Printable View
okay, I looked at eczema pictures it is not that for sure. I need to look at other pictures. Also why couldn't it be from the crack, I have heard it before, or is that a excuse these gals are feeding me. Anyone able to clarify this about crack causing this?
DAmn there are some nasty SW's in Iowa. How could you get hard after looking at that ass?
Be careful....that is a bad case of HSV-2...you get it, you have it for life. Plus a good warning sign of HIV possablility as well...careful dude.
Play safe stay safe,
TH
[QUOTE=Qcmastermonger]okay, I looked at eczema pictures it is not that for sure. I need to look at other pictures. Also why couldn't it be from the crack, I have heard it before, or is that a excuse these gals are feeding me. Anyone able to clarify this about crack causing this?[/QUOTE]
Crack use depresses the immune system also. And as a former slave to that little demon, I can tell you for sure. I still believe it is probably one of those two over the other. I have lived with psoriasis and ecxema, also, since I was just a kid. The primary breakout points are anywhere that the skin has folds, such as behind the ears, the crack of the ass, the areas where the genetalia meet the top of the legs, also in addition to the folds, the scalp, the elbows, the knees and the cheeks of the ass. Alot of the breakouts are caused by clothes constantly rubbing on the skin, laundry detergents, drug use, scratching with the nails, etc. This stuff is definitely one of the above in my book. But, it's not worth debating. The thing is, almost all of these references are indicative of (once again, that same thing) a suppressed immune system. Need any more be said?
#1) Excema
#2) Psoriasis (breakouts can be dime sized to frisbee sized)
#3) Mild case of HSV2-female
#4) Severe case of HSV2-female
Thats a dam shame cause shortie looked like she had a nice phat ass... Just a dam shame... Im a doggie style expert and after seeing that I would have charged that shit to the game and not even delt with her.
This pic is what your tongue would look like. be careful even if they look clean they can make your tongue and mout look like this., cool huh dudes.
later
bubba
[QUOTE=Big Bubba]This pic is what your tongue would look like. be careful even if they look clean they can make your tongue and mout look like this., cool huh dudes.
later
bubba[/QUOTE]
Glad I only took a bbbjcim, still nervous when that was that close to me.
thx
[QUOTE=Stormrider]Crack use depresses the immune system also. And as a former slave to that little demon, I can tell you for sure. I still believe it is probably one of those two over the other. I have lived with psoriasis and ecxema, also, since I was just a kid. The primary breakout points are anywhere that the skin has folds, such as behind the ears, the crack of the ass, the areas where the genetalia meet the top of the legs, also in addition to the folds, the scalp, the elbows, the knees and the cheeks of the ass. Alot of the breakouts are caused by clothes constantly rubbing on the skin, laundry detergents, drug use, scratching with the nails, etc. This stuff is definitely one of the above in my book. But, it's not worth debating. The thing is, almost all of these references are indicative of (once again, that same thing) a suppressed immune system. Need any more be said?[/QUOTE]
thanks good response
STD's have been around since before humans were fucking. Think about it. If I'm a germ and I want to pass to another, what better way than where two individuals come together. When humans evolved, STDs came along from our ancestors.
STDs suck but they aint the end of the world. A large percentage of the populations carries them. It's unfortunate, but if you get one or if you got one, you shouldn't feel like you need to live in shame or that your life is over. Even if you get HIV. I know, nobody wants that, but there are drugs and, shit, in this life, you've got to die of something anyway.
Do what you need to do to protect yourself but please stop posting those disgustings pics. I presume we're all fairly 'professional' or we wouldn't be here. The risk comes with the territory.
[QUOTE=Qcmastermonger]thanks good response[/QUOTE]
like I told you in the private message, if all you had was a BJ you really do not have to worry about HIV. Other stuff, maybe, but not likely HIV. When dealing with a SW, just like you treat a gun, you should always assume it is loaded.
New York is doing a new HIV study where they are basically testing all individuals who go to the emergency rooms. What they have found so far is basically shattering the CDC's estimation that between 900,000-1 million people in the US are infected with HIV. Based on this study, they have been absolutely horrified by the number of people who had no idea they were infected, that are indeed infected. If the rate held the same across the US as it is in this NY study, over 7 million nationwide would be infected!
Also, there were studies done by LE across the US, in states where prostitutes that get arrested are required to test for HIV. Overall about 10% were testing +, but what they do not tell in these figures is that when they broke down those numbers into finer categories, the numbers were shocking. Those prostitutes arrested on the streets for solicitation tested + at over 33%!!! Those with either heroin and or crack cocaine addictions tested at about 45%.
So the point being here, is that if you having sex with street walkers, who do crack, or heroin, there is going to be about a 50% chance she is +. Go to a brothel, or AMP and that percentage is far, far less. Probably below 1%. This why they make condoms people! Use them, or die! It's really that simple!
[QUOTE=GettingTang]like I told you in the private message, if all you had was a BJ you really do not have to worry about HIV. Other stuff, maybe, but not likely HIV. When dealing with a SW, just like you treat a gun, you should always assume it is loaded.
New York is doing a new HIV study where they are basically testing all individuals who go to the emergency rooms. What they have found so far is basically shattering the CDC's estimation that between 900,000-1 million people in the US are infected with HIV. Based on this study, they have been absolutely horrified by the number of people who had no idea they were infected, that are indeed infected. If the rate held the same across the US as it is in this NY study, over 7 million nationwide would be infected!
Also, there were studies done by LE across the US, in states where prostitutes that get arrested are required to test for HIV. Overall about 10% were testing +, but what they do not tell in these figures is that when they broke down those numbers into finer categories, the numbers were shocking. Those prostitutes arrested on the streets for solicitation tested + at over 33%!!! Those with either heroin and or crack cocaine addictions tested at about 45%.
So the point being here, is that if you having sex with street walkers, who do crack, or heroin, there is going to be about a 50% chance she is +. Go to a brothel, or AMP and that percentage is far, far less. Probably below 1%. This why they make condoms people! Use them, or die! It's really that simple![/QUOTE]My feeling is that these people who are + are not using condoms or are sharing needles. In my belief, if using a condom and it does not break, you will not be infected. Unless if you have a cut on your finger perhaps and you finger her vagina but that's a long shot and pretty unlikely.
Clarify what leslie looks like for me, and any other facts, doing a little research if she goes under another name?
[QUOTE=Mister Quick]Was in QC last night. Tried calling Leslie, who I had seen last trip to town before I left home. It was going directly to voice mail. Got to town and did a quick pass through the cruise area. No one out. Tried Leslie's phone again, still no answer.
Found Danielle who I had also seen last time, across the street from the Kraft Factory. She remembered me and we went to my hotel and had some fun. She looked a bit rougher than I recalled. But was still fun to be with. Since the first time I saw her she had mentioned I was only the 5th guys she had had sex with asked her what the count was now. She acted really depressed and siad she had stopped counting. She still had no contact info although she said she wrote down my phone number after I gave it to her but she did not know where the paper went.
Had hoped to get lucky tonite and do a multi day report. Just learned wont be staying in area tonite and have to get back to home office this afternoon. At least got the boss to spring for hotel room last night so I could be here bright and early in the AM and not have to wake up before the sun.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Qcmastermonger]Clarify what leslie looks like for me, and any other facts, doing a little research if she goes under another name?[/QUOTE]
From what I recall, blonde, late 20's, smells like cigarettes, above average height, not petite or crackhead thin, but not heavyset either. Pleasant enough personality for me to try and call her for a repeat visit. No luck there.
Saw another new CL girl in the QC. Has an Illinois phone number but also indicates she will be out of town until November. Do not see the point of putting the ad up now.
OK, I've had that urge all day, & it's not going away. Now I'm on a mission. Since I don't do SW, I called several numbers from a provider site I foolishly put my money into. ALL numbers are not in service. I only called 4 of them, but still. What a rip-off.
Can anyone on here hook me up with some contact info (in PM), for a tried & trusted QC lady? I like them thin & non-black. That's why the QC area CL is no good to me. lol Any help would be appreciated........
Hey Captain,
Best bet is either the QC Times classifieds or the phone book under Escorts. These listings have been in business for many years and are probably your safest bet. Used a provider in the phone book a couple of times and have been very satisfied. It's been several years ago, but I'm sure they're all still in business. Good Luck, Stiffy
Thanks for the help. Didn't end up with anything last night. I might go for Sugar's this weekend, some time. The newspaper & phone book idea just scares me. I'm afraid I'll order THIS [url]http://www.famous-people-search.com/jessica_biel/jessica_biel_pictures/jessica_biel_007.jpg[/url]
and THIS will show up..... [url]http://www.heather-friends.com/images/crack07.jpg[/url] :)
Hey,
That Angel is ringing my phone off the hook looking for money, I gave that number out to one of you guys. Give him that number. Park next to the shricker and if you don't like it when it comes out drive away. You will like it, I promise.
stiff and stink share that number with each other and the pm's I sent.
[QUOTE=Mister Quick]From what I recall, blonde, late 20's, smells like cigarettes, above average height, not petite or crackhead thin, but not heavyset either. Pleasant enough personality for me to try and call her for a repeat visit. No luck there.[/QUOTE]
ohh I haven't got to that one yet, does she mind well?
[QUOTE=Qcmastermonger]ohh I haven't got to that one yet, does she mind well?[/QUOTE]
Not sure what you mean by "mind"? I had my fun with her in my car so we were both a bit rushed. I think she would be more fun if had a better setting.
Sorry man, but you never gave me any numbers. I think I asked once, but never got a reply from you.
And that's a cool name. Maybe Captain Stiffy and I should take it on the road. The "Stiff and Stink Show". Give mongering lessons to the newbe's.
In the paper tonight, there is an ad for Island Spa & Oriental Massage. Right by the QC airport. (Moline) I have never heard of it. Any news would be appreciated. Is this new?? The ad was right by an ad for a local strip joint, so I'm sure it's the right kind of place.
Been there twice. in the last couple months. had an the same older lady each time. 3.5 jacksons for 40 min. decent massage I guess nothing special. decent finish both times for 2 more jacksons. will probably repeat and try to catch someone else.
[QUOTE=Mr Stinky]Sorry man, but you never gave me any numbers. I think I asked once, but never got a reply from you.
And that's a cool name. Maybe Captain Stiffy and I should take it on the road. The "Stiff and Stink Show". Give mongering lessons to the newbe's.[/QUOTE]
okay details sent to you in pm
[QUOTE=Gdarb]Been there twice. in the last couple months. had an the same older lady each time. 3.5 jacksons for 40 min. decent massage I guess nothing special. decent finish both times for 2 more jacksons. will probably repeat and try to catch someone else.[/QUOTE]Good luck, I had the same thought and have been there probably a dozen times or so over the last couple of months. Always the same lady, Penny. Good, but nothing that will make you get up in the middle of the night and put an entry in your diary. A lot like the Garden Spa was in Port Byron. I'm afraid that a 10 finger release is the best you are gonna get.
Well, shit. I really wanna try it, but until I get a FS report, I'll wait. :(
Anything new going on? This is Patty, don't use her she drags the teeth. I felt sorry for her so I picked her up for a forced feeding. Wait till Aamco sees this, I am going to catch some crap from him on this Ivory dragging old bag I know it:)
[QUOTE=Qcmastermonger]Anything new going on? This is Patty, don't use her she drags the teeth. I felt sorry for her so I picked her up for a forced feeding. Wait till Aamco sees this, I am going to catch some crap from him on this Ivory dragging old bag I know it:)[/QUOTE]
Pic 78) Hell yea, look at those pretty eyes. The unblurred face pic is a bonus too. She is sucking the hell out of your dick judging from the way her mouth is caving in.
Pic 79) This pic shows total concentration on her part. Again, look at that suction power. I just love a woman that will spit and slobber all over a dick. She is truly a professional cocksucker.
Pics 80 & 81) Wow!! You met her five minutes ago and you’re shoving your dick down her throat. I like the way you're holding her head down on your dick. Apparently she is OK with you force feeding her cock. Another bonus.
Another job well done. No complaints here Qcmastermonger. Looks to me like Patty is doing a fine job. All this for SW prices. What a bargain. She deserves a second chance to keep her teeth off your dick.
From today's paper:
Jeff Cook/QUAD-CITY TIMES The owners of Sugar’s in downtown Davenport were supposed to meet Thursday with city officials in an effort to stay in business. Instead, the matter will be decided in Scott County District Court.
Sugar’s heads to court By Tory Brecht | Friday, November 03, 2006
For the third time in as many months, a hearing on revoking the business license of Sugar’s Exotic Dancers has been postponed.
Now, the legal battle over whether the adult business in downtown Davenport knowingly allowed prostitution on its premises will be decided in Scott County District Court.
“We’re just looking at proceeding in a different direction at this point in time, which we believe may be a more efficient way of resolving the issue in the long term,” city Corporation Counsel Mary Thee said Thursday.
The club was ordered closed Aug. 18 after two women were charged with prostitution as a result of an undercover investigation at the property, 1037 W. 3rd St. A Davenport statute allows businesses that are ordered closed to appeal to a hearing officer, typically the city administrator or a designee. In the Sugar’s case, Deputy City Clerk Jackie Holecek was designated to issue a ruling.
John Moeller, who is representing Sugar’s owner Dorothy Sampson and building owner Dale Labath, has continually claimed that Davenport’s hearing system is unconstitutional.
“They’re asking a city employee to make decisions about her boss,” he said. “The city administrator signed this order. To ask the city clerk to make a decision contrary to her boss’s is not reasonable. That was my complaint to the city.”
Thee said that since it was clear Moeller would appeal a negative decision to district court anyway, the decision was made to shift the entire process there.
That left some business owners who wish to see Sugar’s closed feeling perplexed. Sue Simms, who owns AVS Inc., an audio-visual rental business across the street, questioned why the city did not go directly to district court after the first scheduled hearing was postponed Sept. 22.
“I was under the impression this place was going to be closed a long time ago,” she said. “It seems like they’ve been able to find a way around these issues. I think there are many people who have legitimate business in this area and our voices don’t seem to be heard. It’s a little discouraging.”
Carol Morris, operations manager of Kryger Glass, 1036 W. 3rd St., said the prostitution and other crime issues in the near west-side business district are much deeper than what happens inside the club.
“It seems to me that the prostitution is coming from other apartment buildings and businesses down here,” she said. “The streetwalkers are the ones propositioning our employees. It seems like Sugar’s does a pretty good job of keeping people away. I don’t see anything outside. As far as a neighbor goes, they’re a pretty good neighbor.”
Thee noted that the state laws Sugar’s is being accused of violating — being a public nuisance and allowing a house of prostitution — have different punitive outcomes than city statutes. The city was attempting to revoke Sugar’s business license permanently and prohibit Labath from operating a similar club on the same site for five years.
If Sugar’s is found guilty in district court, the likely outcome is a restraining order to stop business activities. Initially, that order probably would be temporary, Thee said.
Moeller said he welcomes the chance to defend his clients in a courtroom rather than City Hall.
“It gives me the opportunity to subpoena witnesses and documents and prepare a defense,” he said. “That’s something I’m comfortable with, and I think it’s consistent with constitutional requirements. A judge is not employed by the city. Most people want an independent moderator. A judge is trained in the law.”
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the views of the Quad-City Times or Lee Enterprises.
Dubsak in Jax wrote on November 03, 2006 4:38 AM:"Hey look man give them abreak Hoes need money too. If they aren't on the street flaggin folks down and are inside leave'em alone. This place has been around for a while. If someone wants to purchase a slash massage then so be it . Its there business I just want a discount next time I come into town. For the positive blog."
Sugar is an icon wrote on November 03, 2006 6:26 AM:"If they shut down Sugar's, where else are our high schoolers to solicit strippers for parties? Where else are our street people to congregate and loiter? Fight the power, Sugar's. You are a downtown Davenport icon."
Mr. B wrote on November 03, 2006 6:26 AM:"Why can't you leave those poor girls alone? They're not on unemployment. They're working hard. And I know of several of Davenport's finest who would be deeply saddened that their favorite place would be shut down! "
Applecore wrote on November 03, 2006 6:52 AM:"Ever driven thru downtown Davenport? I don't feel closing Sugar's solves teh problem. At any given time, 4-5 "working girls" can be observed in this area. It is blatantly obvious, no one even attempts to hide it. If Davenport police don't care enough about cleaning up something in plain sight, why does teh city council care about something behind closed doors? "
another legal setback wrote on November 03, 2006 7:18 AM:"What good is the city legal department? They never get anything right, it is as if they know nothing about the law at all. Our city needs someone who can give dependable legal advise. Our council is messed up enough without also receiving poor legal advise. Look at the advise on the Malin issue, now this. Save Davenport the money, hire the legal department, then Malin, the the aldermen at large. Maybe then we can put more policemen on the job and stop the street walkers."
Tainted Rose wrote on November 03, 2006 7:48 AM:"One more reason down town Davenport looks so sleazy!!!!!!!"
Bill wrote on November 03, 2006 7:56 AM:"I got some sugar at sugars once... it was pretty nasty!"
Make it legal. wrote on November 03, 2006 8:25 AM:"If prostitution were made legal, they had to go through screenings for their health and they were taxed on their earnings then maybe things would get better.
Chas Carr wrote on November 03, 2006 8:34 AM:"I first heard about this place from the newspaper articles. I should go there before they close it down, it sounds like a fun place. I would not have known about it until you started doing articles about it. Good job getting the word out."
Solution Dude wrote on November 03, 2006 8:34 AM:"I find it interesting that the city has all of a sudden 'discovered' this problem. Sugars has been well known for doing this type of business and city hall would just look the other way. Why is it suddenly a problem now? "
"Hello wrote on November 03, 2006 8:52 AM:" Everybody in the QCA knows sugars was a brothel ($50 a visit) why just now doing something?"
Sugar's should build a drive-thru wrote on November 03, 2006 8:53 AM:"And nice headline Times, we get that they are "head"-ed to court.
Arnie] wrote on November 03, 2006 9:07 AM:"Figures John Moeller would champion their cause since he defends all the dopeheads and lowlifes. How about the residents just burn it down and tar and feather their lawyer?"
Good Thing wrote on November 03, 2006 9:07 AM:"This place needs to be shut down. this place is nothing but trouble."
Scott wrote on November 03, 2006 9:44 AM:"It's a shame prostitution is illegal to begin with. These people do no harm, what two consenting adults do between each other which does no harm to anyone is none of my business. This should be sanctioned by the state for health concerns and bring in some money for local businesses."
Chuck wrote on November 03, 2006 9:48 AM:"The people against Sugars are narrow-minded and acting holier-than-thou. This business has been in existence quite a while, and does not cause trouble. If you're not interested in what's offered there, don't go in. It's as simple as that. The employees of Sugars are not dragging people inside off the street. The people that patronize Sugars do so willingly. How about if Davenport concentrates on the real and violent crime that goes on in this city? It seems to me that with all the shootings in this city, about the last thing you should worry about is the dancers at Sugars."
Pathetic wrote on November 03, 2006 10:03 AM:"Everytime I go downtown past Sugars,I have yet to see anyone hanging around outside the place.Go a little farther down and all you see are crackheads,drugdealers and hoes.Clean the streets up first instead of what goes on behind closed doors.What they need to do is tear down half of downtown and start over.Turn it into the District like Rock Island."
nun ya bizness wrote on November 03, 2006 10:11 AM:"now frankly speaking ..... while all yall talking do you really think ya husband or ya wife dont go in there and get the nob done... I get so sick of these people who think that there better halfs dont patronize SUGARS ... i know a couple other spots that go to get the jack and hammer ... trust me you would be surprised at who like hoes....better than there own wifes and the wifes that like hoes better than there own husbands... make you think about this one here...."
Davenporter says.. wrote on November 03, 2006 10:14 AM:"I don't think it is the officers that don't care but that prositiution is not a priority. If you have questions, ask an officer or buy a scanner to find out what the propblens are in this city. We are fighting with an increase of hoodlums due to the fact the the council does not back their employees and bends to special interset group such as the QCRPA. Rental units make up approx one third of this cities housing. How easy do you think it is for a thug from Chicago to move in here? I'm here to tell you that its too easy. No background checks, no landlord accountability, just show them the money and your in. These thugs move from house to house then to hotels and motels such as the Excel Inn on 65th Street. How do you stop it? With this council, who knows. Maybe a call out for Superman. "
Jerry wrote on November 03, 2006 10:26 AM:"Waiting for the Bible thumpers to weigh in, especially since the head of the Evangelical organization just got nailed for using a male protitute. "
Holly wrote on November 03, 2006 10:34 AM:"You have got to be kidding me! Don't confuse these poor girls, working hard, working girls with someone like me who works at a job for 10 hours a day for 5 days a week and barely makes enough to put food on the table. And all of you using the word hoe - what are you doing, gardening? How ignorant. Davenport must be proud."
Old School wrote on November 03, 2006 10:39 AM:"Move Sugars to the sixth ward. Then you would see how fast Davenport legal department would act."
prostitution vs. pan handling wrote on November 03, 2006 10:48 AM:" I think that if you can stand on the Interstate Exits and beg for money then prostitution should be legal. At least the prostitutes work for their money."
Realist Says wrote on November 03, 2006 10:50 AM:"The Police have always participated in the regulating of prostitution and drugs. They rewarded for their work. Every once in a while someone does not pay up or the police have to put on a show for the complainers, and we get situations like this. Dont worry, there will always be prostitution and drugs in Davenport."
To Old School wrote on November 03, 2006 11:03 AM:"Isn't Tuxedo's in the sixth ward. I'm not sure where the 6th ward is but I know its not too far from 53rd and that seems to be the sticking point with west enders and other who think the North/east side gets all the attention. Is it the strip club or the prositution. "
Patriot wrote on November 03, 2006 11:04 AM:"You know what they say: Oldest profession in the world! Cant have the bad without knowing the good!"
Hey Holly wrote on November 03, 2006 11:15 AM:"Last Friday night I had dinner downtown (for those of you who will ask why I was down there). Driving past, I saw one of the "poor girls" coming out of that shack at 9 pm with three little kids: a boy appx 9 years old and two girls appx 4 and 7 years old. Nice mom to let their KIDS in there to see that and to let the patrons see her little girls. "
To prostitution vs. pan handling wrote on November 03, 2006 11:32 AM:"'Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.'"
Old School wrote on November 03, 2006 11:58 AM:"Tuxedos if I recall is in the 5th ward, very close to the sixth ward but if drugs and if prostitution activity were going on there it would be stopped. And yes it is a sticking point with me. The half way house isn’t close to the sixth ward, the proposed low income apartments they tried build on Fairmount and Hickory Grove Road isn’t close to the sixth ward. Does anyone see a pattern here? Obviously that kind of activity and proposed development would not be tolerated by the three sixth ward alderman and the mayor. To them, it’s ok to keep this kind of development and circumstances in the west end and downtown because they don’t have to deal with it."
to: Holly wrote on November 03, 2006 12:29 PM:"They are worried that their girlfriends will lose their jobs.Have to supplrment their income!"
Remember, Folks wrote on November 03, 2006 12:37 PM:"If you don't enjoy the sight of the building, you damn well won't like the sight of prostitutes on the streets if Sugar's closes."
none ya wrote on November 03, 2006 1:05 PM:"I'm a legal working girl in Vegas and people wonder why vegas have lots of money because they legalized prositution girls have to get checked for HIV once a month and once a week for s.t.ds I think it should be legal up here to then i wouldnt have to travel all the way to NV!!!This goes out to all the girls that work hard at sugars to servive ,to take care of there kids ,and family the gov. should be happy there not on walfare getting gov funds!!"
All Ya wrote on November 03, 2006 1:22 PM:"Hey "none ya". Prostitution is not legal in any Nevada county with a population over 100,000. Las Vegas is in Clark County and has a population over 100,000. At least try to lie better."
Paul wrote on November 03, 2006 1:28 PM:"Leave the folks at Sugars alone. Force the friggin' Davenport cops to make a real bust; maybe they can shake down the kid stealing the day-old-weenie at 7-11. Big tough guys."
Close it down wrote on November 03, 2006 1:33 PM:"That place should have been closed down a long time ago. Yea they arent out there right now but in the summer time those girls are sitting out on the stoop in barely nothing. I drive down third to get to work every morning and even at 7:45 in the morning there are girls sitting out there basically naked like they slept there all night and came out for their morning smoke. Buses full of little elementary kids are driving down by there and here these nasty a$$ girls are sitting out there not even dressed. I understand that there are people on the street who do it as well but to be honest with you when I am driving down the street with my kids in the car I dont think I have ever had one of my kids question it. Yet when we drive down third and they are sitting and standing out there half naked it raises questions in the mind of kids especially with the flashy lights and balloons they sometimes have out there. I just dont get how someone can let more people run in and out of them then the mall doors do. Get it out of here!"
John Moeller wrote on November 03, 2006 1:47 PM:"It would seem if Scott County and The Davenport Police deptment can't solve this problem then the citizens of Davenport should contact their Governor and have the BCI sent in an undercover agent to find the truth of the issue. This story reeks of "Screw you Scott county and Davenport, and on the other side a reluctance to solve the problem for the rest of the property owners in the area and Davenport's reputation.""
Carly wrote on November 03, 2006 2:29 PM:"Hey None Ya - maybe you should use that travel time to school instead of Vegas, get an education (learn how to spell), and get a real job like most of us intelligent women. Like they say - if you think education is expensive, try ignorance. And if you think we believe for one second they are not getting government assistance, you are crazy!!!! "
Anyone else? wrote on November 03, 2006 2:32 PM:"...think None Ya should take some of her $ and hit UNLV for a college degree of some sort? Wow. I really hope you don't have any kids, none ya. "
to Carly wrote on November 03, 2006 2:36 PM:"Hey Carly - you speaking from experience? How else would you know that they are getting government assistance unless you are one of them?"
Go Sugar's Go wrote on November 03, 2006 2:57 PM:"It's so funny how so much attention is on Sugar's. Hellooo...does anyone say anything about what is going on in Adult books stores or novelty shops? Prostitution and drugs is going on all over in the Quad Cities. It doesn't matter if you shut them down it will be available some place else. Leave it open and let people patronize in a building vs. a car or alley. Geesh people live a little. Nothing wrong with them fine ladies working hard for them $$$$'s. Do they pay sales tax on that??? :)"
To: to Carly wrote on November 03, 2006 2:59 PM:"Unfortunately, I have no experience in the stripping profession or welfare area. What a shame.... sure would look good on my resume. "
to: Close it down wrote on November 03, 2006 3:27 PM:"It's a good thing more upstanding, holier then thou citizens of Davenport like you, don't drive by the city swimming pools. Those girls laying out there almost naked. What’s really bad is we allow our children to be in the same proximity as these scantily clad young ladies. What is this world coming to. The next thing you know they will be having sex during the life guards pool check. "
Jim Bob wrote on November 03, 2006 3:54 PM:"Leave Sugars alone. This is a business, inside the building, between consenting adults. No matter how you view it, if there was not people seeking their services the business would not be there. Let these girls earn their money. And keep more people happy. I have visited Sugars and I can tell you that you do get your money's worth. Actually it was cheaper than wining and dining and a movie plus it was a sure thing. "
West High Dad wrote on November 03, 2006 4:35 PM:"Jim Bob you running for election on Tuesday?"
I only have a minute, so I don't have time to look the info up online, but there was another Davenport stroll sting last night. It was on last night's news. Got about 15 people. Said they're gonna keep on hitting it hard, until the girls & drug dealers are gone. I'm surprised nobody's posted the details yet.
Be careful!
This was in the paper today. The city governmnet appears to have lots of extra money for their legal department. Never saw anything about the sting imentoned in the previous report in the paper.
City sues to close Sugar's by Tory Brecht Quad City Times November 22, 2006
The City of Davenport legal department filed suit Tuesday in Scott County District Court to shut down Sugar’s Exotic Dancers, alleging that the adult business is a house of prostitution.
Previously, the city had threatened to revoke the downtown strip club’s business license, but the legal staff decided to seek closure based on violations of Iowa state code.
Brian Heyer, the city attorney handling the case, said a hearing has been scheduled Dec. 5 in Scott County District Court where the city will ask a judge to shut down Sugar’s until the lawsuit is resolved.
The suit details several searches of the business at 1037 W. 3rd St. Some searches were conducted by undercover Davenport police officers, and one was conducted by undercover agents from the Iowa Lottery Commission.
According to the suit, two commission agents were “solicited for sex acts as defined by Iowa law at the price of $150 and $120, respectively.”
A search warrant executed by Davenport officers “recovered several used condoms from the garbage cans in the rooms located within the business. The used condoms were discovered throughout the business.”
The club was ordered closed Aug. 18, after two employees were charged with prostitution as a result of the investigations. Since then, two city hearings on the matter have been postponed.
John Moeller, the attorney representing Sugar’s owner Dorothy Sampson and Dale Labath, who owns the building where the club operates, has called the city’s hearing process unconstitutional.
In 2005, Moeller successfully challenged a previous city attempt to revoke the business license. In that case, District Judge John Nahra ruled the city ordinance was “overboard and invests unfettered discretion in the office of the mayor.”
Since then, the ordinance has been revised and the city legal staff has decided to cite a state statute to make their case.
If the lawsuit is successful, Sampson would be forced out of the premises and permanently restrained from opening another adult business in the city. In addition, Labath would have to close the business and leave the building vacant for one year.
“After that year, he’d have to find a tenant or sell it,” Heyer said.
The city would then move forward with the business license revocation, he added.
Did the stroll after my regular turned out to be a no show.A lot of mongers out most were very obvious.One girl was out and she was busted very quickly at the covienance store.The undercover girls were two blondes walking together. The vehicle they were using was a late 80's Chevy S 10 ext cab with wire wheels I think it was blue.This was all between the hours of 9 and 11:30 pm.It was dead dead dead!Thought about going into sugars but figured it would be a big waste of time.I imagine its not the same as it used to be.
Anybody know anything about an older broad names Brenda who does massage and other things out of her apartment? Got a number and rates, but I'm a little skeptical about the service.
Looks like they will be staying open but with a lot less fun. There were articles by two different reporters in the QC Times. Both are here.
Sugar's stays open, but faces restrictions By Tory Brecht | Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Sugar’s Exotic Dancers in downtown Davenport can stay open, for now.
But the strip club’s female entertainers will no longer be allowed to perform behind closed doors.
District Court Judge James Kelley issued a temporary injunction Tuesday against the owners of Sugar’s, ordering them to not permit prostitution to occur on the premises, allow closed-door dances, allow patrons to be nude or in a state of semi-nudity or allow any adult entertainer to perform in any place that cannot be observed by the club manager’s station.
Sugar’s was brought into court by the City of Davenport’s legal department, which is seeking a nuisance abatement that would shut down the business. The temporary injunction was a first step, said city corporate counsel Mary Thee. According to the city’s suit, undercover police officers and Iowa Lottery Commission members documented prostitution at Sugar’s during several sting operations over the past year.
“I think this will accomplish what the neighbors and the City Council desire at this time,” Thee said of the injunction. “It will seriously interfere with any illegal activities going on there.”
She said the hearing on the permanent abatement request has not yet been scheduled.
If the city’s lawsuit is successful, club operator Dorothy Sampson would be forced out of the premises and permanently restrained from opening another adult business in the city. In addition, building owner Dale Labath would have to close the business and leave the building vacant for one year.
Judge: No more closed-door dances at Sugar's By Brian Krans
Everything will be in the open at Sugar's Exotic Dancers after a judge's ruling Tuesday prevented any dancing behind closed doors at the club, which the city calls a front for prostitution.
That means the club's "one-to-one" dancing, where a patron chooses a girl and a specific dance and goes behind closed doors, is now forbidden. The injunction bars any entertainer to perform behind closed doors or out of the eyesight of the manager's station.
District Court Judge James Kelley placed the temporary injunction on the owners of Sugar's, preventing the business from leasing the building 1037 W. 3rd St. for the purpose of prostitution. His order came after an in-chambers hearing earlier Tuesday morning.
Brian Heyer, assistant Davenport city attorney, filed for the injunction in November alleging that Sugar's was a house for prostitution. The lawsuit was against owners Dorothy J. Sampson and Dale A. Labath.
None of the parties involved returned calls for comment Tuesday.
The lawsuit filed by the city stemmed from the arrest of two Silvis sisters in May. The women, Amber "Hope" Griffin, 29, and Stephanie "Rene" Griffin, 28, were arrested after police say they agreed to perform sexual acts on undercover officers. The two women have since been given deferred sentences on charges of prostitution.
A search following the arrests also found used condoms in the private rooms, according to the lawsuit. The club was ordered closed Aug. 18, but owners contested the order, demanding an impartial hearing.
The city has been trying to get the club's business license pulled since then-Mayor Charlie Brooke pulled the license in September 2004. It followed a similar police sting there months before when a dancer solicited an undercover police officer. A judge's ruling earlier this year declared Mr. Brooke's decision as unconstitutional based on the review process.
This time, Judge Kelley imposed more stringent rules on the business, including the closed-door policy. While the dancers don't perform nude, only topless wearing a G-string, patrons cannot be nude anywhere on the premises.
No further court dates on the lawsuit were available as of Tuesday.
9 comments on this article
Posted by some anonymous person at 4:33PM on Tuesday, 12/5/06
I don't know why this type of business should be allowed to exist. This is just disgusting
Posted by Todd from Rural RI County at 6:36PM on Tuesday, 12/5/06
Because there is a demand for services performed at said business. If you are offended do not frequent said establishment. Problem solved!
Posted by some anonymous person at 7:55PM on Tuesday, 12/5/06
Why is it disgusting? You think sex is disgusting? what are you a eunuch?
Posted by J at 8:34PM on Tuesday, 12/5/06
I used to goto Tuxedos alot in my younger days. Never would I ever be caught dead at Sugars. Its been well known for a long time what goes on down there. Plus the quality of dancers doesnt compare
Posted by Rocky at 9:48PM on Tuesday, 12/5/06
i think the judge should have ruled for better looking women....
Posted by Matt J. from Geneseo at 10:04PM on Tuesday, 12/5/06
This is just great! You know some of us really do not want to wander the streets to pick up hookers on the corner. A fine establishment such as Sugars has accomodated many great men that just want a place to go and render a fair price for a valued service. This will not stop the craft it will just drive it out into the streets where everyone, women and children will be exposed to these working professionals. At least Sugars allowed them a place to work. You dont see Doctors being forced out of Hospitals to work on the streets do you?
Posted by Hoser at 11:24PM on Tuesday, 12/5/06
I agree with anonymous at 7:55, sex is not disgusting.... only the girls that work ther and the people who go there.
Posted by R.N. from WI. at 12:34AM on Wednesday, 12/6/06
Todd, how would anyone be even slightly offended?
If one wants to contact STD; Gonorrhea, Syphilis; Clamidia; Aids; become HIV +; and a host of other sexually transmitted diseases..let 'em.
Posted by some anonymous person at 1:48AM on Wednesday, 12/6/06
"You dont see Doctors being forced out of Hospitals to work on the streets do you?"
doctors=legal
hookers=not legal
Police get assist from eyes in the sky By Tory Brecht | Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Its technological eyes will get keener and more numerous as the Davenport Police*Department expands its neighborhood camera surveillance plan, according to Chief Mike Bladel.
An undisclosed number of portable and mobile cameras soon will supplement a pair of operational fixed-site surveillance cameras.
The new cameras then will be hooked into a citywide wireless network allowing police to view live streaming video from their squad cars.
In addition, the department will begin recording its*captured video, allowing it to use as evidence to prosecute crimes.
“We want to be adaptable enough to respond to changing crime patterns,” Bladel told the city council’s committee-of-the-whole Monday. “Cameras, I’d like to warn you, are not a silver bullet. However, they can aid our police work.”
Already, cameras mounted on the Heritage high-rise building on West 3rd Street and in the 400 block of Harrison Street have assisted in making arrests for prostitution, public consumption of alcohol and loitering, Bladel said.
As technology improves, so does law enforcement’s ability to utilize it to crack down on crime, Bladel said.
The chief was careful not to reveal too much, responding to Alderman Keith Meyer’s question about whether the camera on the Heritage*building could zoom in on the face of someone walking on the Centennial Bridge: “We really don’t want to demonstrate to the public our full capabilities, but, yes, it would be our goal to identify people from a long distance, and that is an achievable goal.”
Several aldermen said they had mixed feelings, with concerns about “Big Brother” warring with the clearly demonstrated ability of the technology to help combat street crime.
“I know there are concerns from the public about the ‘Big Brother’ syndrome,” said* Alderman Bill Lynn, 5th Ward.
Bladel asked aldermen to think about the number of stores and businesses that videotape customers and the ubiquity of cell phones with video and digital cameras on them.
“This technology is not going to go away,” he said. “We have to embrace it and hold each other accountable to use it in a responsible manner. The reality is, with the police department, public oversight is there. The council has never failed to hold me accountable to them.”
The chief noted all the camera work thus far has been accomplished with no consulting fees and using only around $10,000 of a $100,000 neighborhood camera enforcement budget.
The department is partnering with the Raytheon Company for a six-month trial of the wireless network, which expires in February, and cooperating with the Iowa Department of Transportation on other infrastructure needs for cameras. Once the Raytheon pilot program ends, the wireless network would have to be funded through the police department’s regular budget.
“We’re doing it right, but it takes time,” Bladel said. “We’re pushing this as fast as we can, but we’re doing it systematically, which will save money in the long run.”
Tory Brecht can be contacted at (563) 383-2329 or [email]tbrecht@qctimes.com[/email].
Camera types
The Davenport Police Department soon will be using three types of surveillance cameras. They are:
Fixed — Camera is expected to stay in a location for an extended period of time, often bolted down.
Mobile — Camera can be moved relatively quickly and placed covertly, typically in targeted neighborhoods. Usually is left in place for a brief period of time.
Portable — Camera can be moved immediately and may be a visible deterrent.
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the views of the Quad-City Times or Lee Enterprises.
Davenport Man wrote on December 05, 2006 7:44 AM:"Well, there we have it. Now we know what the city is going to do with the $270.000.00 it is getting from the traffic cameras. BUY more cameras. good idea. then we can stop the police on patrol from sitting in the parking lot where old garfield pool use to be, and give them something to do. I would not mind this all switching to cameras if it was going to free up some officers to do a little "serve and protect" a motto that seems to be lost in this city. How many times have you seen a vehicle broke down, and a cop just drives by, he does not stop to check if the owners are okay, or to see if he can help, nope he has to get to garfield school and hide, while kids shoot out windows on 29th street. Serve and protect? I have more faith in a camera."
Bear 66 wrote on December 05, 2006 7:49 AM:" Sounds like big brother to the greatest, shades of 1984, this is going way beyond cameras for speed enforcement..but then, didn't we all say that this to shall come to pass?? welcome to a free Davenport. we need More police officers, not cameras, we want to stop crime not film it."
schqc wrote on December 05, 2006 8:04 AM:"Davenport wants growth, and then it does this. Who would want to live in such a place? I would think that there's a real issue if this camera can look at private property or inside windows. That would be a 4th amendment violation. Every day. Davenport residents should sue. The authorities have no right to anonymously search your property or residence. The car cameras get around this by focusing on the license plate and making no claim about what is going on in the car. But you can't do the same looking inside or looking inside a house or peering in places that are not public (say, behind a privacy fence) looking for crimes. That would be a clear violation. To even use such a camera should require a search warrant. Otherwise, sue, they are monitoring you in your private areas without a warrant."
The "Davenport Dream" wrote on December 05, 2006 9:19 AM:"A camera on every street and in every home!"
FUNNY!!! wrote on December 05, 2006 9:19 AM:"The funding behind these cameras are from the stop light and speed cameras and of course more tax payer's money to make up the difference. "
Atheist wrote on December 05, 2006 9:45 AM:"I just want to pre-empt the "if you aren't doing anything wrong, don't worry about the cameras" crowd. The problem is, the definition of what is "wrong" changes as time passes. If they have all of these cameras, think about the time, staffing and mainteneance they will require. This will add costs, and therefore the goverment will have to recoup those costs by enforcing laws, or creating new laws. SPitting on the sidewalk, now a $50/fine. Giving the finger in public, now a $75/fine. Speeding on the way to the hospital/$75fine. It is a slippery slope and we are already on the downfall. "
Aaron wrote on December 05, 2006 9:48 AM:"Seems like a waste to spend all that money busting people for prostitution, loitering, and public consumption of alcohol. I'd rather put up cameras outside schools where they can be used to monitor our childrens' wellbeing and deter pedophiles. I suspect the prostitutes and other criminals will move out of the cameras' view and into other neighborhoods where they will be just as unwelcome."
Man of God wrote on December 05, 2006 9:53 AM:"The only people who have something to worry about are the people doing something wrong. I say the more camera's the better. We can't afford enough officers to be in all places at the same time, but in this case we can at least reproduce evidence against criminals. How would we feel if we were assaulted by a group of people and they said that you started the fight and it was your word versus theirs? The camera would be a big help in this instance. And I don't think that it is their intention to spend time looking in on your backyard bbq or in your windows, they have to answer to higher ups as well. If you want to make a difference in the world, give your life to God. If you really think this world is ever going to get better, yoru are mistaken. The bible specifically states that times are going to get worse. If you want to know what was spoken 2000 years ago about what was going to happen read Matthew 24 and the book of Revelation. Just as warning to all the non-believers, when the powers that be start preaching one world religion and one world currency beware because this is a sign of the times. And if there are strange disappearances of Christians, get to your bible because the rapture has happened. The bible doesn't specifically use the word "rapture" for all you neigh sayers, but it uses the words "caught up" and the latin word for caught up is rapture. God bless all of you and Jesus come quickly!!!"
Ha ha ha!!! wrote on December 05, 2006 10:22 AM:"I can't believe you Davenporters put up with this! We should live stream the video from the patrol cars to make sure they are doing their jobs correctly. Also, I'd like a camera in Bladel's office, the mayor's office and at all venues where Davenport police work off-duty. Fair is fair. "
Davenport Woman wrote on December 05, 2006 10:25 AM:"Before long the police department will know all of our daily routines from when we get up and when we go to bed along with what we do in between those times. All I can say is get used to it. This is the way the world is going, like it or not. If you have nothing to hide, this shouldn't be a problem. To be honest though, I really don't like the idea of the department knowing so much about people. I think this is going to create a lot of paraniod people. "
More cameras, please wrote on December 05, 2006 10:26 AM:"Anything to help fight crime is good."
Welcome to What the Soviet Union Could Only Dream About wrote on December 05, 2006 10:40 AM:"Doesn't it make you feel proud to be an American standing up for the right of freedoms around the world to only have them taken away at home? How far is Davenport away from putting up checkpoints around the city? After all, we only want to protect the helpless public. You think someone in North Korea looks at cities like this and is taking notes or did someone in this city look at North Korea and take notes? It's getting hard to tell the difference anymore."
Better than real cops! wrote on December 05, 2006 10:40 AM:"These high-tech cameras have no moustaches, are testosterone-free, don't take steroids and pump iron, have no superiority complexes, they don't beat their girlfriends or shave their heads. They won't fly down Locust at 60 mph with no lights or sirens and they won't let other fellow cameras break the law and then conceal the crime. I like the future of these reliable public servants, let's get more!"
What don't you understand? wrote on December 05, 2006 10:43 AM:"These cameras are used to catch criminals. If someone mugs someone or robs a store, there won't be a cop there. There can't be. That is why we call the police after something like that happens and they start an investigation, to most likely never figure out who did it. This is a way for the city to be there, even though they don't have a person there. I live downtown, and I like knowing that there is a camera on my car at night. "
You people... wrote on December 05, 2006 11:10 AM:"would Grip if they hung you with a new rope. Ill bet your the same people that want all guns out lawed."
Cool fight crime but wrote on December 05, 2006 11:13 AM:"What about salting the darn residents streets? It's like an ice rink on the side street. Can we get some cameras with some freaking lasers to melt the ice!"
clm wrote on December 05, 2006 11:17 AM:"its time to get rid of bladel. "
Get over it wrote on December 05, 2006 11:18 AM:"What are you doing that you are concerned it may be filmed? The cameras are not there to catch you following the laws of society. They are there to catch the people who are BREAKING LAWS! How could you have problem with that. My suggestion to you would be to not break laws and you should be just fine. Same with the speeding cameras. Don't speed and you will never have a problem with them, ever. "
Just a thought wrote on December 05, 2006 11:47 AM:"So by putting cameras up are we just "moving" the crime to different areas? I mean I am not a criminal, but I would look for areas where you would not expect a camera. I realize there are mobile ones, but it seems to me we are not going after the root of the crime, rather we are cherry picking the stupid criminals. Also aren't stores required to post that they are video taping? Will the city be expected to do the same thing? If so that only further supports by above observation."
well you know wrote on December 05, 2006 11:50 AM:"Most big cities have these cameras already. I like the idea to many crimes go unsolved. If you are obeying the law why worry."
Next new world wrote on December 05, 2006 12:00 PM:"Soon will come transfat, alcohol, and smoke monitors to "protect" us from our plebeian selves. The politcal correct crowd is coming for us faster than officer friendly's speed cams. "
RiverCity Rose wrote on December 05, 2006 12:02 PM:"Except for the traffic hold up it would cause, go ahead and put up "check points" - if those cameras mean I won't have to deal with some micreant in my home or street who is out to do harm to me - SO BE IT. Big Brother can watch anytime anyplace and it's A-OK with me. Cudos to law enforcement. Most of us with no hang ups and no criminal intent are happy about anything that could improve our security. "
Kurt to What don't you understand wrote on December 05, 2006 12:27 PM:"That's what they use them for in totalitarian states as well. I hope you enjoy your stay in the soon to becoming re-education camps. Chairman Mao would be so proud!"
To "Man of God" wrote on December 05, 2006 12:39 PM:"You dont need to preach about your religion. Cameras are a good thing to a point of extent. But this is just more taxes, and more money out of your pocket. Pretty soon all of Davenport home owners will pay a $2.00 camera tax or security tax. Where do you think the money is going to come from to fund this crap?"
Cameras won't help. wrote on December 05, 2006 12:44 PM:"Even if a camera does catch a crime the police won't investigate it unless it is very serious. Every time you call the police station they act like it is a big hassle to answer the phones and do their jobs. Say a car gets broken into and it is taped their standard response will be "We are looking into it" and then nothing will ever come of it."
Amused Dav Resident wrote on December 05, 2006 12:59 PM:"I find it very amusing that so many people feel their lives will be interrupted due to these cameras. Most likely your neighborhood isn't one that has surveillance. They will be in high crime areas to help the police put these thugs and low lifes behind bars with hard proof so they aren't let back on the street. To the person who said they will now know you daily routine. Thanks for the good laugh. I'm sure they want nothing more than to know what time you go to your mail box every day! Get real. A lot of you need to find more significant and important things to complain about. "
former QCer wrote on December 05, 2006 1:00 PM:"It is a misconception that everything done that one desires to be discreet is potentially illegal. The fact that I do not want the government videotaping my every movement has much more to do with liberty than secrecy. The very freedoms our country was founded on are being eroded one camera at a time. When is enough, enough. The next argument will be, "If you aren't saying anything wrong then there is no reason they can't monitor your cell phone conversations.""
Go go Davenport wrote on December 05, 2006 1:03 PM:"One more reason for the people that live there to move the heck out. And yet another reason for people not to shop in Davenport. I have one more week teaching at Scott downtown. Then I will not reup my teaching contract and I'll never set foot in Davenport again. Lost another teacher over this one. GJ."
Just a Thought wrote on December 05, 2006 1:07 PM:"Imagine an cool evening at the park, have an intimate conversation with your spouse on a bench ending in a warm embrace.... telecast on the 10PM news, brought to you by your friendly neighborhood police surveilance camera."
Here's an idea wrote on December 05, 2006 1:11 PM:"Let's have them all be webcams... so we can watch each other!"
LOWELL wrote on December 05, 2006 1:29 PM:"Direct your discontent to where it belongs. This was not Bladel's idea, it came from your elected officials..they are the people that are demanding the studies and asking for the cameras ALL OVER. Go to a Council meeting and voice your displeasure to them...don't hide behind a BLOG. "
Booger wrote on December 05, 2006 1:30 PM:"I was at an event where ex-governor Jim Thompson was speaking several years ago. I had my camera and got a great picture of him pulling a huge booger out of his nose. It is one of my prized photographs. It reminds me that we are all people, no matter how dignified the office or position we hold. Cameras can be great things."
picked on booger calls on Kurt wrote on December 05, 2006 1:49 PM:"Earth to Kurt! Where's your worst totalitarian states at? Mao has been dead for a long time. Is all you do to sit around and demand to be recognised as the smartest on the block and bully others with your IQ and income? So much Self promotion for the camera?"
oh great. wrote on December 05, 2006 1:50 PM:"now i now what the one radio talk show host(won't mention his name) will moan and groan about all afternoon long on his show. (give you a hint: he's on in the afternoon around 3 p.m. i get sick of him and everyone else WHINING about the cameras. for one: DON'T SPEED, then you WON'T receive a ticket. It's REALLY THAT simple. do you guys want some some cheese with your WHINE?"
we want Cameras, TOO wrote on December 05, 2006 1:51 PM:"Hey Bettendorf: we want and need cameras in south-east Bettendorf. "
Preemption To Atheist wrote on December 05, 2006 1:55 PM:"Is it some have gone completely off the slope and want to take the rest of us with you? Where's your calls for compromise? Can't we all just smile and say cheese to the camera's? Or are we just pieces of meat no more valuable than a blade of grass?"
Iowa City wrote on December 05, 2006 1:57 PM:"Giving freedoms away for security... I guess it is your choice, but I recall what Ben Franklin said about this: You deserve neither. Good luck!"
mark Riley - candidate for council wrote on December 05, 2006 2:10 PM:"I will do everything I can to remove the TAX Cameras from the street. However these cameras that are used to fight crime and the lawless of our society, I support. Here are some benefits that some in government might find difficult to articulate. We can target Problem areas that produce crime with out being accused of RACIAL PROFILING. Kudos to Mr Bladel for finally using technology for the common good and not the common tax. Still the best neighborhoods (safest) are those with local participation from its residents. Lets clear out the thugs and give those working class neighbors a chance to take their block back. Make sure and put some up in the GAY district to catch the meth and synthetic sex drug peddlers. HEY CHIEF put one up in credit island so we can get our park back."
Godless Atheist wrote on December 05, 2006 3:03 PM:"1 - The definition of "wrong" or a "criminal" act will continue to be revised and more strict, so these cameras can be paid for. What YOU consider to be legal now, could be illegal in the future. Spitting on the sidewalk. Jaywalking. Etc. If tehse cameras aren't catching criminals, then the government will MAKE criminals out of all of us to pay for this!!! 2- There is no compromise, other than possibly putting all this money toward PREVENTING crime. How about that? Spend thousands on crime prevention programs, instead of spending thousands on crime relief. 3 - To Preemption - Your juvenille hounding of me is growing tiresome. Let go of your hate and anger, they are very unsightly for a supposed Christian. "
Where does it stop? wrote on December 05, 2006 3:09 PM:"For all the pro-camera individuals: 1)You can't smoke in bars, restaurants, etc (I'm not a smoker). 2)More gun laws. 3)The burden of innocence is on the owner of the vehicle. Cameras watching your neighborhoods and who knows what else. They are slowly chipping away at our rights, but you're to ignorant to understand that. I would bet most Americans can't even state the Bill of Rights. When we are conditioned to give up rights, it makes it easier for them to take more away and with technology comes abuse of technology. DPD would be lying if they said those cameras don't get pointed in areas they shouldn't be pointed."
Amendment IV wrote on December 05, 2006 3:13 PM:"Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. "
Say what to the godless athiest? wrote on December 05, 2006 3:31 PM:"Even if an atheist were to be correct and there was no creator behind the moral curtain, this assumes that the positive consequences of revealing his absence will outweigh the negative ones. Needless to say, philosophers from Socrates to Voltaire and Nietzsche have strongly disagreed with this optimistic proposition, despite their similar skepticism about the truth of God's existence. Even if an atheist's weak logic merely provides some small ironic amusement here, it threatens to become downright dangerous when their attempts to solve the dilemma of morality by positing an evolved free will that gives humanity the opportunity to worship the golden idol of natural selection and begin to guide its own evolution. To trust in God is a valiant and magnificent aspiration. For some, it is too difficult beyond their laziness. But they will always accept selfish arrogance by claiming to have the ability to judge and grade the faithful. From the vast historical confirmation and scientific evidence, humanity can know for certain, all life without God is impossible. To ignore God is to miss out on His relationship of blessing. To mock and repudiate Him, then to claim human self-enlightenment is evil. Smile, you are on candid camera! "
Captain America wrote on December 05, 2006 3:43 PM:"There are more people incarcerated in America, per capita, than anywhere else in the world. Looks like it's only going to get worse. Most people struggle to pay a fine. What are you going to do to those people who can't pay fine after fine? Beat them up? Deport them to Mexico? "
Solution Dude wrote on December 05, 2006 4:13 PM:"It was a good thing I was sitting down when I opened up the paper this morning. I just could stop laughing about the plans to install surveillance cameras all over town. Now for my comments; (1) The chief said '“We really don’t want to demonstrate to the public our full capabilities..."' Translation: Yes we can identify an individual on the Centennial Bridge from the Heritage Building. (2) The usual pro-camera individuals are chiming in with the old 'if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about' routine. However, I have yet to have one of them take me up on the offer to install a camera inside their home like I posted in last week's camera article. If you're doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about. (3) Where does this stop? I like may others warned that red light cameras were only the beginning. Remember, once a populous gives up a freedom to the government, you never get it back. "
schqc wrote on December 05, 2006 4:18 PM:"Exactly Amendment IV. All those soldiers who you honor, died to protect Amendment IV. As well as Heabeas Corpus. The greatest insult to our troops is throwing away our freedoms. Talk to some former East Germans sometime. I have. How wonderful they remember the years of cameras and neighbors spying on neighbors. If you people can't stand the crime in this country, and want to give up your freedoms, move to Russia. When it comes to the Constitution Love or Leave it."
Kurt wrote on December 05, 2006 4:20 PM:"I have no problem with the no smoking laws. Why should my health have to suffer because someone else wants to smoke? Your rights only exist up to the point that they infringe on another's. Breathing second hand smoke against your will should be constituted as assault and battery against the smoker. "
to godless huh? wrote on December 05, 2006 4:34 PM:""The definition of "wrong" or a "criminal" act will continue to be revised". What? Now atheists are relativist again? How many atheists are in there? and what for cryin out loud must be described as a GODLESS Atheist? Is that a double negative twist like a Jumbo Shrimp, or on time hard core Curious Liberal Intellectual? "
Why Davenport continues to decline in population. wrote on December 05, 2006 5:44 PM:"For those that say that these cameras are good and just, need to reread the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. The very idea that giving up rights to be more secure is silly. You can't defend something that you willingly give up. If you agree with the cameras then you would have no problem with the police always investigating you. That is exactly what this will turn into. By definition these are unreasonable searches."
Hey Chief, wrote on December 05, 2006 5:49 PM:"I know that you read these silly blogs. I want you to know that I support you 100%. Keep up the good work! "
Trigger wrote on December 05, 2006 6:43 PM:"This so strange. One one hand I am for the cameras for the reasons stated, on the other hand it does reak of "big brother". I guess it comes down to the city fathers have miss managed the finaces of this city so bad that we are understaffed in both police and fire. I wish I was wise enough to come up with the answer. Guess thats why I am an electrician and not a politician"
West End Lady, to Mark Riley . . . again. wrote on December 05, 2006 7:23 PM:"Thank you for warning of your impending candidacy. While generally unhappy with much of what the city council does, I am an active voter and will write in "Mickey Mouse" before checking the box next to your name. You express your concern about being accused of "racial profiling" . . . then turn around and gay bash?? While I agree that neighborhood watches are the best (free) service a community can provide itself, I vehemently disagree with your gross generalization of gays as meth and drug peddlers (exactly as I disagreed with your labeling homeless people as pedophiles). Do you really think videotaping homosexuals "hooking up" at Credit Island will make them stop being gay and restore the park to some bygone era of beauty and purity? Reel in your prejudices, please, Mr Riley, they will not be welcome in a public office! As someone mentioned above, the cameras are a band aid solution to bigger social issues in this city. The crime will simply change neighborhoods, it will not go away."
I'm so completely disgusted with this, I'm almost speechless. Sickening.
They are putting them up in Rockford now also. Just posted a newspaper article there. The ones in Rockford seem to be put up by private business worried about crime effecting them rather than police who want ot sit around eating donuts while they watch TV.
Front Page of the QC Times! They said condoms were found in the dumpster there, I have seen people rumaging through the dumpster when I have driven by the place, perhaps they were off duty cops planting used condoms!
Affidavits detail prostitution allegations By Dustin Lemmon | Thursday, December 07, 2006
Performers at Sugar’s Exotic Dancers have allegedly offered undercover police sex for money in a hotel and in locked rooms at the club and in some cases employees have arranged those meetings, according to police affidavits the city is using in a court petition to close the club.
Seven Davenport police affidavits have been filed in a lawsuit the city has pending against the operators of the dance club as evidence for the petition. The city wants the business at 1037 W. 3rd St., closed and has filed suit against its operator Dorothy Sampson and building owner Dale LaBath.
The affidavits detail the results of undercover investigations of prostitution at the club dating back to 2000, but some involve incidents that occurred earlier this year.
A district court judge issued a temporary injunction against the club earlier this week ordering them to not permit prostitution on the premises, allow closed-door dances, allow patrons to be nude or in a state of semi-nudity or allow any adult entertainer to perform outside the view of the club manager’s station.
The city filed an amended petition after the injunction was ordered which includes the state of Iowa as a plaintiff.
According to the affidavits, police discovered used condoms in the garbage at the business during an investigation in 2000 and found several new condoms in the purses of the dancers and club manager.
During that investigation police also viewed 32 videotapes and in one case witnessed a manager telling Sampson about a party she attended on an “out-call” with a club dancer in which the dancer started “turning a date” in a bathroom without collecting the agency fee. The two then “turned dates” with other men at the party, she reportedly tells Sampson on the tape.
In the video, Sampson tells the manager that she knew the dancer’s mother and that they used to “work the streets” a long time ago, the affidavit alleges. According to the affidavit the terms “out-call,” “turning a date” and “work the streets” are all used to refer to prostitution.
In April 2000, a representative from the Scott County Health Department told police he was distributing condoms to a staff member at the club as part of the Minority Aids Prevention Program, because it was a place with potential “high-risk behavior,” one of the affidavits states.
The affidavits also detail an incident in April 2000 in which an undercover officer called the club and spoke with an employee about getting an escort for the evening. He arranged to meet a dancer at a local hotel where she took her clothes off and she told the officer it would be $100 for sex. The girl was eventually arrested by officers waiting in an adjoining room.
During a search at Sugar’s that month an officer spoke with a manager who said any acts of prostitution the girls performed in the club was done so without her knowledge.
The girl who had been arrested a few days earlier was interviewed after the manager and said the manager told her what rates she should charge customers for various sex acts, the affidavit states.
John Moeller, the attorney representing Sugar’s, had no specific comments about the allegations made in the affidavits and said he would argue the case in court.
“It doesn’t take much to get a temporary restraining order,” Moeller said. “The final hearing, I think, is where there is going to be the controversy.”
Moeller said the date of that hearing has not been set. The next hearing in the case is Dec. 26.
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the views of the Quad-City Times or Lee Enterprises.
John Moeller wrote on December 07, 2006 4:01 PM:"As you can plainly read this is not a well run busisness, It took more than 32 videos to the establish the fact that, there might be some "Ladies of Ill Repute" frequenting the building. And the owners have no idea what their patrons are doing during the hours this building is open for business. They don't need a liquor licensee, what they really need is a circus licensee. I sure hope those officers don't catch anything!"
Madison Avenue Ad Executive #1 wrote on December 07, 2006 4:22 PM:"Man oh man. This is some A-#1 advertising. I am curious how much the proprietors of Sugars are paying for all the advertising. Front page yet! Man this is great."
Chuck wrote on December 07, 2006 4:55 PM:"It appears most of the allegations about prostitution took place off of rhe Sugar's property. Are all employers responsible for what their employees do in their off time? If a sales clerk at Wal-Mart were arrested for something they did off the job, would you close Wal-Mart? And so what if used condoms were found in Sugar's trash can. They could have come from anywhere. And all they prove is a man ejaculated. It doesn't prove a thing about prostitution. And is it a crime for people to have new condoms in their possesion? Most single people carry them. You never know when you might get lucky. I think it's terrible the way the city is out to get Sugar's. It appears to me there is a lot worse crime going on in Davenport than anything that allegedly is happening at Sugar's. Why not fight some real crime like the meth dealing and gun crime and murders in this town. It's disgusting to think the city is taking valuable police off the streets to go undercover at Sugar's. Wow, that sounds like tough duty. Get your priorities straight Davenport. "