Montrealxxxtase
Montreal Escorts

It's Official Canada has adopted Nordic Model Prostitution Law

Doc Holliday

Female body inspector
Sep 27, 2003
19,934
1,397
113
Canada
There was a very good article written by the Star's Kimberly Potter that was published yesterday:

Tories' moral stand puts prostitutes in danger.

There is no longer any doubt that the law will pass within the next few months. The Conservatives have the majority and they want to pursue their moral agenda and don't give a damn what others think.

Of course, people will get charged and i expect that their law will be struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada as soon as someone with determination challenges it.

The new law will make purchasing sex & advertising sexual services an offense, among other things. It's a total 180 of what's going on now, where purchasing sex and advertising is not illegal.

CCF told me at the GT that in Sweden, even pornography is outlawed. When i told him that people could still get it via internet if they wanted to, he told me that all the porn sites are blocked and are inaccessible even via internet. Wow!! I never thought i'd ever see porn being outlawed in Sweden, of all places!!! Anyone remember 'Swedish Erotica', which was very popular porn back in the 70's and 80's??
 

gugu

Active Member
Feb 11, 2009
1,741
18
38
Pornography is not at all illegal in Sweden, DH. He was probably using a computer that had a filter.
 

ezekiel

Member
Aug 27, 2010
452
0
16
Habs Nation!
The Liberal Party has no amendment to the bill, as he believes that even as amended, it will have no chance to pass the test of the courts.

That's so funny ...I guess we don't have to worry too much since it will be challenged...

It was taken from La Presse today since the CONservative has made an amendment that says basicly what kind of place we should find children and therefore criminalizing

sp that near those aera ..


Ez
 

The Snark

Member
Feb 24, 2005
198
10
18
The law will be challenged, but it will likely take at least a couple of years to make its way through the court system... in the meantime, you can be sure that hundreds of clients will be charged under the law. They will be left with a criminal record (it will be an indictable rather than a summary offence), so they might lose their jobs if they are members of a professional order, have trouble getting new jobs if they are unemployed, or have difficulties traveling to foreign countries. Honestly, the odds of getting arrested will be pretty low... but if you do get caught, the consequences could be severe.

BTW, the bill has been watered down slightly with respect to where solicitation might occur:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...nding-legal-discussion-areas/article19607673/

Otherwise, the proposed bill remains as stands before it was sent to committee.
 

Doc Holliday

Female body inspector
Sep 27, 2003
19,934
1,397
113
Canada
What is ironic is that i'd be willing to bet that many current johns also happen to be politicians at Parliament Hill who may also happen to be members of the Conservative Party. Such hypocrisy! :rolleyes:
 

prophetofdoom

Banned
Nov 19, 2006
177
0
0
The level of proof that would seem to be required to charge a john with a sex crime would appear to be a high bar ...
You use the term "sex crime" which as per my understanding is not appropriate here.

Sex crimes are when the someone forces someone to participate in an act of sexual nature or or otherwise is lewd to the victim without the latter's consent. The key term would be "non-consensual"

Sex crimes are serious enough to require the perpertrator to be registered as a sex offender.

Proposed C-36 as harsh as it may seem does not reach that level yet when it comes to purchasing in a consensual situation.
 

Siocnarf

New Member
Jul 30, 2011
1,796
2
0
Snuggletown
Pornography is not at all illegal in Sweden, DH. He was probably using a computer that had a filter.
Maybe he means Iceland. I know they were thinking about banning pornography there.

I am confused as to where these hundreds of arrests will come from?
They will come from the streets, same as before. Police have discretion on how they apply the law; meaning there's nothing requiring them to go and arrest all the clients. Whenever they will need to address complains in a neighborhood they will arrest some clients to drive the prostitutes somewhere else. Likewise, they will not try to stop all advertisement, but when they want to arrest someone they will use everything in the book that they can charge them with.
 

prophetofdoom

Banned
Nov 19, 2006
177
0
0
Not to forget most of C-36 offenses are already crimes under current law.

It has been mentioned by many others too that most of C-36 offenses are already crimes under current law - street solicitation, found in Bawdy house as far as Johns are concerned.. The latter is harsher than C-36 as being merely found in a bawdy house will no longer be a crime. An actual purchase will have to occur or an agreement thereof if I understand correctly.

The only new thing for Johns is purchase in private which is not illegal under current law but will become so with the adoption of C-36 in its present form.

It will be interesting to see if blanket immunity to providers does not actually increase their number.

Essentially what has happened is that all other measures having failed to reduce prostitution they are trying this one last ruse that has not been tried before.
In the next few years it will become evident that this does not work either and the norm will be regulation.

In Sweden they have had to increase the penalty to 1 year imprisonment as far as I know. I am pretty sure they have done it because their internal evaluation (without any public admission) has forced them to conclude that the measure has been ineffective.

The backlash has already started in Sweden. This measure is unpopular with the younger generation and academics.
 

anon_vlad

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2004
1,554
532
113
Visit site
Usually, when two people commit a crime together, one cannot blackmail the other without implicating her/him self.

As providing a sexual service is legal, yet purchasing it would become illegal under C-36, what would prevent a prostitute from blackmailing a rich client? If she gets enough, she can retire or relocate or restart with another alias.
 

prophetofdoom

Banned
Nov 19, 2006
177
0
0
Blackmail cannot off course be completely ruled out - but highly unlikely with Quebec girls. Also though selling sex will become legal blackmail itself will remain illegal and a much more serious crime than purchasing.
Usually, when two people commit a crime together, one cannot blackmail the other without implicating her/him self.

As providing a sexual service is legal, yet purchasing it would become illegal under C-36, what would prevent a prostitute from blackmailing a rich client? If she gets enough, she can retire or relocate or restart with another alias.
 

prophetofdoom

Banned
Nov 19, 2006
177
0
0
Prostitution prosecutions are based on solicitation, which is easy to avoid unless the john is really inexperienced and falls into a trap. So I do not agree with the predictions of many arrests, especially of Merb members.

I agree. This is especially true because the crusading element is not present here - at least until now - unlike say in Sweden. Even in Sweden, they focus on trafficking and specific complaints. Even over there it has lapsed into tolerance mode as long as something is not too egregious. Actually C-36 is much milder than the Swedish version and is actually more liberal than the current law not only with respect to the providers but also their helpers. Bookers, drivers, receptionists will suddenly find themselves on the right side of the law for the first time since the current laws were formulted in the eighties.

In this respect, the compassionate Hon. McKay was right when he characterised it as a Canadian approach rather than an imported one.
 

Siocnarf

New Member
Jul 30, 2011
1,796
2
0
Snuggletown
It's uniquely Canadian in the sense that's it's uniquely illogical. In Sweden clients are criminals but so are all third parties and brothels, including private apartments. It's bad, but at least it makes some sense. Now MacKay imports the idea of targeting demand but he can't target indoor work and third parties. He's trying to apply the Swedish model to the Bedford decision, like fitting a round peg in a square hole.
 

Siocnarf

New Member
Jul 30, 2011
1,796
2
0
Snuggletown
Bob Dechert is full of shit. In committee he says specificly that non-abusive third parties are not criminialized and here he says they are exploiters. Of course he does not mention that third parties were completely criminalized with the old laws and yet escort agencies were not usually arrested. An escort can hire a driver, a secretary, a bodyguard, etc. There is nothing stopping a group of escorts from hiring the same person for these tasks. It all hinges on what is a ''commercial enterprise'' and wether it is ''sexual'' in nature. If the agency can make the case that they are working FOR their escorts instead of the other way around they should be fine.

He also argued with a lawyer during committee (that cute little woman from Pivot) that advertisers would not be criminalized if they are not charging exploitive fees. This is hogwash, because this exception applies to material benefits only, NOT advertisement. He is clearly trying to lie as much as possible. He might convince people who know nothing but every lawyer and judge sees through his lies.
 

The Snark

Member
Feb 24, 2005
198
10
18
I am confused as to where these hundreds of arrests will come from?

Look at Sweden. Between 2008 and 2011 there were over 2,500 clients who were charged with the purchase of sexual services. (For police statistics, see http://www.polisen.se/Global/www oc...king_1998_/Trafficking_report_13_20130530.pdf).

As Siocnarf suggested, these arrests were overwhelmingly for street prostitution, but increasingly the Swedish police are looking toward surveillance of the Internet as an investigative technique. They also depend on hidden cameras, tips and wiretaps, which in one case led (ironically!) to the arrest of a prosecutor to whom they were forced to report the crime:

http://www.thelocal.se/20130226/46422

The police have also raided numerous massage parlours on the basis of tips and surveillance, a few of which turned out to be owned by a government official:

http://www.thelocal.se/20120110/38422

On the other hand, no clients have ever done jail time in Sweden, largely because judges seem to have been happy to punish customers (as opposed to traffickers) with a financial slap on the wrist. But who knows if Canadian judges will be so forgiving...
 

BookerL

Gorgeous ladies Fanatic
Apr 29, 2014
5,789
7
0
Northern emisphere
Canada's Court System wil affect Bill C-36 APPLICATION?

Hi all
Hi Reverdy
I will start by saying congrats on your quality postings and intensive research on world wide prostitution laws ,and comment of Toronto escort Agency owners that you take from the sister board you are definitely interesting to read and have good sense of law reasoning !!!
However the Canadian Court Criminal system does not operate the same way Atlantic to Pacific ,Halifax to Vancouver ,precedents in Toronto for similar crimes in Montreal are different ,Joliette to Montreal is different just imagine the rest ,Same crime in Montreal then Ottawa will not carry same sentencing .Montreal Courts and Judges are known to be much more lenient or softer then in other jurisdictions .In Canada Prostitution is not Federally investigated (ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE ) Neither federally prosecuted .Those crimes in Quebec are investigated by the blues or Greens ,City cops and QPP (Surete Du Quebec) vice Squads if its a large investigation but you can be arrested by any Patrol constable!.In Ontario city cops and OPP (Ontario Provincial Police )
Canada's Court System
http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/ccs-ajc/page3.html

and the girls reviewed on these boards and advertising there, as well as their clients, have been pretty
much left alone by the police.

As for more detailed stats regarding arrests of clients purchasing services, I discussed them before: https://merb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...ostitution-Law&p=786133&viewfull=1#post786133

How the Courts are Organized

There are basically four levels of court in Canada. First there are provincial/territorial courts, which handle the great majority of cases that come into the system. Second are the provincial/territorial superior courts. These courts deal with more serious crimes and also take appeals from provincial/territorial court judgments. On the same level, but responsible for different issues, is the Federal Court. At the next level are the provincial/territorial courts of appeal and the Federal Court of Appeal, while the highest level is occupied by the Supreme Court of Canada. (See Figure 1.)

Provincial/Territorial Courts

Each province and territory, with the exception of Nunavut, has a provincial/territorial court, and these courts hear cases involving either federal or provincial/territorial laws. (In Nunavut, there is no territorial court – matters that would normally be heard at that level are heard by the Nunavut Court of Justice, which is a superior court.) The names and divisions of these courts may vary from place to place, but their role is the same. Provincial/territorial courts deal with most criminal offences, family law matters (except divorce), young persons in conflict with the law (from 12 to 17 years old), traffic violations, provincial/territorial regulatory offences, and claims involving money, up to a certain amount (set by the jurisdiction in question). Private disputes involving limited sums of money may also be dealt with at this level in Small Claims courts. In addition, all preliminary inquiries – hearings to determine whether there is enough evidence to justify a full trial in serious criminal cases – take place before the provincial/territorial courts.

A number of courts at this level are dedicated exclusively to particular types of offences or groups of offenders. One example is the Drug Treatment Court (DTC) program, which began in Toronto in 1998, followed over several years by Vancouver, Edmonton, Regina, Winnipeg, and Ottawa. The object of the DTCs is to address the needs of non-violent offenders who are charged with criminal offences that were motivated by their addiction. Those who qualify are offered an intensive combination of judicial supervision and treatment for their dependence, drawing on a range of community support services.



Some provinces and territories (such as Ontario, Manitoba, Alberta and the Yukon) have established Domestic Violence Courts in order to improve the response of the justice system to incidents of spousal abuse by decreasing court processing time; increasing conviction rates; providing a focal point for programs and services for victims and offenders; and, in some cases, allowing for the specialization of police, Crown prosecutors and the judiciary in domestic violence matters.
Provincial/Territorial Superior Courts

Each province and territory has superior courts. These courts are known by various names, including Superior Court of Justice, Supreme Court (not to be confused with the Supreme Court of Canada), and Court of Queen's Bench. But while the names may differ, the court system is essentially the same across the country, with the exception, again, of Nunavut, where the Nunavut Court of Justice deals with both territorial and superior court matters.

The superior courts have "inherent jurisdiction," which means that they can hear cases in any area except those that are specifically limited to another level of court. The superior courts try the most serious criminal and civil cases, including divorce cases and cases that involve large amounts of money (the minimum is set by the province or territory in question).

In most provinces and territories, the superior court has special divisions, such as the family division. Some have established specialized family courts at the superior court level to deal exclusively with certain family law matters, including divorce and property claims. The superior courts also act as a court of first appeal for the underlying court system that provinces and territories maintain.

Although superior courts are administered by the provinces and territories, the judges are appointed and paid by the federal government.
Courts Of Appeal

Each province and territory has a court of appeal or appellate division that hears appeals from decisions of the superior courts and provincial/territorial courts. The number of judges on these courts may vary from one jurisdiction to another, but a court of appeal usually sits as a panel of three. The courts of appeal also hear constitutional questions that may be raised in appeals involving individuals, governments, or governmental agencies.
The Federal Courts

The Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeal are essentially superior courts with civil jurisdiction. However, since the Courts were created by an Act of Parliament, they can only deal with matters specified in federal statutes (laws). In contrast, provincial and territorial superior courts have jurisdiction in all matters except those specifically excluded by a statute.

The Federal Court is the trial-level court; appeals from it are heard by the Federal Court of Appeal. While based in Ottawa, the judges of both Courts conduct hearings across the country. The Courts’ jurisdiction includes interprovincial and federal-provincial disputes, intellectual property proceedings (e.g. copyright), citizenship appeals, Competition Act cases, and cases involving Crown corporations or departments of the Government of Canada. As well, only these Courts have jurisdiction to review decisions, orders and other administrative actions of federal boards, commissions and tribunals; these bodies may refer any question of law, jurisdiction or practice to one of the Courts at any stage of a proceeding.

For certain matters, such as maritime law, a case may be brought either before the Federal Court or Federal Court of Appeal, or before a provincial or territorial superior court. In this respect, the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal share jurisdiction with the superior courts.
Specialized Federal Courts

In order to deal more effectively with certain areas of the law, the federal government has created specialized courts, notably the Tax Court of Canada and courts that serve the Military Justice System. These courts have been created by statute and can only decide matters that fall within the jurisdiction given to them by statute.
The Tax Court of Canada

The Tax Court of Canada gives individuals and companies an opportunity to settle disagreements with the federal government on matters arising under federal tax and revenue legislation. The Tax Court of Canada primarily hears disputes between the federal government and taxpayers after the taxpayer has gone through all other options provided for by the Income Tax Act. The Tax Court is independent of the Canada Revenue Agency and all other government departments. Its headquarters are in Ottawa, and it has regional offices in Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver.



Trial by Jury

Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, individuals accused of the most serious criminal offences generally have the right to choose to be tried by a jury or by a judge alone. A jury is a group of people, chosen from the community, who assess the facts of a case after a judge explains the law to them. They then make a decision based on their assessment. Sentencing, however, is left to the judge. Trial by jury is also available in some civil litigation, but is rarely used.
The Supreme Court of Canada

The Supreme Court of Canada is the final court of appeal from all other Canadian courts. The Supreme Court has jurisdiction over disputes in all areas of the law, including constitutional law, administrative law, criminal law and civil law.

The Court consists of a Chief Justice and eight other judges, all appointed by the federal government. The Supreme Court Act requires that at least three judges must come from Quebec. Traditionally, of the other six judges, three come from Ontario, two from western Canada, and one from the Atlantic provinces. The Supreme Court sits in Ottawa for three sessions a year – winter, spring and fall.

Before a case can reach the Supreme Court of Canada, it must have used up all available appeals at other levels of court. Even then, the Court must grant permission or "leave" to appeal before it will hear the case. Leave applications are usually made in writing and reviewed by three members of the Court, who then grant or deny the request without providing reasons for the decision. Leave to appeal is not given routinely – it is granted only if the case involves a question of public importance; if it raises an important issue of law or mixed law and fact; or if the matter is, for any other reason, significant enough to be considered by the country’s Supreme Court.

In certain situations, however, the right to appeal is automatic. For instance, no leave is required in criminal cases where a judge on the panel of a court of appeal has dissented on how the law should be interpreted. Similarly, where a court of appeal has found someone guilty who had been acquitted at the original trial, that person automatically has the right to appeal to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court of Canada also plays a special role as adviser to the federal government. The government may ask the Court to consider questions on any important matter of law or fact, especially concerning interpretation of the Constitution. It may also be asked questions on the interpretation of federal or provincial/territorial legislation or the powers of Parliament or the legislatures. (Provincial and territorial courts of appeal may also be asked to hear references from their respective governments.)
New Approaches
The Nunavut Court of Justice

When the territory of Nunavut was established in 1999, a new kind of court in Canada was created as well. The Nunavut Court of Justice combines the power of the superior trial court and the territorial court so that the same judge can hear all cases that arise in the territory. In Nunavut, most of the communities are small and isolated from the capital of Iqaluit, so the court travels to them "on circuit." The circuit court includes a judge, a clerk, a court reporter, a prosecutor, and at least one defence attorney. Court workers and Crown witness coordinators might also travel with the circuit court, depending on the cases to be heard. Interpreters are hired in the communities when possible, or travel with the circuit court when necessary. In addition to holding regular sessions in Iqaluit, the court flies to most communities in Nunavut at intervals that range from six weeks to two years, depending on the number of cases.


Provincial Law
A. Jurisdiction
http://www.parl.gc.ca/content/lop/researchpublications/prb0330-e.htm
Unlike Parliament, which has jurisdiction over criminal law matters through s. 91(27) of the Constitution Act, 1867, the provinces have no direct jurisdiction in relation to the criminal law on prostitution within each province. However, some of the provincial powers laid out in s. 92 of the Constitution Act provide scope for dealing with prostitution without any need to encroach on the federal criminal jurisdiction.

Exclusive Powers of Provincial Legislatures

s. 92(13) Property and Civil Rights in the Province

(14) The Administration of Justice in the Province, including the Constitution, Maintenance, and Organization of Provincial Courts, both of Civil and of Criminal Jurisdiction, and including Procedure in Civil Matters in those Courts.

(15) The Imposition of Punishment by Fine, Penalty, or Imprisonment for enforcing any Law of the Province made in relation to any Matter coming within any of the Classes of Subjects enumerated in this Section.

(16) Generally all Matters of a merely local or private nature in the Province.

Although the provinces have no jurisdiction over the law on criminal matters, they do control the enforcement of that law. Courts also sometimes recognize a legitimate overlap between federal and provincial criminal jurisdiction, thus validating provincial legislation that deals with criminal issues in particular situations.(39) Essentially, legislation that merely regulates morality and criminal conduct may be left in provincial hands, but legislation that creates an actual prohibition akin to criminal law must fall under federal jurisdiction. The harsher the penalty becomes, the more such provincial legislation would trespass on federal jurisdiction.(40)

Provinces have attempted to tackle the prostitution question from a number of angles in recent years, most often through legislation on highways and traffic, proceeds of crime, community safety, and child protection. In the mid-1980s, however, before many such measures were implemented, some provinces also tried using injunctions to deal with prostitution.
So as you can see C-36 application may vary from Province to Province and from jurisdictions to jurisdictions
Very much so, a complicated subject for all !!!
If you are a lucky John you might tackled and shackled by a constable on Patrol a real COP !!!!:help::help::help:
Regards all
BookerL
 

Siocnarf

New Member
Jul 30, 2011
1,796
2
0
Snuggletown
But who knows if Canadian judges will be so forgiving...
It could really depend on the judge. But after Bedford, this law is a slap in the face at the justice system. I don't think many judges will be enthusiast about applying that law. Harper wants to show the judges who is boss, but two can play at that game.
 

gugu

Active Member
Feb 11, 2009
1,741
18
38
Some preliminary thoughts.

1 C-36 provides sex workers with increased legal safety conditions. They will be safer from the police, a major threat for them since they are allowed to deprive them of their liberties, to get them into prisons. No more blanket prohibition for bawdy houses. That’s a major improvement. No more blanket prohibition of third parties, another improvement because legit people will more easily accept contracts with sex workers. And, of course, arrests for solicitation will fall.

2 C-36 is basically a market intervention. It wants to depress the demand. If I were against prostitution, I would think that this is the most efficient way to go. It’s very cheap, except maybe for prosecution costs. The York chief of police made a fool of himself in front of the Justice Committee when he was unable to tell how this laws will help his organization to do it’s job. It doesn’t. It’s a law introducing a fear factor in sexual services markets’ demand.

3 C-36 will have little effect on police operations in the three major cities. We would need additional resources for that to happen. As a general principal, police resource allocation is determined by the analysis of crime in the area deserved. It will take more than a morality law to convince them to reallocate resources their actual resources.

4 C-36 will have very unequal enforcement in the other cities across the country. I am scared that those already applying harsher repression will be comforted in their position and encouraged to get even worst.

5 No one can predict the global effect this law will have on the demand and how it will be distributed among the different markets. If demand decreases, it will obviously hurt some, if not all, sex workers. The side issues of this are predictable: a decrease of prices and more competition, if not a reel tension builds up, between the providers. That’s is not conducive to security improvements. It’s hard to say if the negatives here will cancel the improvement noticed in 1.

6 Without additional resources for LE, it boils down to how the fear factor will play on the demand. Each and every john will be forced to reassess his tolerance to risks in regards with the harsh consequences he will now be facing. The problem is that he has no good tools to assess the risks. Johns face virtually no risk of getting caught for a prostitution offense unless he trolls the streets. Of course there will be no significant new risk of getting caught but for him, the only real proof with time. By reading the papers and finding ways to get informed (I predict merb readership will increase).

7 Johns may also fear the use Internet surveillance. I know little about Internet security issues, but I think the general public, me included, is concerned with it. That’s a new factor.

8 There is also the big issue of the massage parlours, now a huge sex service market. IMHO, this is the most fragile demand, people going in a business that has a municipal permit. No one is protected by that, of course, but the sector operates in the day light and most people feel safe in theses places. So now they’ll turn the ears to the cities who don’t get a clue about what to do with the parlours.

9 Now, of course, demand for sex services does not come out of rational calculations. It persists under deadlier conditions (syphilis in the 19th, AIDS when it arrived in the 80s). But it’s probably affected by those calculations.

10 My general impression is that every sector will suffer quite equally. Some may think street prostitution will suffer most. It will because the drop in revenue is more difficult for them to support. But I don’t expect a larger drop in demand there then anywhere else. After all, any street client may be arrested presently.


The impact of this law will be on the sex workers revenue. How long it will last after the initial electroshock is hard to predict.
 

Siocnarf

New Member
Jul 30, 2011
1,796
2
0
Snuggletown
Good analysis gugu. However I would add that it’s not completely true that workers will be safe from the police. They are still involved in an illegal activity and they can be harassed at will by the police and their possessions can be seized as evidence. They are safe from getting prosecuted, but in practice the police can still really mess up their life if they choose.

Here is my own analysis on why I think it won’t affect demand/supply much. Sex is a very strong human need in everyone (almost). It is not like alcohol or cigarette that many people can easily live without. Policing of prostitution is difficult an inefficient. Making it marginally more difficult to access will not decrease its popularity. Prohibition of prostitution makes people more careful, but does not diminish the interest of those who like it. Good clients will be willing to move slightly upmarket for a more reliable provider. Street hookers will be left with even more of the bad dates.

It will not change how ''men thinks about women''. Most sex-for-money that goes on is very visible and is not socially considered to be ''prostitution''. Everyone can see that rich and famous men have plenty of young mistresses, sugar babies and trophy wives. Less fortunate men see that and also want the same. They know they cannot afford a full-time mistress, so it creates the demand for more affordable hourly arrangements. Most people never see a real prostitute, but they see them in movies, fiction and porn. Making the real activity less visible does not make the existence of prostitution less visible. These media will not go away and they also reinforce the interest of potential clients.

When you ban alcohol, all production and import is stopped. Supplies go down dramatically and it takes skill and resources to produce some supplies in secret. Sex itself is not illegal and is not regulated. Anyone can easily ''produce'' sex legally so the supply of sex is never limiting. When it is exchanged for money it is easy to hide or disguise, except for streetwalkers. People who don't have any other good job prospect will always create a supply and this will in turn reinforce the demand. The fact that they are less criminalized than before might even convince a few more women to do it. I think it's only a fraction of men who feel comfortable buying sex from strangers, so decriminalization would not increase demand by much either.
 

Siocnarf

New Member
Jul 30, 2011
1,796
2
0
Snuggletown
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts