tuscl

Judge orders imprisonment of Brookhaven sex toy shop owner

doctorevil
Evil Lair
Wednesday, May 27, 2020 2:57 PM

13 comments

  • JAprufrock
    4 years ago
    Good. Those dens of iniquity do nothing but promote pre-marital sex and masturbation.
  • misterorange
    4 years ago
    ^^ And we all know you'll go blind from those things. Lol.
  • AlBundy1966
    4 years ago
    You'll shoot your eye out LOL
  • shadowcat
    4 years ago
    Is Pink Pony next?
  • Muddy
    4 years ago
    These stupid fucking laws
  • Jascoi
    4 years ago
    The fucking damn prudes.
  • Nidan111
    4 years ago
    “Legal extortion”. I fucking Hate Organized Crime (AKA GOVERNMENT). Pricks.
  • goldmongerATL
    3 years ago
    So the city employs a man whose job is to count dildos?? The city says this will allow further economic development. That area is mostly old, cheap apartments and run down strip malls. Why not run THEM out of town?
  • Icee Loco (asshole)
    3 years ago
    He should should just let the city rule against him then appeal it. The way the judge is phrasing it its either extortion or getting rid of perceived competition for the strip club which pays fees. He'd win the appeal.
  • Cashman1234
    3 years ago
    It’s the usual government crap. His store isn’t allowed in the area, but paying more money will make it ok. The strip club nearby is fine - as they appear to pay. Gotta love the Moscow government officials! Oh wait - it’s Atlanta?
  • san_jose_guy
    3 years ago
    "illegal to operate a “sexually oriented business” near a similar business or a residential district." This is the new generation of laws, created in the 80's, after courts had overturned the older laws in the 60's and 70's. These new laws are probably just as unconstitutional as the older ones. One way around for a strip club is a membership club. SJG
  • Icee Loco (asshole)
    3 years ago
    The laws are constitutional. The nature of the business is impacted by secondary legislation ie lewdness ordinances etc
  • san_jose_guy
    3 years ago
    No, courts already dumped an older generation of such prohibitions because they are free speech violations. These newer laws are made to look like they are different, but they are not. SJG
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion