Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pocketkangaroo
We also can't forget that 2257 is still just a record keeping law. Although the thoughts of 5 years in jail will scare the crap out of most of you, in reality, there isn't a judge in the world who is going to sentence you to 5 years in jail for that. People don't even get that for actually molesting a child nowadays. In reality, all you'd probably have to do is get the documents from the primary producers and show them in court. They aren't going to give you 5 years for not having paper work with you. If the girls are not under 18, you have nothing to do with child pornography.
|
I've been saying exactly this since the original 2257 scare and stand by it.
Further, when the defense points out that the government is risking people's lives by having to offer up model's home addresses to anyone and everyone who "Promotes" LEGAL adult entertainment and WE as an industry are more caring about our fellow citizens safety than the government, how is that going to make them look? One example a defense lawyer could raise, is that this isn't limited to only the models themselves (who the government has already stated are worth risking, again, "To protect the children") but it would also include the families of these models...including YOUNGER siblings! Are THOSE children exempt from government protection because their older, LEGAL aged siblings choose to make legal adult entertainment?
Remember that the general public has absolutely NO understanding of what the laws really mean, other than they're meant to "Protect our children." Who's against that? The government wants the general public to believe that WE'RE against it. Once that shroud of deceipt is lifted, I believe ANY judge OR jury is going to see the law for what it is.
Perhaps I'm naive to believe that when I can PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt, with all legal, GOVERNMENT documentation, that every single person I promote IS of legal age, my fellow citizens will come to realize that the laws on the book are unsafe, unreasonable and biased specifically against the legal adult entertainment world.
Imagine the uproar if Hollywood studios had to offer up the home addresses of it's stars (that would be subject to 2257 in OUR world), to every theater owner or video store operator in the U.S. that shows or rents the movie (that would make them a secondary producer, no?). The media and lawyers would have a field day and it would never come to pass.
I believe that the secondary producer requirements are a battle that our industry will eventually win, but it'll be costly, and I also admittedly wouldn't want to be the one sitting in the defendants seat.
/end rant