Seattle voters will get a chance next year, in a special election, to vote on tighter restrictions on Strip Clubs. Here's a link to an article on the subject from the Seattle P-I. I'm of the opinion that such additional regulations on strip clubs are not only an excercise in futility for the majority of Seattle voters, but do not reflect the opinions of most of the patrons of such clubs.
First and foremost, I do not frequent strip clubs. To the best of my knowledge, most of the folks who frequent strip clubs are lonely individuals looking for a visually "stimulating" experience. I've seen strippers plying their trade, via friends' bachelor parties, but my wife is all I want or need (CNBC anchorwoman Liz Claman, though, is pretty easy on the eyes, if you know what I mean!)...
The proposed regulations to Seattle strip clubs are politically-motivated. That is, it'll be an election year for most of the City Council, and those incumbents will want to thro a bone out to the voters to garner as much support as possible (in this case, the majority of the voters in Seattle do not frequent strip clubs, and would rather not have a strip club in their neighborhood - hence, a proposal to enact increased regulations on the operation of strip clubs that would, in essence, drive such clubs out of town). If you are a Seattle voter, please keep in mind that the proposed regulations are intended soley for a political purpose, regardless of how much you may agree with them.
In defense of strip clubs (again, I don't go to them), the proposed regulations will not be enforceable on a daily basis, and they are a representation of how a large part of the voting public could feel about what a small part of that same public conducts itself. And that same small part of the public, meanwhile, conducts itself in a manner that does not injure others. Like them or not, those clubs are operating legally, and they provide a service to a small slice of the public.
And we're not talking about porn shops on 1st Avenue - we're talking about strip clubs.
The concept of going to a strip club may be a bit beyond my comprehension (I think that if one were that interested in seeing a naked woman, there are plenty of sites on the World Wide Web that would provide that for free). But the regulations proposed by the Seattle City Council directly prevent legal businesses from doing business. The City Council already has a 14-year moratorium on construction/establishment of new strip clubs in place. Legally, they can't say "no strip clubs in our city." What they're proposing is a loophole around what they can't legally do - regulations that will make operating a strip club so difficult, it will be unreasonable to continue doing business.
To use an extreme example - let's say your City Council doesn't like dogs. I mean, really doesn't like dogs. They can't legally pass ordinances prohibiting the ownership of dogs, the establishment of dog obedience training schools, or the creation of a dog-friendly park.Instead, your City Council proposes regulations on owning dogs that are so restrictive, that the average person cannot either abide by the regulations or cannot afford the fees associated with those regulations. Obedience schools and dog-training centers go out of business. What's going on in Seattle is something like that.
Bottom line - regardless of how you feel about strip clubs, that the Seattle City Council is proposing is a campaign-year, back door, way around what they can't legally do - put the kibosh on a business/service that is provided to a legally-abiding segment of the populace. Like it or leave it, strip clubs are legal under state law, and the right to have those clubs in an economically-feasable manner has just enough merit as any attempt to keep the business you work in afloat.
No comments:
Post a Comment