Strippers sue to prevent identity disclosure

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-29946114

Government open-records requests can be boring. Government open-records requests made by a man who wants to obtain information about 70 licensed strippers in his town so he can "pray for them", on the other hand...

The godly citizen in question is David Allen Van Vleet of Tacoma, Washington. In September he filed court papers to obtain personal information on 70 government-licensed nude dancers at a nightclub in his area - including their full names, addresses, photos and dates of birth.

(Yes, Washington requires nude dancers to pay a $75 (£47) a year licence fee. If government oversight is good enough for beauticians, it seems, it's good enough for lap dancers.)


The county auditor granted his request under the state's open-records law - although she also notified area dancers and club managers of her action. On 21 October two licensees sued to block the release of the information. Two days later a county judge issued a temporary order blocking the release, with a final decision scheduled for 15 December.

Click to expand...

"It's entirely likely the person who wants this information is a crazy stalker or an anti-sex nutjob," writes Reason magazine's Elizabeth Nolan Brown. "Maybe both. Maybe merely a blackmailer or a 4chan-er. At any rate, it's hard to imagine many non-nefarious reasons for requesting personal information on a wide swath of individuals in a sensitive job."

Click to expand...

I don't believe Mr. Van Vleet wants the addresses in order to "pray". He is perfectly able to pray for strippers without knowing where they live and collecting their photos.

And why does he need their names and addresses? Surely God can find the girls!

I read the article and started to leave the thread but came back. This really really bothers me. Apparently there are people who have nothing better to do than to explore even more avenues to violate our right to privacy. I believe there are 'think tank' groups who do nothing but sit around and try to figure out ways to undermine our Constitution. Where are all of these radicals coming from?

I realize this is a nutjob as someone pointed out in the comments, but I see it as a dangerous thing to do. It is personal with this guy, IMO, or he is obsessed with one of the women. Does he ask for the names of any male strippers there may be?

Washington is just plain wrong (and ridiculous) to make these women pay for a license to work, IMO. At least a judge has issued an order to not release the information until a decision that is to be announced on December 15th. We have to protect the FOIA, but this is taking it too far. This idiot wanting the information found a loophole in the FOIA to use to obtain personal information, and that is wrong.

This just absolutely infuriates me!! What if it is a college student stripping to supplement college tuition? What if it is a single mother with children and needs this income to support her children? While I do not condone stripping, I would fight for their rights to do so. I'd rather not call these women strippers at all because the term is denigrating, IMO.

All this licensing is doing is bringing in tax revenue and finding a way to keep up with a certain group of people. If I lived there I would find a way to ask the city counsel why this was passed and why it is in effect. Or it may be the County Commissioners who passed it. I served on my Parish Police Jury for a term. It is the same as a County Commissioner. We passed parish laws, rules, and regulations. I know what I would have told anyone on the Police Jury who wanted to pass a law, rule, or regulation such as this. I would have told them to go fly a kite and that I would not support this sort of invasion of privacy and require a license to do a harmless act such as these women are doing.

Sorry for being so long winded. I may not have presented my position very well, but I am totally opposed to this idiot getting any personal information concerning these women. IMO, the very idea of requiring a license in the first place is an idiotic one. These women are 'performers' (if you will). Since when should you have to have a license and pay a fee to be a performer??? Then you are subject to having your name, DOB, and your address disclosed to any nutjob who wants it? NO.

These are just my personal opinions. I am just outraged about this for all of the reasons stated.

:moo:

ETA: If I were to go in and ask for the DOB and address of that same County Auditor, she would probably call the police. She would probably feel intimidated and/or threatened. She should be opposed to this also, IMO.

I have to say that this idiot who wanted this information is sly in a way because he managed to include the FOIA, our personal right to privacy, and prayer all rolled into one request. *Sigh*, I guess it could be political.

Haven't stalkers used sunshine laws in the past to prey on their victims? IIRC, some states have interpreted their sunshine laws to mean that voters' private info must be available to the public.

Personally, I have nothing against ecdysiasts (LALaw doesn't like the term "strippers"), whether they are single mothers, college students or simply earning money in the manner they prefer. But I don't think FOIAs should be used to justify releasing ANYBODY's private info. There must be a way to write sunshine laws so they can't be used to invade the privacy of private citizens; that is not the purpose of such statutes.

Here is an article with a picture of Van Vleet:

Federal judge in Tacoma blocks release of strip club dancers' licenses

http://www.thenewstribune.com/2014/10/23/3448052_federal-judge-in-tacoma-blocks.html?rh=1

snips

"A Pierce County man who requested the licenses under the state’s Public Records Act said he requested the information because he was curious and he wants to pray for the strippers.

“I would pray for those dancers by name,” David Van Vleet said after the hearing. “I’m a Christian. … We have a right to pray for people.”

Van Vleet said he also was trying to protect the public’s rights."


"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.”


”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.

“I’m not going to harm them,” Van Vleet said."

More...

He lists an Auburn post office box as his address

Click to expand...

hm let him disclose where he lives first...

"A Pierce County man who requested the licenses under the state’s Public Records Act said he requested the information because he was curious and he wants to pray for the strippers.

“I would pray for those dancers by name,” David Van Vleet said after the hearing. “I’m a Christian. … We have a right to pray for people.”

Click to expand...

I just don't understand why he needs the addresses and photos to pray if he's not going to stalk, harass and picket. God knows who he's praying for. He could even pray for all the strippers in the world, even in the countries with no licencing whatsoever, and God would still know who he's talking about

i.b.nora said:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ent/uploads/sites/14/2014/10/RoevAnderson.pdf

Click to expand...

i.b. nora
Thx for your link to the US Dist Ct. judge's Oct 23, 2014 Amended Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law
and Order on Preliminary Injunction. 7 pages.

Per paragraphs 12 & 13
info on manager's license inc. true name, DoB, physical description & photo.
info on dancer's license inc.^same^ plus stage name.

No home addresses, no soc sec #, no tel #.

Does that make a diff to anyone?

"Van Vleet has been convicted of violating anti-harassment protection orders." (part 23)

Perhaps he could pray for all the men who go there to watch the dancing, instead. He's obviously got something else in mind. Nasty old creep!

LaLaw2000 said:

....
<snipping discussion re FOIA or Wa. PRA, and whether there is a need for licensing these dancers/performers>....
I am totally opposed to this idiot getting any personal information concerning these women.... These women are 'performers' (if you will). Since when should you have to have a license and pay a fee to be a performer??? Then you are subject to having your name, DOB,
and your address disclosed to any nutjob who wants it? NO.

Click to expand...

bbm sbm

LaLaw
In light of Morag's post "Van Vleet has been convicted of violating anti-harassment protection orders,"
I agree w you, this guy is probably a whacko.

But per paragraphs 12 & 13,
info on manager's license inc. true name, DoB, physical description & photo.
info on dancer's license inc.^same^ plus stage name.
No home addresses, no soc sec #, no tel #. ...................................... Does that make a diff?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ent/uploads/sites/14/2014/10/RoevAnderson.pdf
link to US Dist Ct. judge's Oct 23, 2014 Amended Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order on Preliminary Injunction. 7 pages.

About local licensing dancers/performers
Seems like we frequently read about a young teen or under-aged kid in clubs, and the owner claims, I thought she was 20 y/o.
In issuing licenses to dancers/performers, presumably city would cull out underaged kids, so preclude owners from that feeble defense.
Maybe that was part of the impetus behind local licensing.
Maybe that revenue thing too.

JM2cts.

It makes me cringe when anyone uses religion as their justification for their horrible behavior.

Nevada strippers just won 2 HUGE legal victories: the club must pay the "live entertainment" tax, and the dancers are considered to be employees of the club who must be paid at least minimum wage; the dancers are not "independent contractors" who have to "pay to dance" as the clubs tried to argue.
http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/nevada-strip-clubs-take-two-high-court-hits

Recall back in the early 90's a relative of mine in Florida had to have a license for dancing and pay a fee.

I think strippers should have to reveal their real name. Now, all you haters out there have at me.

bwt42 said:

I think strippers should have to reveal their real name. Now, all you haters out there have at me.

Click to expand...

I agree if you want privacy keep your clothes on and get another job! Being a stripper totally contradicts the need for privacy.. It's like being a *advertiser censored* star but not wanting people to look at you naked.

bwt42 said:

I think strippers should have to reveal their real name. Now, all you haters out there have at me.

Click to expand...

What purpose would that serve? Really- what purpose?

What is the necessity of revealing their real names? As far as I can tell, plenty of men are happy to look at naked women, regardless of whether they know their names.

At one time, I worked in a bank (and we all were fully-dressed!), and the tellers' name plates were merely their first names. It was the opinion of the bank that young single women (in particular) might not want to have their full names for all to see. As I recall, one of the tellers had a number of exceedingly nasty anonymous calls when a perv managed to find out her last name. As that was in the era of landlines only, and since most people's names were in the phone book, the would-be pervs would have had easy access to the home address of any of the tellers. All of those girls and women were happy for the anonymity that the first name only name plates provided. And they were aged from young to elderly, and were all completely clothed in business attire.


Why wouldn't attractive and naked young women deserve the same protection? Would you want the creepy- and previously convicted- Mr. Van Vleet to have access to your full name (and probably easily attainable address)? Of course not.

This is not an issue of morals or prayers. This is an issue of a justifiable desire for privacy, and a realistic fear of a disgusting creep who has things other than prayer on his mind.

<modsnp>

I can understand them needing licensed. If own a daycare, mechanic shop, a fuel tank or any other business I have to be licensed in the city and state. A stripper is a contract worker meaning she's not fully employed at that bar she can strip where ever she wants.