Talleyrand. I guess my question had to do with the concept of privacy. I assume that police could not break in to a private residence and arrest Consenting adults for mutual fondling or even sex. Would this protection extend to a hotel room? So why does this protection of privacy rights not extend to a private area at a strip club?
I'm not questioning that this is a common police action. Just wondering where the legal line is drawn and how to push back on government and law enforcement incursions into private rights.
Because a strip club is a legal business establishment whereas a private residence (house, apartment, etc) is not. Police along with other forms of authorities have a legal duty to make sure businesses are following rules. For example, I don't expect a health inspector to come force itself into my apartment; but if I were, say, a restaurant owner, that's something that would be expected and mandatory. Also, if the two consenting adults in the private residence scenario were breaking the law, they may be at risk for having that privacy taken away from them.
Strip clubs are sexually oriented businesses, and sex there is illegal,
so obviously there are going to be people policing the sexual nature of the job and taking legal action if laws were broken. Just like when I was a cocktail waitress we would always have to be aware of possible sting operations ticketing us for serving minors or not checking IDs because it was a bar and alcohol was the main selling point. Occasionally that serving of alcohol would be policed and if anyone broke the laws, actions would be taken. That's what happens when you run a business, it's subject to inspection and law enforcement.
Nina, Tallyrand and others. I understand that sex between consenting adults becomes illegal according to state laws when money is explicitly exchanged for sexual services (I don't happen to agree with those laws but that's another topic). What I was asking about concerns the venue under which sexual contact occurs and the concept of privacy and individual rights. Start with the assumption that money is not being exchanged and that the adults are consenting. Under those conditions, sex (including fondling) is legal. Right? You would not expect police incursions into your home, your hotel room or your office (yep, people have trysts in their office) to issue citations for having sex or other forms of sexual contact. I also understand that you cannot legally have sex in public, like on a bus or in a public park. My question was where is the line drawn between public and private venues and where should a strip club (or a private room in the strip club) fall on this continuum?
I know that most strip clubs have few if any windows so the accidental exposure of a non-consenting public to potentially offensive strip club activities (partial or full nudity, heavens forbid) is unlikely. Presumably, anyone entering a strip club does so with the understanding that they are willing to view scantily clad performers and possibly have some physical contact (even of a non-sexual nature) with these performers. So, if a patron is sitting in a strip club and touching a dancer's arm, leg or even breast, with that dancer's consent and without the explicit exchange of money for such contact, is it appropriate for the police to issue a citation for inappropriate touching (whatever that entails) as was reported about the Toy Chest raid? By the way, my depiction of the Toy Chest raid is all second and third hand reports-- I was not there, so I can't vouch for the accuracy of the reports.
Said another way, I'd like to see some "push back" on law enforcement incursions into what should be a private and perfectly legal activity-- absent the explicit exchange of money, sex and fondling between consenting adults in a private setting (of course strip clubs may not qualify as private?) should be legal and protected from law enforcement intrusion.
Then the followup question would focus on what activities should be allowed versus prohibited when money is exchanged. It is legal to pay a person to dance for you--- some prefer ballet, others Dancing with the Stars and others strippers in a club. It is legal to pay a person to engage in services that involve physical contact-- massage therapists, physicians, but the line is drawn with contact of a sexual nature. We can all read the relevant laws but there is still lots of room for interpretation. Should a person be cited for allowing a dancer to sit on his or her lap or for touching a dancer's leg (assuming consent was obtained)-- as was reported to have occurred in the Toy Chest raid? I know that LE can do many things (including issue citations for illegal contact if a dancer is sitting on a patron's lap) but the question focuses on "should" and the potential for push back to limit incursions of LE into protected individual rights.
Sorry for the lengthy post.