Strippers

Judge Blocks Public Records Request for Stripper Info, Temporarily Thwarting Man Who Wanted to Pray for Them by Name

|

Dreamgirls at Fox's/Facebook

Last week I wrote about strip club employees in Tacoma, Washington, suing to block the county from releasing their private information to someone who filed a public records request for it. Strippers in Tacoma are required to register for "entertainer's licenses," which are then kept on file with the county and subject to such requests.

This Thursday, a federal judge in Tacoma issued a temporary injunction to block the release of these licenses, which include dancers stage and legal names, dates of birth, and photos. District Court Judge Ronald Leighton said that releasing the licenses of DreamGirls at Fox's dancers and managers could bring them "irreparable harm." 

According to The News Tribune, the man who requested the info, David Van Vleet, said his request was for "the public good" and he had merely wanted to "pray for those dancers by name." From the Tribune

Van Vleet said he is a civil engineer, a parent and a Pierce County citizen who frequently files public records requests. He lists an Auburn post office box as his address.

Standing at a lectern, he argued his case to Leighton for 20 minutes. The judge asked him if he understood why the women didn't want him to have their license information. Van Vleet said he did, but that he is protected by the same Constitution they are.

Leighton also asked Van Vleet why he wanted the information. Besides being curious and praying for the workers, Van Vleet said he was entitled to the licenses under the state's Public Records Act.

(…) He said the workers should have known their licenses could be disclosed under state law.

A good reason to change the law and/or do away with occupational licensing of strippers altogether, no? 

This isn't the last we'll here about this situation, however, as the judge's ruling only temporarily bars the records request. According to the Tribune, the judge had concerns about the breadth of Fox's request. A final decision will be issued December 15.

NEXT: U.S. Investigating Whether ISIS Uses Chemical Weapons in Iraq

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. People need to think about this when they propose to have anyone register with the government. It becomes a government record, and the very fact that the govt is collecting the info could make it a public interest.

    If the didn’t gather the info in the first place, it wouldn’t be a problem.

    1. If *they* didn’t

      1. ITT I ask a serious question and realize what a stupid fucking idea it was.

    2. Serious question, to those who think prayer actually effects change, is praying for someone who doesn’t want your prayer an NAP violation?

      1. God is outside our jurisdiction.

      2. Not a libertarian, but I see it this way:

        1) If prayer is useless, no harm done

        2) if it helps, they should be grateful.

        None of this is an excuse for the govt. gathering people’s names and giving out the info to creeps/politically-connected people (*there’s* an overlapping Venn diagram!)

        1. That doesn’t really address the “they don’t want your prayer part”, which is where the aggression would be I presume

          1. If someone has a no tipping sign in their restaurant, is it a nap violation to leave a fiver on the table?

            1. I would say yes. I’m interested in why it isn’t. Improving their lot doesn’t mean you haven’t violated their stated will.

              1. Its not aggression.

                1. Ok, again, I’m interested in why it isn’t.

              2. I violate peoples stated will all the time. Both Grimes and McConnell have staed their will that I vote for them, but Im still voting for Patterson. Its not a nap violation.

                1. “Both Grimes and McConnell have staed their will that I vote for them, but Im still voting for Patterson.”

                  And you think this accurately analogizes to using god to force your will upon someone?

                  ” Its not a nap violation.”

                  Again, bad inaccurate analogy aside, why?

                  1. There is no initiation of force.

                    1. Yes there was.

                    2. Nope. Just like speech isnt force.

                    3. You ask god, who you believe to genuinely be able to effect change, to actually effect said change against a person, and that person has explicitly told you that said change was against their will, that’s not force?

                  2. Prayer doesnt force your will.

                    Its a request.

                    1. “Its a request.”

                      that god does something, that the target of is hypothetically against, and does (it is beleived) actually effect change, which was the original premise.

                    2. As someone said below, you have to accept all the premises.

                    3. Oh ok, I didn’t realize you were in charge of the rules too, I though the original question was mine to explore and examine.

                      Thank you so much for telling me that in my genuine quest for an answer, I have to accept anything I’m given from you because you said so.

                      Fuck off.

                    4. A prayer is a request. And I also don’t believe my gods honor such requests. Also the Christian god is pretty big into the Free Will thingy so he won’t honor request to force you to do something either. SO a prayer can be a violation of the NAP internally and make the prayor a bad person, but it is not something actionable in the real world or even in the spiritual world (other than the gods adding negative karma points to the aggressive prayor’s tally). Shall I suggest praying right back him?

                    5. Once you asked it, it became as much mine ad yours. And I only discuss from my premises, anything else is futile.

                      And you said, “for those who belueve”, well those premises go togetheyou claim you wanted to explore, but you immediately rejected every answer given.

          2. Nope praying for someone is like free speech, you can say all sorts of shit I don’t want to hear but it isn’t aggression.

            1. As I said, I was asking the people who believe prayer effects change. Thanks for your input.

              1. I think that if you honestly believed in a God who is omnipotent *and* who listens to and is influenced by prayers (which is, of course, a logical contradiction of the first order), the NAP really doesn’t matter – what matters is God’s will, which is not subject to the NAP.

              2. You didn’t see my other post? And I do believe in spells (which is a form of prayer). To find the ethical value of any given prayer, you must first determine whether it would be ethical if you did whatever you’re asking for face to face in person physically. So a love spell would be like date rape, obviously anything to cause physical harm would be like assault. But if you aren’t asking for anything that in real life would be an NAP violation, then you’re just babbling at the gods which is no different then babbling on a street corner as I walk by. I might be mortally offended, but that’s not aggression.

                1. “You didn’t see my other post?”

                  “Depends on the prayer. ”

                  That one? Yeah, it didn’t address my point, and couched the “aggression” as dependent on the prayer, which ignores the will of the prayed for I think.

                  1. Okay what’s your definition of aggression? My definition is physically forcing someone to do something they don’t want to do. Prayer that is aggressive is petitioning the gods to force someone to do something they don’t want to do.

                    1. ” My definition is physically forcing someone to do something they don’t want to do”

                      In this case, as stated in the original question, so is mine. But instead of doing it yourself, you’re praying to god knowing (or believing) that he will in fact cause the change.

                    2. And that’s when a prayer violates the NAP.

                    3. Well, that was the original question.

                      “Serious question, to those who think prayer actually effects change, is praying for someone who doesn’t want your prayer an NAP violation?

                      If you were answering the original question, then it wouldn’t depend on the prayer, as it was stated that the prayed for didn’t want it.

                      At any rate it seems we’re in agreement.

                    4. Well, that was the original question.

                      “Serious question, to those who think prayer actually effects change, is praying for someone who doesn’t want your prayer an NAP violation?

                      If you were answering the original question, then it wouldn’t depend on the prayer, as it was stated that the prayed for didn’t want it.

                      At any rate it seems we’re in agreement.

            2. Well yeah, but my conversation with a hitman concerning arranging a contract to have you killed, while “just speech” is still pretty baldly an unjust act of aggression. Replace “hitman” with “God” and “killed” with “smote”…

              1. The only part of The Ten Commandments that I enjoy is when Jehovah gets around to smoting.

                Jehovah is a really heavy smoter.

              2. I’m sure arranging with someone to commit a crime on your behalf is not covered by freedom of speech…something something conspiracy…

      3. +5 million dead jews mormons

        1. I wonder if there’s an afterlife scoreboard, and the COJCLDSTM figured out a loophole and stole all those jews

        1. So, using God as your agent is ok? If the other guy doesn’t want you to?

          1. Sure, as owner of the universe, God cant aggress.

            1. I own myself, even before God does, so, no dice.

              1. He disagrees. His IP claim is pretty good.

                1. Ok, thanks anyway for trying.

                  1. Why did you ask the question if you werent interested in answers?

                    1. “Why did you ask the question if you weren’t interested in answers?”

                      What part of my repeated further questioning makes you think I’m not interested in answers?

                      I’m not interested in anymore useless, short, uninformative answers from you.

                      That’s all.

              2. “I own myself, even before God does, so, no dice.”

                No.

                If you’re buying the system, you have to buy the whole system. If God made your ass, God owns your ass before you do.

                1. “If you’re buying the system, you have to buy the whole system. If God made your ass, God owns your ass before you do.”

                  Says who? I certainly don’t believe that nor does my wife.

                  1. If you don’t believe that God made you, then you don’t buy the system, and you own yourself.

                    If you believe that God made you, then God owns you.

                    1. Nope I believe god made me and then gave me free will.

                      And for future reference, I’m not interested in you telling me that I can’t believe what I actually, in real life, do believe, it’s tedious , insulting, and you sound moronic doing it.

                    2. You can believe whatever you want. Your assertion that you have a right to believe whatever you want does not undo the utter failure of logic at the center of your statement.

                      How does God “give” free will, and what does that have to do with the concept of self-ownership?

                      IOW, if you believe that you have free will, you don’t believe in an omniscient-omnipotent God. Or am I being an unfair tyrant by making that observation?

                    3. Disagree, free will and omniscience arent in conflict. God knowing what I choose to do doesnt change my choosing.

                    4. That’s a possible argument, no doubt, and is probably the best solution to the omniscience vs. free will problem.

                      It’s when you combine omniscience with omnipotence that free will gets pretty well squeezed out of the realm of possibility.

          2. Yes. God isn’t armed with a badge and gun, and won’t shoot your puppy.

      4. Depends on the prayer. If you are praying for something that if were done in person physically to the person would violate the NAP then it violates the NAP. Say praying for someone to be hit by a bus. However proving supernatural causality is impossible, so is properly beyond the scope of law.

      5. I just wish I lived in a world where the greatest violation of my sovereignty was people praying for me against my wishes.

    3. The WHOLE POINT of gathering the info was to make stripping less attractive.

      1. The whole point of gathering the info was government employee perversion.

  2. “”pray for those dancers by name.”

    Ok.

    “Van Vleet said he did, but that he is protected by the same Constitution they are.”

    Ok, now answer this sir, why is their polite request that you refrain from seeking their names a problem?

    Because it makes you look like a cunt, regardless of your other motives.

  3. This guy probably tipped in quarters. Or worse, toonies.

    /close the northern borders.

  4. How am I going to find the stripper I paid $37.51 to shave my crotch before she breached the contract and ran away?

    I’m the victim here.

    1. Well, that’s because you should hang some mirrors under the bridge so you can see what you’re shaving. Problem solved.

      1. It’s not that hard; just do it your damn self!

        1. Your handle reminds me of Revan, which reminds me of a once great RPG that died a silent death. Also, brazilian wax.

          1. /pours out a 40

            Also, fucking ow. Plus, you have to let it get to a certain length before you can do that, and even after that, you have to wait some time before the extracurriculars can begin. Pass.

            1. Nonsense. No way Hope Solo misses a game after a good waxing.

  5. Breaking: School shooting in Marysville, WA

    http://blogs.seattletimes.com/…..gh-school/

    Austin Joyner, a student at the school, said on Twitter that he saw the shooter come into the cafeteria, walk over to a table, pull out a gun and shoot students who were sitting there. Jarron Webb, 15, said the shooter was angry at a girl who would not date him, and that she was shot.

    He has a RIGHT to be liked and respected! He’s entitled to it!

    1. Where do these losers get the idea that if they go around killing people they’ll get lots of attention and media coverage?

      1. Well, he committed suicide by turning the gun on himself, so we won’t be able to ask him.

        1. It seems odd that they’d want all the media attention if they’re just going to kill themselves immediately afterwards.

    2. He has a RIGHT to be liked and respected! He’s entitled to it!

      +1 self-esteem

    3. Right before the election, how convenient.

  6. Theists, help me out here:

    Does God get more spell points with which to cast beneficial spells if names are used than if definite descriptions are used (or nicknames, for that matter)?

    1. I no longer have my Monster Manual or Dungeon Master’s Guide. I suggest googling that.

      Besides, you came to the WRONG place for nerdy questions like that anyway.

    2. I can’t speak about God or names, but when I sacrifice a goat in the name of the Elder Gods, everything usually turns out alright.

    3. “Please help Jennifer Anderson” has a +20% chance of working compared to “Please help ‘Destiny,’ you know, that one with the blonde hair and the tramp stamp.”

    4. God doesn’t are about names. God only cares that you know these people personally, otherwise you are merely prying for yourself and God don’t play that selfishness game.

    5. See, this is the kind of question I should have asked.

  7. Maybe some of those entertainers believe (as Van Vleet evidently doesn’t) that God is omniscient and therefore will know who is being prayed for, regardless. Won’t someone please think about their right to believes as they please?

    1. I dunno, I mean, if he doesn’t know their real names, how can God be sure which Jasmine or Brandi or Desiree the guy is praying for?

      1. That’s why he wants the pictures too. So he can have a clear mental image of the girl so God will know exactly which girl he’s praying for.

        1. That just makes me suspect the guy has a Death Note.

          1. +1 Shinigami

  8. David Van Vleet, said his request was for “the public good” and he had merely wanted to “pray for those dancers by name.”

    yeah, and Jack the Ripper was just offering a foot-massage to weary streetwalkers.

    1. It’s a Pollack tradition.

  9. He wishes to reduce the number of strippers by praying over them. Is this not the primary goal of the State when licensing them? Is he not aligned with the purposes of the list?

    Let’s not bicker or argue over whether it is God or Fear that convinces the strippers to change their employment. God works in mysterious ways.

  10. This Van Vleet fellow sounds like a lot of fun:

    http://bit.ly/1sZ4pRR

      1. I think a “Let’s talk about your questions over dinner and drinks?” would’ve went over much better. Heineken is cheap.

    1. So has Van Vleet denied the reports that he fucks sheep?

      1. Is this the same David Van Vleet that was allegedly sending the author of this article creepy and paranoid sounding emails?

  11. “…Thwarting Man Who Wanted to Pray for Them by Name”

    He can still pray for them by name:

    “God bless Sapphire, God bless Bambi, God bless Crystal, God bless Amber, God bless Brandy…”

    Problem solved!

  12. I pray for strippers too. Oh, praying FOR strippers. That’s different.

  13. Maybe a group of Bouncers from the area strip clubs could visit and politely persuade him to pray for the strippers, without their names!
    Bouncers can be pretty persuadable at times!
    Don’t ever recall Jesus saying you had to know the names of the folks your praying for!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.