Judge closes Love Shack.

Or does he?

“It appears clear to me that the plaintiff is operating an adult business and it is operating illegally,” Thrash said. He said Cornetta had failed to obtain proper permits and to meet zoning requirements from Fulton County.

But then Thrash warned Cornetta that if he stayed open with a “significant” amount of adult material, then Cornetta was in danger of being in contempt of court. Thrash refused to define what he meant by significant when asked by Cornetta’s attorney, Louis Sirkin of Cincinnati.

Thrash agreed to allow the Love Shack at Jones Bridge and State Bridge roads to remain open until 3 p.m. Thursday to give Cornetta time to appeal and seek a temporary stay from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Cornetta was putting in rush orders Wednesday night to dilute his adult inventory by adding lingerie, children’s movies, and sportswear and hats.

“The judge was completely off base and off the law,” Cornetta said. “Can they have a sign that says ‘Don’t drive too fast through town’ — but we’re not telling what that means? The 11th Circuit is going to remand it to him, I guarantee it.”

County Commissioner Lynne Riley said that code enforcement officers and police will be on hand at 3 p.m. to lock the store if Cornetta doesn’t have a stay.

“The ruling said the store is operating illegally,” she said. “Anything short of a stay by the 11th Circuit, we’ll close those doors.”


  1. DougieFresh says:

    I have never visited an adult store, and never intend to, but are we not supposed to live in a country founded with the premise of liberty?

    I found the quote in support of the closing from the proprietor of the dance studio across the street to be interesting.

    There are several groups that think that dance for any reason other than to “praise god” is obscene. Will it be long before the American Taliban arrives at his door?

    Freedom is not the ability to do things that the majority supports; it is the ability to do things the majority opposes.

  2. jaybird says:

    Please understand the actual events of the case. This is a zoning issue, not a free speach issue. Mr. Cornetta has every right to open an adult entertainment business in the proper location.

    The Supreme Court has already ruled that these types of businesses can be regulated due to secondary impacts.

    Additionally if you followed the case you would know that it was Mr. Cornetta who sued Fulton County not the other way around. The reason this is in court is becuase Mr. Cornetta did not want to locate his adult business in the proper location.

    Mr. Cornetta has claimed that the Love Shack is not an adult business. The federal judge yesturday said that Fulton County was correct in assuming that the Love Shack was an adult business and therefore Mr. Cornetta was operating illegally.

    Please tell me what first amendment rights are being violated.

    Also please don’t compare people who don’t want a porn shop in their neighborhood to the Taliban, unless you are want to allow a porn shop to open across the street from your house.

  3. jsm says:


    Then why not have unfettered sex in the streets? Where do we draw the line of what’s decent and appropriate?

  4. DougieFresh says:

    jsm, I think people that shop at these stores perfer completely fettered sex.

    Seriously, your argument is specious, as plenty of things go on behind closed doors that are illegal in public. The gonvernment in this case is trying to restrict what is going to go on inside a second location (the patron’s home), not activities on the street, or even inside the shop.

    Assuming the item is question is made out of rubber, is that substance illegal to own? Is it illegal to own a drawing of the item? Is it illegal to own the item itself? If not, why should it be illegal to conduct the transaction of selling the item, unless your intent is to regulate the behaviors of people in their own homes?

    I.e. just another legislation of “Conservative” Christianity. (And by that I mean Socialism in the name of god).

  5. jsm says:

    Have you had to explain a “XXX” sign or an adult videos sign to a kid who happens to see it when you’re riding somewhere in the car? It seems to me that the local population has an issue with the location of the store and the little eyes that don’t understand what the store is about and aren’t old enough to deal with an explanation. Nearby places that children frequent make this a bad location for a sex store.

    Sure. My previous question was somewhat exaggerated, but that was the point. There has got to be a line drawn at which someone can no further offend the average citizen.

    This is a situation in which I believe zoning is beneficial. I support this guy’s right to operate this store, but I think he is completely disrespectful of the community and its surrounding businesses. If he were respectful, he would operate in an area near similar businesses or in a professional area where people are less likely to bring children.

    I know this is a tough subject that can be hard to sort out and protect the rights of everyone. I just think this guy is purposefully being a thorn in the community’s side to prove a point and get media coverage.

  6. VSUguy says:

    Then how do you explain the presence of adult materials in the name of “massagers” or edible underwear in a Spencers store in most major malls? How does a parent react when a child hears a song they like comming from that store, or wants to look inside its doors for a haloween costume? At one mall in the middle GA area Spencers is located between a major entrance and several kids stores.

    Zoning can help, but it falls onto the parents to controll their own kids, not the government.

    the state government requiring this store to close sounds more like an issue of proper permits, much like topless bars which want to serve alcohol, they need seperate permits to do so. Operating an adult book store likely requires additional permits than an ordinary retail store.

  7. DougieFresh says:


    That was a well written reply. I give more leeway to local governments, as I think that was the founding father’s intent, to allow local governments to have their own standards in such matter.

    However, it seems the motivation behind running places like this out of business is based more on how their merchandise is used in someone’s private dwelling.

    We cannot limit our freedoms based on what children might ask parents. In that case we have simply surrendered our freedoms to tyranny, as sure as we would have out of fear of offending a despot.

  8. griftdrift says:

    Well I actually visited the store yesterday. A few points. There are no signs on the store. No lurid displays that would have to be explained to kids. The only possibility of kids in the area is the tiny ballet school about 200 yards away and partially obscured by trees. But once again even if the view was clear there is no indication that an adult establishment exist on the exterior. Which brings me too….What parents may actually have to explain is what a “D.C. Beverage” is since there is a very obvious, very massive liquor store located right next door.

Comments are closed.