Dude, you and your buddies have nothing to worry about (except, perhaps, how the girlfriends greet you when you get home).
The real deal is presented here, courtesy of Arnold Snyder, whose book, tentatively titled Naked Vegas -- A Guy’s Guide to 10,000 of the World’s Hottest Strippers, will be published early next year by Huntington Press.
Yes, many of you know Snyder from his blackjack magazine, books, and articles. But he’s also a self-described "connoisseur of beauty," and in that capacity has become, over much of his adult life, an expert at watching women take their clothes off. What follows is an excerpt from the expert, with Snyder’s highly colorful language cleaned up slightly (to maintain QoD’s PG rating); it answers your question about how much physical contact is permitted by law in a Las Vegas strip club.
The legal status of lap dancing in Las Vegas goes back to a case that began in 2004, when 13 Crazy Horse Too dancers were busted for violating the Las Vegas Erotic Dance Code, which says: "No dancer shall fondle or caress any patron, and no patron shall fondle or caress any dancer."
Now, the wording of that section of the law may sound pretty clear, but nobody had ever tried to enforce the law, since lap dancing had become common in the Las Vegas strip clubs. The Las Vegas law was modeled on a decades-old decision in a Washington state case, where dancers were prohibited from getting within 10 feet of customers. But with nobody making any effort to enforce the law for so many years, "fondling and caressing" had become an established part of the strip club scene, until suddenly, for whatever reason, the Las Vegas District Attorney’s office decided otherwise.
The Crazy Horse Too dancers fought the charges against them on the grounds that the law was "vague," since the terms fondling and caressing were not precisely defined. And, as was widely expected in Las Vegas at that time, the dancers won their case. It was thrown out of court by Municipal Court Judge Betsy Kolkoski, who agreed with the dancers that the law was unconstitutionally vague. That should have been the end of it.
But no, the city attorneys decided to appeal the case to the District Court, arguing that the touching of strip club patrons by dancers should be deemed illegal when a dancer engaged in this contact for the purpose of sexually arousing a customer. What kills me is that no one who was actually involved in this activity was complaining. No customers complained that the dancers were offending them with their lewd behavior. No dancers complained that customers were taking advantage of them. No strip club managers called the cops to have their dancers or customers arrested. Just one stuffed shirt in the DA’s office was morally outraged that somebody out there was having more fun than he was, and he found a law on the books that he felt he could use to put a stop to it!
To the dismay of the city attorneys, however, the Municipal Court judge’s decision was upheld by District Judge Sally Loehrer. Judge Loehrer pointed out that since the law didn’t even specify if the caressing had to be done with the hands, a dancer might be found in violation if she used a feather boa to caress a customer. Judge Loehrer deemed the appellants’ argument about sexual arousal particularly ridiculous. She was quoted in the Las Vegas Sun as stating: "Why else would anyone go into those establishments? They’re not going for the lighting or the drinks. If people go in there I would assume they are going in to be erotically aroused."
So there is intelligent life within the Las Vegas court system! It took two female judges to recognize, and be brave enough to state for the record, that guys go to strip clubs to get turned on and that the anti-fondling and caressing laws were more about police harassment than protecting public morals.
But that wasn’t the end of it. The Las Vegas city attorneys, who apparently had enough time on their hands that they could worry about what strip club patrons had on (or in) their hands, appealed the District Court’s ruling to the Nevada Supreme Court. The state Supreme Court was actually called upon to make a ruling on whether or not consenting adults were allowed to touch each other. In November 2006, more than two years after the alleged crime of fondling occurred at the Crazy Horse Too, the Nevada State Supreme Court overturned Las Vegas District Judge Sally Loehrer’s ruling, declaring that the Las Vegas Erotic Dance Code was not unconstitutionally vague! The Nevada newspapers and TV news all reported that the strippers had lost their case and that Las Vegas’ anti-lap-dancing laws were not unconstitutional. It looked like a dark and gloomy future for lap dance aficionados.
Had Sin City suddenly turned into Prude City?
Well, someone took the time to read the full text of the Supreme Court’s ruling. Although the state justices had ruled that the Las Vegas law was not unconstitutionally vague (because they felt the terms "fondling and caressing" were sufficiently understood by the average person), they also stated the following in their opinion, "Arguably, erotic dance is expressive conduct that communicates, which could be deserving of some level of First Amendment protection. If that is so, fondling and caressing may be protected expressive conduct when part of an erotic dance… Further, even if fondling and caressing as part of an erotic dance are afforded First Amendment protection as expressive conduct that communicates, the protection is not absolute. Such conduct remains subject to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions. Therefore, to the extent that LVMC 6.35.100(I) reaches conduct arguably protected by the First Amendment, it is not overbroad so long as it is a valid time, place, and manner restriction of the arguably protected conduct that communicates, i.e., fondling and caressing as part of an erotic dance…"
And what exactly does that mean? It means that despite the Nevada Supreme Court’s finding that the Las Vegas erotic dance code was not unconstitutionally vague, none of the 13 busted dancers were brought back to court to face the charges against them. Nor, to my knowledge, have any other strippers or strip club customers in Las Vegas been arrested for "fondling and caressing" crimes since this Supreme Court ruling came down.
The reason is that, in order to prosecute, the DA would have to argue that although fondling and caressing as part of an erotic dance routine may be protected communication under the First Amendment to the Constitution, a strip club performance is not the proper time or place for such protected activities to occur! I’d love to see the arguments in that case should it ever get to trial.
So, what does this mean for us?
It means the lap dancing in the Vegas topless clubs is pretty loose, and the VIP room activities are even looser. This does not mean that you have a "right" to fondle or caress any dancer who sits in your lap. The important point is that if she allows you to touch her, you can’t be arrested for doing so, and she won’t be arrested for allowing (or even encouraging) you to do so.
Bottom line: If a Las Vegas stripper wants to exercise her First Amendment rights while she’s in your lap, long live the Constitution!
