Fucking Drama read here (2257 related) - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

stev0 · 01-24-2007, 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DirtyDanza

are you serious..... have you seen every ggw out there... cause I am watching one now where the girl is in the hallway of a hotel and the security gaurd is there and guess what hes doing bending her over and fucking her... are you claiming that my eyes are bad? 20/10 here baby I know what I see... so lets see here... your saying she was 17 thast ok? are an idiot as an owner of a company you have to look our for the best intrest of the company... saying she's 17 not 10 may be the dumbest statement I have heard all night...laws are laws... and yeah you can film who ever you want on public places but not kids... notice how they always block kids faces... any time the news is on here in nevada and there talking aobut kids say in court or whatever... they are not allowed to show the face because they are minor... so maybe check on your facts before you start preaching... keep in mind I have been shooting content for over 6 years and I tend to push the line alot with my content... so I get a lot of heat for it.. therefore my company is fully up top date on all laws when it comes to filming anywhere... ok my business license is a motion picture / tv/ audio production company I can film anywhere in vegas... we are insured for 2 mil with a 5 mil umbrella... anytime I film anything anything at all thats not porn related even example was the tony hawk huck jam or what ever it's called... when I put into the county to go film it first question on the pamplet I had to fill out was... do you plan on filming any minors if so you need a gaurdian to sign right... just like if a 17 year old girl goes to the doctor before they do anything the parents have to sign.. theres a reason she's a minor and if she mis respresented her age thast still joe's fault... just like if I shot a girl that was underage and she lied to me I would still have to take blame for it.... if I recall they had to recall all traci lords videos right?

Yeah, laws are laws... that's why I added the IMO.

Which GGW title are you refering too? Back in 2002 when the incident they were in court over took place they had nothing other than flashing and softcore girl/girl scenes. I know they have a couple new ones out, maybe they're more hardcore.

On another note,

They only have to block kids faces if it's over something being investigated (because of the young offenders act) or if the sitatuation being reported would put the minor in harms way. If you're filming a swimming competition, news interview, disneyland commercial, mardi gras, whatever... you don't have to censor anything or get ID's from anyone. If you did mothers would be arrested every time they filmed their kids at the park or at the beach and school photographers would be hauled downtown every time a class photo is taken. Wouldn't make any sense.

And 2257 record keeping would not apply to the vast majority of the old GGW 'flashing' type content because it is not sexually explicit as defined in USC110S2256. But you make it sound like they purposely went around looking for minors when that's far from the truth.

ps. ya, im pretty sure they recalled the traci lords video(s) in question... GGW also removed a large number of their dvd titles because of this incident as well.

Matt 26z · 01-24-2007, 01:39 AM

This was about records keeping violations in general, not CP. It just so happened that a few underage party girls slipped in and flashed their tits. He'll never be put on trial for CP because no jury is going to agree that tit flashing in public is the same thing as XXX porn.

Only far right conservatives think otherwise. Just look at the Janet Jackson fiasco from a few years ago. In any other major country that story would have been limited to entertainment shows and magazines for a week and then died.

In the US there are a few extremely vocal people who will even harass a mother for breast feeding her newborn baby in public. If these types didn't exist, you'd see breasts on network TV just like they do in other parts of the world.

stev0 · 01-24-2007, 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt 26z

This was about records keeping violations in general, not CP. It just so happened that a few underage party girls slipped in and flashed their tits. He'll never be put on trial for CP because no jury is going to agree that tit flashing in public is the same thing as XXX porn.

Only far right conservatives think otherwise. Just look at the Janet Jackson fiasco from a few years ago. In any other major country that story would have been limited to entertainment shows and magazines for a week and then died.

In the US there are a few extremely vocal people who will even harass a mother for breast feeding her newborn baby in public. If these types didn't exist, you'd see breasts on network TV just like they do in other parts of the world.

I think it was one girl/girl scene they were getting in trouble for... if it was flashing the case would have been thrown out.

Jack_Daniels · 01-24-2007, 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DirtyDanza

I am sorry but Joe breaks all kind of rules when shooting that I can't belive he gets away with...

Yeah, I guess we're all sorry.

DirtyDanza · 01-24-2007, 05:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stev0

Yeah, laws are laws... that's why I added the IMO.

Which GGW title are you refering too? Back in 2002 when the incident they were in court over took place they had nothing other than flashing and softcore girl/girl scenes. I know they have a couple new ones out, maybe they're more hardcore.

On another note,

They only have to block kids faces if it's over something being investigated (because of the young offenders act) or if the sitatuation being reported would put the minor in harms way. If you're filming a swimming competition, news interview, disneyland commercial, mardi gras, whatever... you don't have to censor anything or get ID's from anyone. If you did mothers would be arrested every time they filmed their kids at the park or at the beach and school photographers would be hauled downtown every time a class photo is taken. Wouldn't make any sense.

And 2257 record keeping would not apply to the vast majority of the old GGW 'flashing' type content because it is not sexually explicit as defined in USC110S2256. But you make it sound like they purposely went around looking for minors when that's far from the truth.

ps. ya, im pretty sure they recalled the traci lords video(s) in question... GGW also removed a large number of their dvd titles because of this incident as well.

old video I will post the clips of what I am watching tomorrow when I wake up...

I can't find any documentation of USC110S2256 anywhere whe I search you got anything I can read on it... I am not aware of that one.... all I found was this when seraching for it http://fuk.ca/al/sbh/mgp/party-girls/pw.html... and I hear you about the swimming but the cops were standing over me watching every move I make... reminds me of a buddy that called me up one day and said... hey danza I got arrested last night for wearing red shoes... I said get the fuck outta here they can't arrest you for that.... he said yeah I know but I am calling you from jail now...... so I dunno... running a company like GGW you need to dot your i's and cross your t's it's worth alot of money... we won this time but what abuot next time and next time... and the other guys now.... and thats the prob someone said oh some drunk 17 year old flashed her titties to the camera no big deal... ok look I like tities as much as the rest of you do.... but no big deal? she's a minor nakkie on camera.... thats the prob with it... it takes 2 secs to say.. sweetie how old are you? can I see your ID? thanks... how hard is that.... when I go on interviews I check ID before I even say hello... when we fly girls out they fax in all info on them prior too.... if and when we shoot spring break stuff... someone goes and "sets everything Up" prior too..... joe dodged a bullet on this one....

another thing... ok so you guys are saying I am preaching morality... I am not... but what does this say to the rest of the population? you know the people we wish would leave us alone? this fuels their flames more as well.... oh well...

Lee · 01-24-2007, 06:20 AM

My thoughts are this... Jails should be for people that commit crimes like rape, burglary, assault, pedo wankers etc.. not for a bloke shooting a 17 year old flashing her tits. You should be grateful you arent having to foot the bill for paying for his incarceration as your jails are already full-up to breaking point.

But hey I live in a country where what he did wouldnt have been illegal as topless shots at 16 are allowable so what do I know?

So what do you think would have been a reasonable amount of time to serve? 6 months? 20 years?

DirtyDanza · 01-24-2007, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee

My thoughts are this... Jails should be for people that commit crimes like rape, burglary, assault, pedo wankers etc.. not for a bloke shooting a 17 year old flashing her tits. You should be grateful you arent having to foot the bill for paying for his incarceration as your jails are already full-up to breaking point.

But hey I live in a country where what he did wouldnt have been illegal as topless shots at 16 are allowable so what do I know?

So what do you think would have been a reasonable amount of time to serve? 6 months? 20 years?

ehh whats to say reasonable.... and I am not saying he should be serving jail just saying if it were me up there because I am dirty danza a guy who fucks girls throats.. they would not have been so nice.... what I am saying is if he got away with comunity service and some fines... then the rest of us shuold get away with the same thing....

01-24-2007, 01:39 AM	#52
Matt 26z So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: ¤ª"˜¨๑۩۞۩๑¨˜"ª¤ Posts: 18,481	This was about records keeping violations in general, not CP. It just so happened that a few underage party girls slipped in and flashed their tits. He'll never be put on trial for CP because no jury is going to agree that tit flashing in public is the same thing as XXX porn. Only far right conservatives think otherwise. Just look at the Janet Jackson fiasco from a few years ago. In any other major country that story would have been limited to entertainment shows and magazines for a week and then died. In the US there are a few extremely vocal people who will even harass a mother for breast feeding her newborn baby in public. If these types didn't exist, you'd see breasts on network TV just like they do in other parts of the world.

01-24-2007, 06:20 AM	#56
Lee Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Kernow Posts: 2,977	My thoughts are this... Jails should be for people that commit crimes like rape, burglary, assault, pedo wankers etc.. not for a bloke shooting a 17 year old flashing her tits. You should be grateful you arent having to foot the bill for paying for his incarceration as your jails are already full-up to breaking point. But hey I live in a country where what he did wouldnt have been illegal as topless shots at 16 are allowable so what do I know? So what do you think would have been a reasonable amount of time to serve? 6 months? 20 years?