Love Shack Stays Open

It’s got the okay.

A U.S. District judge on Wednesday gave a slap on the hand to an adult video store in north Fulton, and the terms of the order had the owner declaring victory.

U.S. District Judge Thomas Thrash said that John Cornetta, owner of controversial Love Shack store, could face fines for continuing to sell “a significant amount” of adult material in defiance of a court order. But he suspended enforcement of the $1,000-per-day fine included in the order.

You know, I’m relatively libertarian about these places, but I think this Cornetta guy is a rather vile individual. He clearly came into an area knowing he was not wanted, opened a place that the locals did not want in a hurry to get in before laws went into effect, thrived off the media attention of it all while hiding behind his first amendment rights and peeing on the good people of Johns Creek.

32 comments

  1. Adam says:

    But if the residents of John’s Creek don’t buy his adult wares he’ll eventually go out of business, right? Are the residents afraid of what it says about their community if he doesn’t go out of business under the natural pressures of a free market?

  2. Erick says:

    Well, you know, the WSJ ran an ad about these places a while back and showed that most of them actually get their business from people who live in other locations. Most people buy their porn out of town or online.

    I think it’d be great if a Baptist Church or two got together and staked out the place, keeping a record of everyone going in and out and putting the pictures of the people on a website.

  3. Rick Day says:

    You say you are a libertarian on the issue, and then turn around and say the guy is ‘hiding’ behind his free market and legal tactic you call a first amendment end-around?

    Interesting. What else do you claim you really are not?

  4. LoyaltyIsMyHonor says:

    They would probably discover that many of the people visiting the Shack are fellow clergy members. Maybe even a minister or two.

  5. StevePerkins says:

    I used to work in the Technology Parkway campus near the Love Shack on Peachtree Pkwy in Gwinnett. The Baptists used to stake that place out too, protesting and taking pictures of customers… until after several months they got bored and gave up when they realized no one really gives a #$%&. I’m surprised at you, Erick.

  6. “I think it’d be great if a Baptist Church or two got together and staked out the place, keeping a record of everyone going in and out and putting the pictures of the people on a website. ”

    WTF? you freak!

    Will they then put out a hit list & wanted posters like they do with abortion doctors? Maybe then the Eric Rudolphs out there can stalk & kill dildo buyers?

    What a bunch of FREAKS !!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Good Lord, I will stay out of Johns Creek if people who think like you stay the hell out of the city of Atlanta. You scare me alot more than any porn store.

  7. Rusty says:

    Well, you know, the WSJ ran an ad about these places a while back and showed that most of them actually get their business from people who live in other locations. Most people buy their porn out of town or online.

    LOL, if that’s true, it’s because they’re afraid to be seen by their neighbors and have their joint hypocrisies exposed.

    And the Baptist stalking thing is really, really freaky dude. If that happened, John Cornetta should stake out a local Baptist church and compare the names to his sales ledger. I guarantee lots of names would pop up twice.

  8. Mike Hassinger says:

    Does “First Amendment” really apply here? Cornetta is a retailer, not a writer, or even a publisher. No one is restricitng his right to say, write or publish whatever he wants, only to sell certain materials in a specific area -in this case, across the street from a kids’ dance studio in a neighborhood.

  9. StevePerkins says:

    If you believe it shouldn’t be legal for an adult establishment to exist near a studio that services kids, maybe you should be against the liquor store that’s next door also.

    Maybe we should put adult businesses in a public “registry” of some kind. We could declare that entities in that registry can’t exist within a certain distance of places where kids might conceivable be… basically banning them from the state altogether indirectly.

    Hmm… then again, maybe would could just expand our blue laws. People seem to have no problem with adult establishments at all so long as they don’t serve on Sundays… maybe that’s a good fix.

    Alternatively, maybe we could just stop crying to Mommy-government whenever we see someone doing something we don’t like. I note with interest that the store is getting enough business from Johns Creek residents to remain viable, and that the dance studio hasn’t had to relocate away from the Love Shack or DC Beverage store to make parents send their kids there. Sounds like free market principle isn’t as embraced on Peach Pundit as some would like to pretend.

  10. Jeff says:

    Erick has a very moronic idea. Taking pictures. If that website ever became public, and the individuals whose pictures are on the site did not sign any form of written consent to having their pictures taken and published on line…then you got a problem. Personally if you are going to have your precious baptist churches screw around with this stuff I would push to have their precious tax exempt status revoked. What is wrong with the store? Having more of these retailers may actually help our kids. Afterall it would give the Mark Foley’s something else to be occupied with, besides your young male children.

  11. Jace Walden says:

    If that happened, John Cornetta should stake out a local Baptist church and compare the names to his sales ledger. I guarantee lots of names would pop up twice.

    Rusty,

    Truer words have never been spoken.

  12. Mike Hassinger says:

    Steve, you missed my point. I asked if the First Amendment was applicable in this instance, because the proposed restrictions are on what the shop sells, not what the shop writes, produces or publishes.

    And I seem to recall a list of all businesses -adult and otherwise- being in a government registry that determines which ones can go where, and how far away from residential areas they must be. I think they’re called “zoning laws.”

    But I do agree that stalking the pornophiles is a bad idea.

  13. jsm says:

    I’m amazed at the attack on Baptist Churches on this thread. The idea for them to stake out the place was floated by Erick, and now everyone wants to attack as if they actually did it.

    The best thing a Baptist Church could do in this situation is preach the truth about Bible principles on sex and stay out of the fight. If church members live according to the Bible they claim to believe and follow, they wouldn’t be found buying pornographic materials from this place.

    We all know so-called Baptists shop in the Love Shack probably everyday. No church is perfect. “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone …” So, who’s throwing next?

  14. StevePerkins says:

    Yeah. Just to be clear, half my family is Baptist. My shots were meant to be taken only at a small number of activists whom I assume span numerous denominations. If any shot seemed directed at one denomination it was only to turn someone’s quote back at them.

  15. VoHongPhuc says:

    Erick, would you also like it if I were to go out and take pictures of the Talibaptists in front of the store? They can have their album of the shoppers and I can put them next to pictures of Ayman al-Zawahri in my catalog of threats to free speech and western life. As for people outside the city shopping there, it’s freakin sales tax money! It’s always a good thing to have other people fund your city. If Cornetta’s stores do the business he’s bragging about then that’s a lot of sales tax he’s making the government everywhere he opens a store.

  16. RuralDem says:

    “I think it’d be great if a Baptist Church or two got together and staked out the place, keeping a record of everyone going in and out and putting the pictures of the people on a website.”

    I’m going to go out on a limb here and say you were making a joke. Please tell me I am right. I would not want a porn shop in my area but I think the idea you are pushing would cause trouble. You’ll end up having some fanatic either burn the place or shoot someone. I could also see a scenario where a church and for lack of a better term an “ACLU” type group constantly fueding and bringing an even more negative image upon the city. Let the church protest, picket, whatever, but don’t sit there and make a website listing names and posting pictures. Besides, like someone else said, if the owner did a roll comparison, some names would indeed pop up twice.

    On an offtopic note, you only mention Baptists. Where are my fellow Methodists at on here 🙂

  17. gatormathis says:

    mmmmmmmm….Methodists……..

    they probably got enough sense

    to get their stuff

    …..mail order……………

  18. Mike Hassinger // wrote Jan 4, 2007 at 10:36 am

    Does “First Amendment” really apply here? Cornetta is a retailer, not a writer, or even a publisher. No one is restricitng his right to say, write or publish whatever he wants, only to sell certain materials in a specific area -in this case, across the street from a kids’ dance studio in a neighborhood.

    ——————————————————————————–

    Mr. Hassinger just to clear a few things up, not to stir them up. The First Amendment to the Constitution protects more then just publishers and or writers, which by the way I am both. I publish three adult publications have for years. But case in point, the US Supreme Court has said that
    “Non-obscene But Sexually Explicit and Indecent Expression.– There is expression, either spoken or portrayed, which is offensive to some but is not within the constitutional standards of unprotected obscenity. Nudity portrayed in films or stills cannot be presumed obscene nor can offensive language ordinarily be punished simply because it offends someone. Nonetheless, government may regulate sexually explicit but non-obscene expression in a variety of ways. Legitimate governmental interests may be furthered by appropriately narrow regulation, and the Court’s view of how narrow regulation must be is apparently influenced not only by its view of the strength of the government’s interest in regulation, but also by its view of the importance of the expression itself. In other words, sexually explicit expression does not receive the same degree of protection afforded purely political speech.”
    None the less, thank god that Americans are allowed to view, think, read and paint what they wish, to a degree. So by all means my Johns Creek store is a First Amendment issue as well as a Fourteenth Amendment issue. Now Johns Creek and Fulton will say it is just a zoning issue and therefore can be considered a time, place and manner issue rather then a constitutional one. They have to as they have no other case. The fact is however, that at the time that store opened, it was opened legally and in compliance with all Fulton County and Georgia laws. The question remaining for the courts besides damages is simply, did the store operate even for one minute legally and in compliance with Fulton County ordinances or did it not. I can assure you it did as I helped draft that ordinance in a way by defeating the previous one. If for some strange and outrageous reason the courts were to find that the store was not operating legally, that still does not spell the end of that store. It would just mean that now that store has to comply with Johns Creeks Ordinances ( which by the way we currently are ) instead of being grandfathered in under Fulton’s ordinance. Either way it is a win / win for us. We would of course rather have the all out win, but the alternative for us is not gloomy. Oh, also a privately owned dance studio does not count under either ordinance, or for that matter any ordinance I have ever read anywhere. Only public schools. I wish you all the best.

    Regards,

    John Cornetta

    “Restriction on free thought and free speech
    is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the
    one un-American act that could most easily defeat us.”

    William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice 1939-1975

  19. Shakin the bush boss says:

    One of my favorite Art Linkletter kid questions:

    Art: Son, are you a Christian?

    Kid: No sir, I am a Baptist……

  20. bluechip says:

    As a citizen of Johns Creek, I support our mayor 100% in trying to get rid of the Love Shack.

    If you require porn & adult toys in your life, drive a few extra miles toward the perimeter. As a poster mentioned previously, I am sure you wouldn’t want to “shop” around in your own city anyway. What you do in the privacy of your own home is up to you, just keep that filth from being sold in Johns Creek. We are trying to make a great city here. Our tax dollars could be better spent on parks, schools, etc. and not not trying to get rid of filth which is not wanted anyway.

    To the person who has that link to a poll, it is so easy to set up something like that and keep voting or tell a few people who support your cause to keep voting on it. Nice try.

    Good riddance Love Shack! We do not want you here!

  21. rugby_fan says:

    “What you do in the privacy of your own home is up to you, just keep that filth from being sold in Johns Creek. We are trying to make a great city here. Our tax dollars could be better spent on parks, schools, etc. and not not trying to get rid of filth which is not wanted anyway.”

    Doesn’t sound like you actually believe your first sentence.

Comments are closed.