Which part of the first amendment is Giggles exercising? It certainly isn't the right to petition for a REDRESS of grievances. WHAMMY! Wait... why's that guy with the cane coming on to get me?
It's ridiculous to close an adult club because it's near a school. What the fuck are you so afraid of? Strippers don't perform in the street, ferchrissakes. Kids wouldn't even notice.
@7 agreed, and the sign is pretty tucked-away and non-obvious, you can barely tell it's a strip club, they don't even have the cliche silhouette of a naked lady
@7,8: Obviously they're worried because only perverts go to strip clubs, and they don't want perverts wandering around in front of schools with boners. Don't you know by now that there's no differentiating; perverts who ogle adult women also probably molest children.
@ 9 despite what they believ,e after a couple of diet cokes and a good pee a boner doesn't last very long..definitely not all the way to the school up the street.
Good to know the economy is so strong that there are so few vacancies, leading Giggles to open the only place that was available. Because if Giggles had another location, those jobs wouldn't exist. That's the rationale, right?
Staying meta for a moment, my favorite part of the P.I. story has got to be paragraph 8:
The argument that targeting strip clubs attacks the First Amendment is often used. But the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that cities and states can ban nude dancing and regulate adult-oriented businesses, but can't prohibit them from operating. Federal courts generally protect such businesses unless communities can prove "harmful secondary effects" -- increased crime, blight or diminished property values, USA Today reported.
WTF? What the hell does USA Today have to do with... ANYTHING?!?!?
"Since when are they the quotable, go-to legal authority on these matters?" me wondered out loud.
Then, out of curiousity, I googled "strip clubs & first amendment" and guess what comes up in the #2 spot? Yup, no surprises here! And paragraph two of that USA Today article from 2008:
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that cities and states can ban nude dancing and regulate adult-oriented businesses, but can't prohibit them from operating. Federal courts generally protect such businesses unless communities can prove "harmful secondary effects" — increased crime, blight or diminished property values.
Oh, P.I. staff... you're not even trying anymore are you?
The real danger to children are all the fucking guns the kids are getting their hands on. But for that problem, they do nothing, nada, zilch, zero. But a strip club down the street and they get their thongs in a bundle. What a stupid society we live in!
Maybe they shouldn't have opened up across the street from a school?
First off--that's, what, 39 more than Giggles?
Second--Jiggles is just being coy. I'm certain there's been more than 40 jobs there since they've opened...
WTF? What the hell does USA Today have to do with... ANYTHING?!?!?
"Since when are they the quotable, go-to legal authority on these matters?" me wondered out loud.
Then, out of curiousity, I googled "strip clubs & first amendment" and guess what comes up in the #2 spot? Yup, no surprises here! And paragraph two of that USA Today article from 2008:
Oh, P.I. staff... you're not even trying anymore are you?