Share This Page

Strip club's reasoning for Pittsburgh police protection as skimpy as a G-string

| Thursday, April 18, 2013, 2:06 p.m.

The Pittsburgh Police Department is a little concerned about its reputation right now — for pretty good reason.

But so is one of the city's prominent strip clubs.

Acting police Chief Regina McDonald last month decided to enforce an existing policy prohibiting off-duty police officers from working in adult entertainment establishments and other places of “disrepute.”

One of them, Blush, is fighting in court for the right to continue employing off-duty police officers to work the doors. A hearing is scheduled next week to consider the club's request for a temporary injunction.

OK. Here's the thing. There's a name for clubs that need a regular police presence. They're usually called nuisance businesses. So when a strip club files a lawsuit begging the police not to leave, it makes you wonder what's going on inside. Well, I mean besides that.

In this case, Blush considers itself a “pillar of the community.” That's right, that's what Jonathan Kamin, the strip club's lawyer, called it in an interview with the Tribune-Review.

Just curious: When you're explaining the concept of a “pillar of the community” to a child, does the term “G-string” usually come up?

Anyway, Blush says it needs police protection for the outside of the club; it uses a private security firm for the inside. I asked Kamin why the club insists on having a police presence.

“Industry standard,” he said. “(Police security) adds an extra level of security and professionalism that's important. We've had no problems for almost five decades.”

Kamin said the club is being discriminated against based on what happens on the premises. (Not a frequent flyer at such places, my guess is a lot of “broken dreams.”) He ran through a list of the organizations in Pittsburgh that enjoy police protection, including the Pirates, Penguins and the Steelers.

Considering the club pays for the security as everyone else does, Kamin feels Blush is being judged strictly on what happens inside its doors. He says that is a violation of the club's constitutional right to equal protection.

It's pretty clear why both sides are worried about their images.

McDonald didn't expound on the reason for her decision, but the department is already under investigation for its handling of off-duty assignment funds. It needs to separate itself from anything that might raise questions about its reputation.

Blush, also facing an image issue, could use someone official-looking at the door to maintain its sturdy, “pillar” status.

That would match the sturdy silver pole inside.

Nafari Vanaski is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 8669, nvanaski@tribweb.com or on Twitter @NafariTrib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.