The Facade of Anti Strip Club laws & perceived negative "secondary effects"

You're right about Democrats as well as Republicans enacting strict laws. Detroit, which is ruled by Democrats, has passed very restrictive strip club laws. Politicians and civic groups blame strip clubs for crime and drugs, as though Detroit wouldn't have crime and drugs without strip clubs, and ignore the positive economic effect of the clubs. The only good thing is that the Detroit laws are not being enforced yet.

In Dallas a few years ago, an ordinance was proposed requiring strip clubs to collect a $5 entry fee to be turned over to the city to fund a rape crisis / womens' shelter. It wasn't because they wanted to build a facility, and needed a source of funds. It was only because some moralists wanted to legislate that strip clubs produce rape.

In Houston, the anti strip club law was written by a female democrat. The law is being ignored as the fuzz are concentrating on gambling raids (which they make money on) and concentrating on hotels for trafficking (good press).

With residential property values still in a free fall, it's easy to convince voters that a strip club is a threat to their homes. The Erie case decided by SCOTUS, written by Rehnquist, started the ball rolling and nothing is going to stop it with elected officials, including judges, fearful of losing their jobs. The unfortunate and unpredictable shooting incidents in and around strip clubs certainly don't help. Sadly, the morality issues are just a cover for certain people to get elected so they can run their hidden agenda--whatever that may be. Dancers have told me about giving lappers to the same people who get up on TV and condemn clubs, only to sneak in during the afternoons for some action. If you believe that politicians are hypocrites, nothing reveals it more than the battle over strip clubs. They know that the clubs are an easy target and bashing them gets votes without having to discuss real issues. And so it goes.

you hit the most important part of this: that people have to draw a line somewhere so the people who want to legislate morality and "save" us who don't hold their beliefs know their "help" is not wanted nor is their interference in our lives appreciated.

Excellent post, this is getting ridiculous what is being thrown at this business. I'll say this much, I have grown to like places where no smoking is allowed, but having it so the dancer is 6' away from me, I might as well stay home and watch HBO.

Yet, what are most of us to do, it's not like we are going to stand up in a public display and show this because right now there are too many of them that see no problem taking photos and deciding they will start attacking you directly.

I hope I don't see the day when my favorites aren't there any longer, but the industry appears to be trying to destruct on it's own. They should all ban together.

i believe that Kansas got a little reprieve- the president of the senate held off on the bill so as to not unemploy 2,000. Hope that stays for a few more decades!

Good to hear Kansas got a reprieve...for now

Hadn't heard that but very good news if it sticks. Funny how they think that strip clubs, where at least there is some attempt to limit sexual activity, is worse than a situation where the girls and guys go around the law, potentially putting both in much greater danger and likely leading to more out and out prostitution.

From The Pitch KC alternative paper 3/16 blog:

Kansas' Arizona-style immigration bill dies a swift death, but Lance Kinzer has the defibrillators out.

Why important? Lance Kinzer also into'd the KS anti-stripper law modelled after MO's which, so far, is tied down in senate committee.

Another setback for the b*****d.

Here's a link:

blogs.pitch.com

Lance Kinzer -- the Olathe REPUBLICAN....IMAGINE THAT. MATT BARTLE-(R) WAS THE MAIN PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR MISSOURI'S STATE WIDE LAW...

I'd advise those watching the Kansas ebb and flow on this to not jump to any conclusions one way or another yet. The legislative session is in a full sprint to about April 2 and then they will have nearly a full month off and then they will come back for what they call the "veto session". Sometimes they even reserve a day or two after that for any loose ends. Until the legislature finishes completely for the year, I wouldn't think this thing has run its course yet.

As long as there is the ability to demagogue on this issue, they will. And if there is only a day or two left in this session, it can surface once again. Kinzer is probably one of the hardest-headed (note I did not say stupidest) members they have. He does not know the meaning of beating a dead horse. Just because the Senate majority leader says that they have placed it on the back burner does not mean it is dead. It can be used right now for negotiating on several other issues ("log-rolling" or any trade-offs). There are other tricks left, including dropping the House bill into a dormant Senate bill shell then rushing into a conference committee with 3 friendly senators and trying to jam it through both houses quickly, often late at night or the wee hours of the morning.

www.forbes.com

Drive stalls in Kan. to restrict adult businesses

Associated Press, 03.17.11, 05:55 PM EDT

TOPEKA, Kan. -- A push in the Kansas Legislature to impose new restrictions on strip clubs and other sexually oriented businesses stalled Thursday because a Senate committee wants to leave the job to cities and counties.

The Federal and State Affairs Committee voted against advancing the proposed Community Defense Act to the full Senate for debate. The panel's voice vote didn't kill the bill, but it remains stuck, despite strong support for the measure in the House, which approved it last week.

The legislation would limit the hours and location of adult businesses, ban total nudity inside them and impose a "no touch" rule for employees and customers. But strip clubs and adult cabarets still would be allowed to serve alcohol, a key concession to club owners meant to ease its way to passage.

As the bill's title implies, supporters argue they're protecting communities from crime, blight and other problems linked to adult businesses, especially in clusters. But senators said cities and counties should impose regulations that work best for them, rather than having the state impose one set of rules.

"Local governments are capable of doing that," said Sen. Tim Owens, an Overland Park Republican who served on his hometown's city council for two decades. "Every different local area may be in a different situation. You have some very small communities where one of these places would impact them a lot differently than in a metropolitan area."

Supporters argue the bill is necessary because small communities often don't have the resources to fight adult businesses if their owners are willing to challenge restrictions or adverse zoning decisions in court. Backers have presented information from numerous studies linking adult businesses to problems, some dating back decades.

Related Stories

Reader Comments

You and a pretty redhead are tucked away in a corner table at that impossible-to-get-in​to new French bistro. she's laughing at your jokes, twirling her hair, and giving other crystal-clear signs she'....

Post a Comment

Phillip Cosby, executive director of the Kansas City-area office of the National Coalition for the Protection of Children and Families, questioned whether the committee could adequately review those studies as it squeezed its hearing, discussion and a vote into little more than an hour.

"They waded through 40 years of evidence of negative effects and made a subjective call," said Cosby, also a retired Army master sergeant from Overland Park. "I can't imagine how they could have weighed that with intellectual honesty in such a short amount of time."

Cosby said he and other supporters will look for ways to get around the committee's resistance. Senate rules allow its members to pull a bill out of a committee over its objections, but such a move requires 24 of 40 votes, rather than a simple majority of 21. Supporters also could try to amend the bill's provisions into other legislation as well.

The bill's restrictions would apply not only to strip clubs, adult cabarets, book and video stores, shops that sell sex toys and adult arcades, but also to non-academic semi-nude modeling studios and "sexual encounter centers," defined as business that allow patrons of the opposite sex to wrestle or tumble together semi-nude.

The measure would require adult businesses to remain closed from midnight to 6 a.m. and prohibit new businesses within 1,000 feet of the property line of existing similar businesses or any school, library, day care center or house of worship. Semi-nude dancers at clubs would have to keep at least 6 feet away from their customers.

"The whole concept is to close them," said John Samples, the owner of two Topeka-area clubs. "They can talk whatever they want - but that's the reality."

Samples said if clubs go out of businesses, employees who are trying to provide for their families will be forced into seeking social services from the state. He also said his clubs are a safer environment for his workers than bars because of the security measures he uses.

Owens also questioned the studies on problems associated with such businesses, saying they're from other states. Committee Chairman Pete Brungardt, a Salina Republican, called the link "speculation, adding the legislation infringes on the personal liberties of business owners and people who want to patronize their clubs and stores.

"This group came down on the notion that local communities can fend for themselves in this area," Brungardt said.

Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

@ SamPepys, The term "MODERATE REPUBLICAN" is a paradox when you have the FAR RIGHT WING RELIGIOUS RIGHT GOP on one extreme (MATT BARTLE (R) MISSOURI, LANCE KINZER (R) KANSAS and the TEA PARTY LIBERTARIAN GOP on the other extreme. Fortunately, there are some "MODERATES" left in the GOP, but they are often vilified as RINO'S (REPUBLICAN IN NAME ONLY) if they don't meet the "PURITY LITMUS TESTS" from either the religious right or Tea Party GOP extremists who are attempting to eliminate the "MODERATES" from the party.... Many Tea Party & religious right candidates are running against the MODERATES of their own party...

A good example of a MODERATE REPUBLICAN is Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels who is vilified by the extremist Tea Party GOP for his endorsement of Richard Lugar because he isn't "CONSERVATIVE" enough according to their rigid litmus test, and also despised by the Religious Right GOP for his call for a "truce" on social issues.... Unfortunately politicians like Daniels & Lugar maybe dying breeds in either party. They get MY VOTES though...

Let's not confuse the Tea Party types with real Libertarians, OK? The TP types love that sort of comparison, but it's usually completely inaccurate.

Tea Party GOP is certainly more "Libertarian" minded on social/morality issues like our topic of discussion than is the Religious right GOP.... They are polar opposites on most social/moral issues... One for LESS REGULATION on social/moral issues, and the religious right GOP who typically are for MORE STRICT REGULATIONS of strip clubs, etc...

Why can't we have a party that is socially liberal and economically conservative? Let people live their lives the way they want (as long as everyone is consenting and over 18). Let business run themselves the way they wish, the free market will usually set most things right. How many of our countries resources are used up trying to protect citizens from themselves? Let darwinism do its thing! If someone wants to run their life into the ground, FINE! There are plenty of us out here who can have some fun and not ruin ourselves with sex, drugs and rock-n-roll!

As for the moralists out there who want to tell the rest of us the "right" way to live our lives, how about you fuck off! Put yourselves in someone elses shoes! How would you like it if a muslim majority took over and told you that what your are doing in your life is a sin and should be illegal!?

@Prom0, Couldn't agree more... I would vote for any socially LIBERAL & economically moderate-conservative... Too bad neither party fully endorses this although there are some from each party that do... See you are from NO-OHIO, are they enforcing the STATEWIDE NO TOUCH LAW that was initiated by the far right wing Republican group CCV ??

Guess I'll be votin' for ya^all, I was recently moaning about the Kansas's anti-freedom bill to some staffers at a club, & while i call me a conservative GOP, am also definately socially liberal! Considered contacting my reps, but since am from a small town-----whimped out:(! Sorry 'bout that. ...can't think what CCV is?

CCV= "Citizens For Community Values", the main right wing group in OHIO or NO-OHIO responsible for pressuring Politicians into PASSING a STATEWIDE NO TOUCH LAW.... If you have the stomach for viewing their website it's www.ccv.org

Here is pretty much the LAW in OHIO that has been in place for a few years now mainly because of the CCV...kinda scary to me....

www.ccv.org

Community Defense Act

Friday, August 8, 2008 was, indeed, a very significant day for the families of Ohio.

It was on that day that a long-awaited decision came down from the office of Judge Solomon Oliver, Jr. of the U.S. District Court of Northern Ohio: Ohio Revised Code 2907.40 – the Community Defense Act (CDA) – had been confirmed to be constitutional and enforceable. The request of Ohio’s sex business owners to secure a “preliminary injunction” to prevent CDA from being enforced had been unequivocally denied.

Click to read the Federal Court’s Decision and the Community Defense Act as passed by the Ohio General Assembly.

Click here to read Ohio Attorney General’s office has a model ordinance regulating and prohibiting criminal conduct in Sexually Oriented Businesses

Columbus Dispatch gets it!

Senate Bill 16 History: The Community Defense Act

How We Got Here

Prior to the passage of HB 23 in 2006, the 1,308 townships in Ohio had very little authority to address the problems associated with sexually oriented businesses (SOBs) within their jurisdiction. The House-passed version of HB 23 on a vote of 92-5 not only included home rule authority for townships, but also statewide standards for all SOBs regarding their hours of operation and the distance required between employees and patrons. The Senate-passed version of HB 23 removed the statewide standards, and was eventually accepted by the House and signed by Governor Taft.

The Initiative Process

Numerous studies identifying the negative secondary effects of this industry point to a compelling state interest for these two statewide standards: hours of operation and no physical contact. Therefore, in response to a voter-initiated petition by more than 220,000 Ohio citizens, the General Assembly took up a bill entitled the “Community Defense Act” (CDA) on January 2, 2007 in accordance with constitutional guidelines for such. The Senate passed SB 16 by a bi-partisan vote of 24-8; the House passed SB 16 by a bi-partisan vote of 73-24. The effective date of SB16 is scheduled for September 4.

The Why and What of SB 16

CDA places two regulations on all sexually oriented businesses, thereby establishing a uniform minimum industry standard in Ohio law to address the problems associated with SOBs. Numerous government studies (available upon request) have chronicled these problems, which include the following:

* Increased crime, especially, but not limited to, those sexual in nature;
* Decreased property values, both residential and commercial; and
* Urban blight, the general downgrading of the surrounding areas.

The U.S. Supreme Court, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and other federal courts have consistently upheld the rights of governments to implement the two regulations of this proposed legislation:

1. No physical contact

Employees who regularly appear nude or semi-nude and while in such a state would be restricted from having physical contact with patrons. Violation of this provision is either a fourth-degree or a first-degree misdemeanor, depending upon the location of the prohibited contact.

The prohibition of touching between patrons and nude or seminude employees serves to prevent various crimes such as the exchange of money for prostitution or drug transactions. Courts have recognized that governments may reasonably find that separation requirements serve the interest of reducing these secondary problems of adult establishments. Court cases upholding various no-touch rules include:

* “While on the premises, no performer or adult cabaret dancers shall have physical contact with a patron and no patron shall have physical contact with a performer or adult cabaret dancer, which physical contact involves the touching of the clothed or unclothed genitals, pubic area, buttocks, cleft of the buttocks, perineum, anal region, or female breast with any part of any other person’s body either before or after any live entertainment by such performer or adult cabaret dancer.” Gammoh v. City of La Habra, 395 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2005)
* “No employee who regularly appears within view of patrons in a semi-nude condition in a sexually oriented business shall knowingly or intentionally touch a patron or the clothing of a patron in a sexually oriented business.” Sensations, Inc. v. City of Grand Rapids, 2006 WL 2504388 (W.D. Mich. 2006) (Order Denying Preliminary Injunction); R. 73, entered 10/23/2006 (Opinion Granting Motions to Dismiss)
* “[T]hat entertainers maintain a minimum distance of five feet from areas on the establishment’s premises being occupied by customers, for a minimum of one hour after the entertainer appears semi-nude on the establishment’s premises.” 729, Inc. v. Kenton County, 2006 WL 2842884 (E.D. Ky. 2006)”No dancer shall fondle or caress any patron and no patron shall fondle or caress any dancer.”  Kev, Inc. v. Kitsap County, 793 F.2d 1053 (9th Cir. 1986). The law also prohibited direct-tipping, stating, “No patron shall directly pay or give any gratuity to any dancer [and] no dancer shall solicit any pay or gratuity from any patron.”
* “It shall be a violation of this chapter for an employee who regularly appears in a state of semi-nudity in an adult entertainment establishment, to knowingly or intentionally touch a customer or the clothing of a customer while on the premises of the establishment.” Fantasyland, Inc. v. County of San Diego, 373 F. Supp. 2d 1094 (S.D. Cal. 2005)

2. Hours of Operation

Sexually oriented businesses would be required to remain closed between the hours of 12:00 midnight and 6:00 am, with the exception of those holding a liquor permit, which may remain open until the hour specified in their permit, but may not offer nude entertainment between the hours of 12:00 midnight and 6:00 am. Violation of this provision is a first-degree misdemeanor.

Federal Courts have consistently found that “access to adult establishments was not unduly restricted” by legislation that required adult businesses to close at midnight – see Richland Bookmart I, 137 F.3d at 441 – upholding the closing law because adult businesses could still be open many hours during the week, thereby passing First Amendment muster. Other cases upholding such regulations include:

* Déjà Vu of Cincinnati, LLC v. Union Twp. Bd. of Trustees, 411 F.3d 777 (6th Cir. 2005), cert. denied (2006), 546 U.S. 1089 – closed 12:00am to 12:00pm, no Sundays
* Richland Bookmart, Inc. v. Nichols, 278 F.3d 570 (6th Cir. 2002), petition for cert. filed, 71 U.S.L.W. 3001 (June 11, 2002)(No. 01-18) – closed 12:00am to 8:00am, no Sundays or legal holidays
* Mitchell v. Commission on Adult Entertainment Establishments, 10 F.3d 123 (3rd Cir. 1993) – closed 10:00pm to 10:00am, no Sundays or state holidays
* Ctr. For Fair Pub. Policy v. Maricopa County, 336 F.3d 1153, 1159 (9th Cir. 2003) – closed 1:00am to 8:00am, Mon-Sat, 1:00am to 12:00pm on Sundays

3. Local control maintained; Attorney General assistance provided

Beyond these statewide standards for SOBs, local governments have the right to enact their own zoning and licensing regulations that may be broader and/or more strict than the state law. SB 16 provides for direct assistance in drafting and defending local regulations. Further, if the law is challenged and found unconstitutional, the local government is indemnified for damages and the AG is held accountable.

Further case law supporting SOB regulation

Noteworthy cases include (copies available upon request):

* City of Erie v. Pap’s AM 529 US 277 (2000)
* City of Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc. 475 US 41 (1986)
* Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc. 501 US 560 (1991)
* Bamon Corp. v. City of Dayton 923 F.2d 470 (6th Cir. 1991)

Ohio is not alone

Several states already have various statewide regulations to regulate SOBs, including Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Regulations worth noting exist in the following states:

* Delaware:  Hours of operation limited to 10:00am–10:00pm, Mon-Sat, no Sundays or state holidays
* Arizona:  Hours of operation limited to 8:00am–1:00am, Mon-Sat, 12:00noon-1:00am Sundays
* Tennessee:  No full nudity allowed on premises, 6ft distance required between performers and patrons, employees must be licensed, no direct tipping or touching allowed.
* Other states: Nearly a dozen states have some type of zoning rules which require SOBs to be X feet from protected properties like homes, schools, etc., while numerous states prohibit the typical lapdance under “lewdness” laws. Indiana, Iowa, and Tennessee ban nudity, while Pennsylvania requires peep booths to be open to prevent anonymous sexual encounters inside or in between adjoining booths.

Thanks, scary stuff.

Jeesh, that crap is disturbing. So the stripper handshake is out, but a dancer can't even hand you your jacket, only a bouncer could? A girl dances on stage but cannot solicit tips and a customer cannot directly give tips. So I guess you can put it in a mayonnaise jar and hand it to another dancer to give to her? The physical contact is not specified as intentional or not, so I guess accidental touching by your elbow with a dancer's sexual part is an offense. The one case talks about no contact before or after any live performance, so maybe during is okay?

The current lewdness laws should cover it--making sure that two freaky consensual people don't do a hot blowjob in the town square is probably a good idea. But if two people are getting busy in a club and nobody else in the club minds, where's the harm? Nope, we have to take it a step further and make sure that no one anywhere is engaging in this behavior. Is it time for the Taliban to decree that only married missionary man-on-woman sex in a dark, enclosed room only a Saturday night and only for the purposes of procreation is acceptable?

From what I read & hear from my friends in NO-OHIO, the LAW is pretty "loosely enforced" in liberal Cleveland, but "strictly enforced" in the Cincinnati area where the far right wing "conservative" group CCV originates... Anyone from Missouri care to comment on their statewide law and areas/degrees of enforcement? WHAT A WASTE OF TAXPAYERS $$!!

The club I work at - which is located in a very Democratic area of town - has been operating under constant threat to be shut down. Of course, it also has a reputation. That being said, the neighborhood hates us, and they want us out. Apparently we devalue their property and morality.

LAkitten, I assume your from California and the club you work at is there also...? Don't know what your unique situation is but as a "whole" liberal California ha some of the least restrictive laws for strip clubs on the books. San Diego is one exception to this...

From the Kansas Wichita Eagle

www.kansas.com

@beaverbandit69 - I'm in W. LA. The laws are very restrictive, just no one abides by them. Plus I find the "no alcohol in a nude club" scenario absurd. The Pony and Cheetah in ATL is the way to run a club IMO (as an observer from a dancer's perspective).

FYI, THE MAIN ATTORNEY RESPONSIBLE FOR REGULATING & LEGISLATING CLUBS OUT OF BUSINESS NATIONWIDE IS SCOTT BERGTHOLD www.adultbusinesslaw.com www.strengthenthefamily.net

NEEDLESS TO SAY HE IS AFFILIATED WITH SEVERAL FAR RIGHT WING ULTRA CONSERVATIVE GROUPS

THIS GUY MAKES HIS LIVING DUPING CITIES AND STATES INTO BELIEVING HIS OFTEN "BOGUS NEGATIVE SECONDARY EFFECTS" STUDIES AT THE EXPENSE OF TAXPAYERS... HE WINS SOME AND LOSES SOME, BUT IT'S A DISTURBING TREND REGARDLESS....