studies failed to show the secondary effects which had formed the basis of their law. (See Flanigan's Enterprises, Inc. of Georgia v. Fulton County, Georgia in FCS’s Case Library,
    http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/c...ary.htm#case22)
    'Now Fulton County is back on stage in a similar case, this time in the Georgia Supreme Court. In May, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Marvin S. Arrington Sr. struck down -- as unconstitutional prior restraints on free speech -- the county's ordinances regulating nude-dancing establishments that serve alcohol. This time the law is being challenged by Maxim Cabaret. Somewhat amazingly, Assistant County Attorney Steven E. Rosenberg cites the same 2001 study that went down in flames at the Eleventh Circuit. but this time with a different focus. In Flanigan’s it was noted that the study showed no increase in crime at adult entertainment establishments that served alcoholic beverages over non-adult entertainment establishments that served alcoholic beverages. In fact, it was the opposite. There were greater instances of calls for service and reported crime at the non-adult bars.
    'In the present case (Fulton County v. Maxim Cabaret, No. S05A1893) the county compares crime statistics near the county's five alcohol-serving exotic dance clubs with Maxim Cabaret's predecessor, The Coronet Club, which did not serve alcohol. Rosenberg argues that alcohol-serving adult entertainment clubs are more prone to crime than similar clubs that do not serve alcohol: "The Coronet had about 4 percent of the total criminal activity," while the other five clubs "accounted for nearly 96 percent," says Rosenberg.

    'From Law.com, 11/14/05
    http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1131714655407'
    Last edited by Jo Weldon; 11-27-2005 at 10:12 AM. Reason: Wrong Forum?
    Blog:


    Burlesque classes and info:


  2. #2
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    8,031
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 143 Times in 42 Posts

    Default Re: Negative Secondary Effects Case

    I wonder how much of this is due to the strip clubs having better in-house security than regular bars?

  3. #3
    Veteran Member laplover69's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    412
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re: Negative Secondary Effects Case

    "Secondary Effects" studies are the main aresenal that groups like CCV www.ccv.org, Alliance Defense Fund www.alliancedefensefund.org, Community Defense Counsel aka Scott Bergthold http://www.communitydefense.org/ use to lobby our politicians to vote for overly restrictive legislation. Thankfully, the "secondary effects" studies that these groups use are often outdated or totally irrelevant to the area they are attempting to legislate, and the data is often misrepresented and manipulated to their cause. Missouri and Ohio are two recent states that used these religious funded groups in an attempt to legislate the SC's out of business, Missouri's law was actually signed into the books by the governor but overturned (for now) by a judge; Ohio is still trying to pass HB 23, but it was recently shot down also. "Neutral" secondary effects studies such as Ft. Wayne, In. that are positive to the SC industry are critical to this industries survival, as the religious right never will rest on issues like this.

  4. #4
    God/dess doc-catfish's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    123 Tornado Alley Way, Hooterville USA
    Posts
    6,322
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 36 Times in 30 Posts

    Default Re: Negative Secondary Effects Case

    Somewhat amazingly, Assistant County Attorney Steven E. Rosenberg cites the same 2001 study that went down in flames at the Eleventh Circuit. but this time with a different focus. In Flanigan’s it was noted that the study showed no increase in crime at adult entertainment establishments that served alcoholic beverages over non-adult entertainment establishments that served alcoholic beverages. In fact, it was the opposite. There were greater instances of calls for service and reported crime at the non-adult bars.

    This doesn't surprise me in the least. I remember reading an article in the local paper when I was a college student in Lincoln, NE and the statistics showed that the two strip bars downtown generated far fewer calls to the PD, than other drinking establishments, namely those that more likely to be frequented by the college aged kids.

    My theory behind this:

    - The average adult nightclub customer is generally older than the average non-adult nightclub customer, therefore less prone to violent behavior.
    - Strip clubs usually admit patrons in smaller groups and do not generate the kind of large crowds that other nightclubs do, there its much easier to control troublemakers.
    - Strip club patrons are overwhelmingly male, while patrons at other clubs are generally an even mix, so fights and arguments over girlfriends tend not to break out.
    - As Susan suggested, there seems to be a much greater emphasis by SC's to use security, cover charges, higher drink prices etc. to keep minors, problematic customers, and other assorted rif-raff out.
    Former SCJ now in rehab.

  5. #5
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Negative Secondary Effects Case

    Unfortunately, these days, where politically sensitive matters are concerned, 'majority opinion' seems to win out over scientifically collected evidence. Thus by the same reasoning that allowed second hand smoke's political advocates to disregard countless studies which showed no correlation in favor of a handful of studies that did show marginal correlation, the anti-strip club political advocates will likely also be allowed to disregard studies which don't support their chosen position -

    - and 'sell' new anti-strip club laws on the basis that (sic) 'the American people know that strip clubs bring a whole host of community problems', in the same way that second hand smoke laws were "sold" despite major studies which did not support the conclusion that second hand smoke has direct correlation to irreversable adverse health effects (most notably a large sample 7 country WHO study in 1998 that found no association) .

    "For example, in 1998 a Federal judge held that the EPA had acted improperly (regarding second hand smoke being classified as a carcinogen), had : "committed to a conclusion before research had begun", and had "disregarded information and made findings on selective information". The reaction of Carol Browner, (then) head of the EPA was: "We stand by our science; there's wide agreement. The American people certainly recognize that exposure to second hand smoke brings a whole host of health problems." Again, note how the claim of consensus trumps science. In this case, it isn't even a consensus of scientists that Browner evokes! It's a consensus of the American people." (source Caltech Michelin Lecture by Dr. Michael Crichton 2003)

    My point here is not to get political, nor is it to advocate the position that second hand smoke laws should be repealed, but only to point out that we shouldn't put much faith in 'scientifically conducted' strip club secondary effects studies standing in the way of the passage of anti-strip club laws which the majority of local people approve of ! Lawmakers and courts passed second hand smoke laws on the basis of a handful of (arguably erroneous) studies which drew the conclusion that advocate groups wanted, in spite of the existance of many other studies which reached a conclusion the advocate groups didn't want to hear. It's naive to think that strip club laws will be approached any differently. Just as people who attempted to raise the issue of lack of scientific corroboration on second hand smoke from 'unfriendly' studies were shouted down and disregarded as 'shills of Big Tobacco', people who attempt to raise the lack of corroboration of actual negative secondary effects from strip clubs from 'unfriendly' studies will probably be shouted down and disregarded as 'pimps, whores and criminals'. The precedent is certainly set for this to happen.
    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 11-27-2005 at 07:03 PM.

  6. #6
    Veteran Member laplover69's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    412
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re: Negative Secondary Effects Case

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie
    Unfortunately, these days, where politically sensitive matters are concerned, 'majority opinion' seems to win out over scientifically collected evidence. Thus by the same reasoning that allowed second hand smoke's political advocates to disregard countless studies which showed no correlation in favor of a handful of studies that did show marginal correlation, the anti-strip club political advocates will likely also be allowed to disregard studies which don't support their position -

    and 'sell' new anti-strip club laws on the basis that (sic) 'the American people know that strip clubs bring a whole host of community problems', in the same way that second hand smoke laws were "sold" despite major studies which did not support the conclusion that second hand smoke has direct correlation to irreversable adverse health effects (most notably a 7 country WHO study in 1998 that found no association) .

    "For example, in 1998 a Federal judge held that the EPA had acted improperly (regarding second hand smoke being classified as a carcinogen), had : "committed to a conclusion before research had begun", and had "disregarded information and made findings on selective information". The reaction of Carol Browner, (then) head of the EPA was: "We stand by our science; there's wide agreement. The American people certainly recognize that exposure to second hand smoke brings a while host of health problems." Again, note how the claim of consensus trumps science. In this case, it isn't even a consensus of scientists that Browner evokes! It's a consensus of the American people." (source Caltech Michelin Lecture by Dr. Michael Crichton 2003)

    My point here is not to get political, nor is it to advocate the position that second hand smoke laws should be repealed, but only to point out that we shouldn't put much faith in 'scientifically conducted' strip club secondary effects studies standing in the way of the passage of anti-strip club laws which the majority of local people approve of ! Lawmakers and courts passed second hand smoke laws on the basis of a handful of (arguably erroneous) studies which drew the conclusion that advocate groups wanted, in spite of the existance of many other studies which reached a conclusion the advocate groups didn't want to hear. It's naive to think that strip club laws will be approached any differently.

    True to an extent, however there are judges i.e.(most recently) Missouri, Oregon that have put the burden of PROOF back on the states or whomever i.e. CCV to show a definite cause-effect that the perceived NEGATIVE "secondary effects" are REAL not just some conjured up "bogus theories". I would like to think there are a lot more judges of this mindset that understand these issues are nothing more than misguided moral crusades from religious funded organizations that often can't be proven with updated relevant facts to the areas of concern and are usually clearly UNconstitutional.

  7. #7
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Negative Secondary Effects Case

    however there are judges i.e.(most recently) Missouri, Oregon that have put the burden of PROOF back on the states or whomever i.e. CCV to show a definite cause-effect that the perceived NEGATIVE "secondary effects" are REAL not just some conjured up "bogus theories". I would like to think there are a lot more judges of this mindset that understand these issues are nothing more than misguided moral crusades from religious funded organizations that often can't be proven with updated relevant facts to the areas of concern and are usually clearly UNconstitutional.
    I'd like to think so too. However, the second hand smoke laws are arguably UNconstitutional for the very same reasons you cite, and nobody is actively calling for a review of the underlying scientific validity justifying those laws. Thus IMHO this actually boils down to an issue of politics not law, with 'liberals' supporting the use of a few hand-picked studies to justify second hand smoke laws and 'conservatives' wanting all studies considered, But with 'conservatives' supporting the use of a few hand-picked studies to justify anti-strip club laws and 'liberals' wanting all studies considered. If this issue DOES start heading for the US supreme court, which would result in a LEGAL ruling on the selective use of case study conclusions versus evaluation of ALL study conclusions, it will then be up to the 'liberals' to judge whether the striking down of anti-strip club laws is also worth the striking down of second hand smoke laws as part of the same 'bargain'. I'm betting that when that point becomes a real possibility, the 'liberals' will walk away throwing the strip club industry to the wolves (as the ACLU has already done since Erie vs PAPS).

  8. #8
    Veteran Member laplover69's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    412
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re: Negative Secondary Effects Case

    "Liberal" Seattle, WA. recently gathered enough signatures to repeal their lap dance ban which was narrowly approved by city council 5-4. Will be interesting to see the end results of this. i think the ACLU (in general) is much more of an asset to thie SC industry than the ultra "conservative" religous right...

  9. #9
    God/dess
    Joined
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    8,031
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 143 Times in 42 Posts

    Default Re: Negative Secondary Effects Case

    Quote Originally Posted by laplover69
    i think the ACLU (in general) is much more of an asset to thie SC industry than the ultra "conservative" religous right...
    .
    .
    .
    .
    . . . uh, you think?

  10. #10
    Veteran Member laplover69's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    412
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re: Negative Secondary Effects Case

    I would agree across the board there aren't many politicians (Liberals, Conservatives, Republican or Democrat that openly support the adult entertainment industry. Privately, there are many supporters, however this dosen't make a difference when their votes are public... As far as the secondhand cigarette smoke studies compared to the negative secondary effects studies in the sc industry, there is far more documented PROOF of the effects of secondhand smoke than there is of the PERCEIVED negative effects i.e. increased violence, etc. from SC's.

Similar Threads

  1. Secondary Rhinoplasty?
    By Katrina312 in forum Body Business
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-15-2011, 01:42 PM
  2. Negative thinking
    By Jezzebelle in forum Life Support
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-20-2009, 04:53 AM
  3. Positive "Secondary Effects" Study
    By laplover69 in forum Stripping (was Stripping General)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-18-2007, 10:37 PM
  4. When They're Negative About Themselves
    By Bella21 in forum Hustle Hut
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-08-2006, 09:52 AM
  5. Negative Secondary Effects Case
    By Jo Weldon in forum Customer Conversation
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-27-2005, 10:05 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •