Bill on Child Porn Returns

[TheLegacy]

WASHINGTON (Hollywood Reporter) - The chief author of legislation that would treat steamy Hollywood films the same as hard-core pornography said Tuesday that he is willing to alter his bill in an effort to get at child pornographers but leave the mainstream film industry alone.

Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., said the legislation wasn't intended to target the mainstream movie and television industry but to catch paedophiles who make pornographic visual material at home using underage children.

http://www.crime-research.org/news/10.19.2005/1574/


By removing the term "actual" from the child pornography laws, anything that could be considered youthful or done in a fashion that implies youthful people engaging in any sexual activity including mere nudity would become a crime under this amendment.

Therefore a 25-30 year old woman wearing a plaid schoolgirl skirt and pigtails who only looks very young in a sexfilm would in fact be guilty of such child pornography violations because she is no longer an ACTUAL underage person, but an implied underage person due to her appearance and setting despite her actual age.

[who]

Why fucking bother... wtf.

[ronaldo]

Originally Posted by TheLegacy

By removing the term "actual" from the child pornography laws, anything that could be considered youthful or done in a fashion that implies youthful people engaging in any sexual activity including mere nudity would become a crime under this amendment.

Therefore a 25-30 year old woman wearing a plaid schoolgirl skirt and pigtails who only looks very young in a sexfilm would in fact be guilty of such child pornography violations because she is no longer an ACTUAL underage person, but an implied underage person due to her appearance and setting despite her actual age.

I don't see how they could possibly win that argument.

"Your honor WE think she LOOKS underage."

"Your honor WE think she looks 19 years old. Furthermore, WE can PROVE she's 25 years old."

Who would then decide how old someone looks? Utter bullshit.

[TheLegacy]

Originally Posted by who

Why fucking bother... wtf.

I know its so fucking silly, in the gay market which is heavily into twinks - just the facial features will make many of those sites shut down. The teen market for the straight market is in trouble... not too mention such hollywood films that depict such things.












not too mention all those teen movies where we see girls topless etc. Even if someone is IMPLIED younger in clothing, your fucked.

[TheLegacy]

Originally Posted by ronaldo

I don't see how they could possibly win that argument.

"Your honor WE think she LOOKS underage."

"Your honor WE think she looks 19 years old. Furthermore, WE can PROVE she's 25 years old."

Who would then decide how old someone looks? Utter bullshit.

never said that alot of thought went into this bill - I personally think the guy is doing this as a political move on the wave of religion without realizing that many films in hollywood would be pulled away, Academy's would be taken back and all of the executives would be fined and jailed for producing child porn.

It is a tool designed for the whim and pleasure of officials should they just not like what is seen

[Rochard]

What a load of fucking crap already. Now it's gonna be against the law to do something that does't break the law? This will never stand up in court. The first person that gets hauled into court over this will point to hundreds of mainstream movies starting with Titantic........

This is yet another waste of the tax payer's money.

[SteveLightspeed]

I think we need to put www.nanafunk.com in pigtails and a schoolgirl skirt to test this theory! How bout it Dugmor?

Steve Lightspeed

[TheLegacy]

Originally Posted by RocHard

What a load of fucking crap already. Now it's gonna be against the law to do something that does't break the law? This will never stand up in court. The first person that gets hauled into court over this will point to hundreds of mainstream movies starting with Titantic........

This is yet another waste of the tax payer's money.

wonder how old she was suppose to be? Many of the disney character female stars were under 18 and starting relationships and getting married



and dare we forget the biggest underage simulated song artist?? She would be charged as would record companies in promoting teen singing stars in erotic poses.. lets haul in maxim and rolling stones magazine.

[ronaldo]

Originally Posted by RocHard

What a load of fucking crap already. Now it's gonna be against the law to do something that does't break the law? This will never stand up in court. The first person that gets hauled into court over this will point to hundreds of mainstream movies starting with Titantic........

This is yet another waste of the tax payer's money.

Agree 100%.

Not a chance it would stick.

Otherwise they could enact laws that would allow them to prosecute someone with $100 in their pocket for driving down a street where known drug dealers lived.

Or, arrest someone shopping with items in their hand, THINKING they were gonna walk out the door without paying.

Or someone who was drunk with his car keys in his pocket, even though he's climbing into a cab.

OR.........etc. etc.

[MrPinks]

You could be right, but I think you are reading into this way too much.
The thing that pisses me off is Pence is willing to discuss this with the "legitmate" entertainment industry. We are still the bastard step child but they love are tax money. The fucked up thing is what is really going on with the FSC and 2257. I didn't know that this actually passed the House with Pence's BS. Looks like the Senate will pass it too. I think alot of affiliates are going to be fucked.

Originally Posted by TheLegacy

WASHINGTON (Hollywood Reporter) - The chief author of legislation that would treat steamy Hollywood films the same as hard-core pornography said Tuesday that he is willing to alter his bill in an effort to get at child pornographers but leave the mainstream film industry alone.

Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., said the legislation wasn't intended to target the mainstream movie and television industry but to catch paedophiles who make pornographic visual material at home using underage children.

http://www.crime-research.org/news/10.19.2005/1574/


By removing the term "actual" from the child pornography laws, anything that could be considered youthful or done in a fashion that implies youthful people engaging in any sexual activity including mere nudity would become a crime under this amendment.

Therefore a 25-30 year old woman wearing a plaid schoolgirl skirt and pigtails who only looks very young in a sexfilm would in fact be guilty of such child pornography violations because she is no longer an ACTUAL underage person, but an implied underage person due to her appearance and setting despite her actual age.

[ATKCash]

Somewhat off topic, but strangely relevant imho:

Last night I'm watching "Dirty Jobs" on the Discover Channel and the host was being an assistant at a pet grooming place. About a third of the way through, the little old lady with clippers trimming puppies says "we gotta get the dirty hairs around your weewee" to this little poodle. She lifts it up to clipper around its pecker and Discovery Channel BLURRED IT OUT. Same thing with the dog's ass, which needed some trimming as well... they BLURRED OUT its asshole.

I mean, was Discovery Networks so terrorized by the fact that somebody might be offended at the site of a dog penis, or of a dog's anus?

You have GOT to be shitting me. What's this country coming to?

[MrPinks]

Originally Posted by ronaldo

Otherwise they could enact laws that would allow them to prosecute someone with $100 in their pocket for driving down a street where known drug dealers lived.

Actually I think this already happens

[ronaldo]

Originally Posted by MrPinks

Actually I think this already happens

Seriously? If it does, then that's just fucked up.

[TheLegacy]

Originally Posted by ATKCash

Somewhat off topic, but strangely relevant imho:

Last night I'm watching "Dirty Jobs" on the Discover Channel and the host was being an assistant at a pet grooming place. About a third of the way through, the little old lady with clippers trimming puppies says "we gotta get the dirty hairs around your weewee" to this little poodle. She lifts it up to clipper around its pecker and Discovery Channel BLURRED IT OUT. Same thing with the dog's ass, which needed some trimming as well... they BLURRED OUT its asshole.

I mean, was Discovery Networks so terrorized by the fact that somebody might be offended at the site of a dog penis, or of a dog's anus?

You have GOT to be shitting me. What's this country coming to?

Need I say more you sick bastard without the skirt this dog is fine.. now it appears underage.

[ATKCash]

Originally Posted by TheLegacy

Need I say more you sick bastard without the skirt this dog is fine.. now it appears underage.

Now that's funny. LOL

[MrPinks]

Originally Posted by MrPinks

Actually I think this already happens

I think it could be criminal intent to purchase narcotics

[fetishblog]

We've been through this bullshit here involving the movie "The Tin Drum." Fuck these stupid politicians.

[TheLegacy]

Originally Posted by MrPinks

I think it could be criminal intent to purchase narcotics

I believe the idea was, that if your walking in the bad area of town known for drugs with 100$ in your pocket - and you even talk to someone to ask for directions out of the area - the police sitting in a car can suspect you of buying drugs and nail you. NO proof of even having drugs in your pocket but suspicous nature only

[borys]

Originally Posted by TheLegacy

any sexual activity including mere nudity would become a crime under this amendment.

You better burn your family albums if there are any photos of the wife bathing your baby in them.

[ModelPerfect]

Originally Posted by ronaldo

I don't see how they could possibly win that argument.

"Your honor WE think she LOOKS underage."

"Your honor WE think she looks 19 years old. Furthermore, WE can PROVE she's 25 years old."

Who would then decide how old someone looks? Utter bullshit.

The Jury would decide. So 12 people, interviewed to choose as desired, will decide the fate in a situation which isn't remotely illegal. How easy would it be to convince 12 near-sighted jury members that an 18 year old model actually looks 17 1/2?

[TheLegacy]

Originally Posted by borys

You better burn your family albums if there are any photos of the wife bathing your baby in them.

never thought of that either.. good point

[BlueQuartz]

the land of the free is out o' control!!

[TheLegacy]

Originally Posted by BlueQuartz

the land of the free is out o' control!!

wasnt it said, "freedom isnt free?"