Is this a new law or a change to a current law: A change to a current law.
What law do you wish to change/add: 9.7 Sexual Offences - Any person who coerces another person through force, threats or abuse of authority forces another person into performing a sexual act commits an offence. Any person who exchanges sexual acts for money is also committing an offence.
Why should this change/addition be made: Currently, there is no proper law against street prostitution, such as the ones that would exist in real life. This change would add realism to the laws and would not allow this to be openly broadcasted.
What is the aim of this change/addition: Adding more realism to the law.
Additional Information: N/A.
What law do you wish to change/add: 9.7 Sexual Offences - Any person who coerces another person through force, threats or abuse of authority forces another person into performing a sexual act commits an offence. Any person who exchanges sexual acts for money is also committing an offence.
Why should this change/addition be made: Currently, there is no proper law against street prostitution, such as the ones that would exist in real life. This change would add realism to the laws and would not allow this to be openly broadcasted.
What is the aim of this change/addition: Adding more realism to the law.
Additional Information: N/A.
Last edited:
) pimp for tax evasion. Though they technically could've legalized the act by selling a taxed object and including prostitution in the price, thus complying with tax law. Though the prostitution wasn't necessarily bad, they were mostly just a nusience and I received some 911 calls and complaints so i had to do something. The point is I don't think a law is NECESSARY but then again we have some other unnecessary laws that just further clarify things, grant additional options to for the officer, and further list common sense and realistic laws (especially since we don't implement the concept of common-law here). For example: law 6.4 criminalizes the failure to comply with a warrant. The suspect could be instead charged with law 6.5 (regarding compliance with LEOs) without the existence of the aforementioned law. The same is true with the latter of the laws, since law 6.10 (Obstruction of LEOs) encorporates the premise of 6.4 and 6.5 in a larger scope. This is just one blatant example but others can be spotted throughout. (Trust me this used to be my job).
