Just in - Max hardcore GUILTY on all charges - Page 5 - GoFuckYourself.com

bringer · 06-06-2008, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NikKay

Bumfights was a good example of a non-porn production that DID get it's producers in trouble. Here's the difference: In Jackass you have a group of friends causing physical harm to themselves and one another and (jointly) laughing heartily doing so. In Bumfights you have a group of friends basically preying on a troubled and downtrodden member of society.

I think the Max Hardcore stuff lines up with Bumfights more than it does with Jackass. However, I also think MH has a better defense than the BF guys because he can make the argument that his models are interested sexually in what he is doing to them. None of the bums brought into the legal issues with Bumfights said they enjoyed their performance and were happy they had done it.

I think combining violence with sex makes you a much bigger target than just producing something containing only violence or just producing something containing only sex. It simply makes *most* people nervous and uncomfortable so it's easier to prosecute and (attempt to) regulate.

obscene is really nothing more then what offends you. the movie i linked to above, Trade, shows a 18 year old girl have her top ripped off and then is raped while children watch. another scene shows girls who look under 10 years old in a field BLOWING a guy. since the movie lacked visible penetration, is it not obscene? is simulated rape not obscene in that movie BECAUSE its fake? its easy to see where YOU draw the line, but it'll never be in the same place as the person next to you. this thread is rampant with hypocrites who think their standards should trump others rights. isnt that what religious groups do to this industry in general?

Redrob · 06-06-2008, 07:33 PM

I remember some comedian once said that "If you aren't occasionally offended, you don't live in a free country."

bringer · 06-06-2008, 07:38 PM

i wonder if gay porn is next. i bet most americans think gay sex is obscene and should be stopped.

tony286 · 06-06-2008, 07:47 PM

My wife's sister is having problems with her landlord.Who is not taking care of things and so I want to look up the law for the kid. Is it state or county?

Kudles · 06-06-2008, 07:49 PM

Geez that super sucks

tony286 · 06-06-2008, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony404

My wife's sister is having problems with her landlord.Who is not taking care of things and so I want to look up the law for the kid. Is it state or county?

I sorry I meant to make a new thread. lol

Paul Markham · 06-07-2008, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NikKay

Bumfights was a good example of a non-porn production that DID get it's producers in trouble. Here's the difference: In Jackass you have a group of friends causing physical harm to themselves and one another and (jointly) laughing heartily doing so. In Bumfights you have a group of friends basically preying on a troubled and downtrodden member of society.

I think the Max Hardcore stuff lines up with Bumfights more than it does with Jackass. However, I also think MH has a better defense than the BF guys because he can make the argument that his models are interested sexually in what he is doing to them. None of the bums brought into the legal issues with Bumfights said they enjoyed their performance and were happy they had done it.

I think combining violence with sex makes you a much bigger target than just producing something containing only violence or just producing something containing only sex. It simply makes *most* people nervous and uncomfortable so it's easier to prosecute and (attempt to) regulate.

Great post and I do disagree with you about the sex making it more defensible. Putting porn into a film about abuse does not make it legal. The Freedom of Speech does not give you the right to assault and abuse people. Did the jury decide the porn was obscene or the abuse?

Who here would support anyone doing what he did if there was no porn attached or think he would not be prosecuted for doing it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

where I live porn featuring a black man fucking a white chick would be obscene. In some areas just a girl giving a guy a blowjob would be obscene. So to say what you do in not "obscene" is your opinon. Unfortunately for you that doesn't count. The only opinions that count is the jury where a DA trying to make name for himself takes you to trial in some backwoods part of the country.

Very true. And to continue to sell or produce in those areas is crass stupidity. Unless you think you should only follow the laws you want to follow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikki_Licks

The government has been after Max Hardcore for a long time. He faired well with his first trial and now lost this one. I think even if he appeals this one and wins, they will still continue the witch hunt until they have destroyed him.

If you think about it, obscene is in the eye of the beholder. Hell, the government can't really define obscene. While some of us don't really care for his content, it is his right to produce it. Someone may find a solo masturbation scene or just softcore images to be obscene. Where will it end?

All in all, this chipping away at our rights is going to hurt everyone and it won't be long before they start going after the softer stuff......all they need is a doorway.

I hope he appeals and wins round two

Yes he got off of the first one and continued doing it in the same country. Not the wisest move.

No I don't think he has a right to abuse people on film because he does it to a paid model in a porn shoot. Do you think people should be allowed to abuse others if they pay?

Please don't be a mouse, they will not go after the softer stuff. They will apply 2257 and other laws, but they will not try for softer stuff which will get thrown out when there are people like MH to score off.

Yes I think he might get off on appeal. Maybe not though and what ever he will be paying for it. He abuses models and hurts them, I don't think porn and Freedom of Speech gives him the right to do that.

Maybe other do.

The Duck · 06-07-2008, 01:27 AM

thats bad

Beaver Bob · 06-07-2008, 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Who here would support anyone doing what he did if there was no porn attached or think he would not be prosecuted for doing it?

thats a pretty stupid fucking question considering what he was doing to them was PORN. Theres no way to do the things he does in his productions without it being porn.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

No I don't think he has a right to abuse people on film because he does it to a paid model in a porn shoot. Do you think people should be allowed to abuse others if they pay?

I don't, but I'm pretty sure the models are well aware of the type of shoot they are getting involved in beforehand. Its twisted but in the end its two consenting adults and the girls know what they are getting themselves into.

V_RocKs · 06-07-2008, 02:52 AM

Isn't he the guy that does the seriously hardcore stuff?

I don't agree with his brand of porn and I think it sickens an unsick mind to see it.

If you don't agree with my point of view that is fine. You are probably one of the sick fucks that doesn't understand WHY you are a sick fuck.

Beaver Bob · 06-07-2008, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V_RocKs

Isn't he the guy that does the seriously hardcore stuff?

I don't agree with his brand of porn and I think it sickens an unsick mind to see it.

If you don't agree with my point of view that is fine. You are probably one of the sick fucks that doesn't understand WHY you are a sick fuck.

i'm pretty sure that why he's called Max Hardcore.

you don't have to agree with what he does to support his right to do it.

NikKay · 06-07-2008, 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bringer

obscene is really nothing more then what offends you. the movie i linked to above, Trade, shows a 18 year old girl have her top ripped off and then is raped while children watch. another scene shows girls who look under 10 years old in a field BLOWING a guy. since the movie lacked visible penetration, is it not obscene? is simulated rape not obscene in that movie BECAUSE its fake? its easy to see where YOU draw the line, but it'll never be in the same place as the person next to you. this thread is rampant with hypocrites who think their standards should trump others rights. isnt that what religious groups do to this industry in general?

I'm not saying I personally draw the line in any particular place. I think people should be policing themselves and that it's pretty obvious where the lines should be drawn if you have any consideration for others around you. I like some fairly extreme stuff more than I like the vanilla but I don't think people should be harming others when it's not entirely concensual. Do I think that makes it obscene? No. Do I think laws should exist to help people who are being victimized by selfish bastards? Yes. Would I rather people just stop being selfish bastards? Absolutely.

Electric Lights · 06-07-2008, 07:57 AM

I hope he gets ass raped by negroes.

He gives porn a bad name. I know that sounds ridiculous but it's true.

directfiesta · 06-07-2008, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

The envelop you pushed was nothing compared to the current issue... even for that time.

You are right ...

It ended up with a criminal lawsuit ( The Queen vs Me... ), arrest, fingerprints ( twice because of 2 charges ), guilty of a criminal offense in lower court, acquitted in Appeal Court of Quebec, after 30K of fees ( that was in 1983 , so you could buy a house with that ).

After that, cops would answer to all the zealous religious freaks :

" We know mam, but the courts decided that .... we cannot do anything anymore... "

But I am sure you know better, because ..... you have a few totoos and make hand gestures.

You should not be in this business and would not be in it if it wan't for guys like me.

topnotch, standup guy · 06-07-2008, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V_RocKs

Isn't he the guy that does the seriously hardcore stuff?

I don't agree with his brand of porn and I think it sickens an unsick mind to see it.

If you don't agree with my point of view that is fine. You are probably one of the sick fucks that doesn't understand WHY you are a sick fuck.

tony286 · 06-07-2008, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beaver Bob

thats a pretty stupid fucking question considering what he was doing to them was PORN. Theres no way to do the things he does in his productions without it being porn.

I don't, but I'm pretty sure the models are well aware of the type of shoot they are getting involved in beforehand. Its twisted but in the end its two consenting adults and the girls know what they are getting themselves into.

If you shoot and ever used agents you know that's not the case the girls don't always know what they are getting themselves into. We have talked to agents told them exactly what we needed and insisted my wife spoke to the girl that she not just show up. I have to say its almost 50-50 she would talk to the model and model would only have the vaguest idea of what type of shoot she was going to. After my wife explained it was with a bbw the girl would say no thank you and hang up.
The video side is much tougher on girls than our side. A girl is new shows up for a boy /girl and instead of one guy there are 5. She complains and is told I thought you really wanted to work in this business. So the girl does it, not knowing she could tell them to fuck off and be working tomorrow.
My friends first shoot for a video company, it was dp scene . She said its hurting alot,they said well just keep going and held her to finish the scene ,she had to go the hospital afterwards.
So I can see a girl needs money an agent says I can get you a shoot with Max Hardcore she has only a vague idea or no idea who he is and says great the rent is due. She gets there finds out its much more over the top than she was told but the rent is due tomorrow. Another scared porn girl.

Nikki_Licks · 06-07-2008, 11:40 AM

[QUOTE=Paul Markham;14290596]
No I don't think he has a right to abuse people on film because he does it to a paid model in a porn shoot. Do you think people should be allowed to abuse others if they pay?

Paul, I don't think it is right and never said it was, but these models damn well know what they are getting in for as BeaverBob stated and I fully agree with his statement. Whether I or you feel it is right is not the issue. If he operates within the boundaries of law, then he is entitled to produce whatever he wants...whether we like it or not. Please do not insinuate that I feel it is Ok to abuse models.

Please don't be a mouse; they will not go after the softer stuff. They will apply 2257 and other laws, but they will not try for softer stuff which will get thrown out when there are people like MH to score off.

First off Paul, I am not being a mouse, be rather gesturing that once this government gets an open doorway it could create a path of destruction in any direction they feel they can push. Maybe you feel like this government is not going to do anything like this, but I would not put anything past this government. You would have to live under the rule of the American Government to maybe understand this.

I don't think porn and Freedom of Speech gives him the right to do that.

What does porn have to do with him being able to do what he does?
Once again....if he operates within the boundaries of the law then there is not much you, I or anyone else can do about it. Until the laws change in this country, he or anyone else has the right to produce extreme content.

Peaches · 06-07-2008, 12:09 PM

If the models were being abused then this should have been brought as a criminal case for assault, not an obscenity case. I think the government may have done themselves a disservice by muddying the waters on this one.

bringer · 06-07-2008, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NikKay

I'm not saying I personally draw the line in any particular place. I think people should be policing themselves and that it's pretty obvious where the lines should be drawn if you have any consideration for others around you. I like some fairly extreme stuff more than I like the vanilla but I don't think people should be harming others when it's not entirely concensual. Do I think that makes it obscene? No. Do I think laws should exist to help people who are being victimized by selfish bastards? Yes. Would I rather people just stop being selfish bastards? Absolutely.

id be willing to bet this "clear line" you speak of would be drawn at gay porn for nearly 75% of americans today. is that reasonable? the others around you argument is moot in this instance btw. this wasnt broadcast on cbs or projected on the side of a building forcing everyone to watch. people had to seek this content out. you like "fairly extreme stuff"? im sure some of the stuff you enjoy WOULD be considered obscene by a jury so are they wrong in judging your taste and right in punishing max for his? also, arent there are already laws on the books to protect people being victimized? if anything wasnt consensual, a different law could be used to protect the victim. consider this: would max of been prosecuted had there not been a camera there filming it? is filming it where he went wrong or the action itself? if its the action itself, why wasnt that pursued instead of a distribution of obscenity charge? this is the point many have been trying to make. if the camera wasnt there and what was done was within the law, why did filming it make it illegal? before you submit your reasoning, see if it also could be applyed, IN THE EYES OF AN AVERAGE JUROR, to the "fairly extreme stuff" you enjoy. look, i dislike his stuff just as much as everyone here. unfortunately, most here dont realize that censoring what they would consider obscene is what religious fundamentalist do to "plain vanilla" . ggw is obscene in their eyes and trying to convince them that the line should be drawn where you want it is as pointless as this thread.

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_99657.asp

tony286 · 06-07-2008, 02:10 PM

[QUOTE=Nikki_Licks;14291583]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

No I don't think he has a right to abuse people on film because he does it to a paid model in a porn shoot. Do you think people should be allowed to abuse others if they pay?

Paul, I don't think it is right and never said it was, but these models damn well know what they are getting in for as BeaverBob stated and I fully agree with his statement. Whether I or you feel it is right is not the issue. If he operates within the boundaries of law, then he is entitled to produce whatever he wants...whether we like it or not. Please do not insinuate that I feel it is Ok to abuse models.

Please don't be a mouse; they will not go after the softer stuff. They will apply 2257 and other laws, but they will not try for softer stuff which will get thrown out when there are people like MH to score off.

First off Paul, I am not being a mouse, be rather gesturing that once this government gets an open doorway it could create a path of destruction in any direction they feel they can push. Maybe you feel like this government is not going to do anything like this, but I would not put anything past this government. You would have to live under the rule of the American Government to maybe understand this.

I don't think porn and Freedom of Speech gives him the right to do that.

What does porn have to do with him being able to do what he does?
Once again....if he operates within the boundaries of the law then there is not much you, I or anyone else can do about it. Until the laws change in this country, he or anyone else has the right to produce extreme content.

I wouldnt say they know damn well with 100% certainty.

Beaver Bob · 06-07-2008, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bringer

id be willing to bet this "clear line" you speak of would be drawn at gay porn for nearly 75% of americans today. is that reasonable? the others around you argument is moot in this instance btw. this wasnt broadcast on cbs or projected on the side of a building forcing everyone to watch. people had to seek this content out. you like "fairly extreme stuff"? im sure some of the stuff you enjoy WOULD be considered obscene by a jury so are they wrong in judging your taste and right in punishing max for his? also, arent there are already laws on the books to protect people being victimized? if anything wasnt consensual, a different law could be used to protect the victim. consider this: would max of been prosecuted had there not been a camera there filming it? is filming it where he went wrong or the action itself? if its the action itself, why wasnt that pursued instead of a distribution of obscenity charge? this is the point many have been trying to make. if the camera wasnt there and what was done was within the law, why did filming it make it illegal? before you submit your reasoning, see if it also could be applyed, IN THE EYES OF AN AVERAGE JUROR, to the "fairly extreme stuff" you enjoy. look, i dislike his stuff just as much as everyone here. unfortunately, most here dont realize that censoring what they would consider obscene is what religious fundamentalist do to "plain vanilla" . ggw is obscene in their eyes and trying to convince them that the line should be drawn where you want it is as pointless as this thread.

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_99657.asp

one of the best posts in this thread in a while.

the line of what is obscene and isn't is going to be subjective to every individual.

i'm sure there is a nice percentage of people in the U.S. who would find our BBW stuff obscene simply because some of the women are 300+ lbs.

theking · 06-07-2008, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by directfiesta

You are right ...

It ended up with a criminal lawsuit ( The Queen vs Me... ), arrest, fingerprints ( twice because of 2 charges ), guilty of a criminal offense in lower court, acquitted in Appeal Court of Quebec, after 30K of fees ( that was in 1983 , so you could buy a house with that ).

After that, cops would answer to all the zealous religious freaks :

" We know mam, but the courts decided that .... we cannot do anything anymore... "

But I am sure you know better, because ..... you have a few totoos and make hand gestures.

You should not be in this business and would not be in it if it wan't for guys like me.

The FBI is fully aware of your arrests/convictions...and you are on a watch list.

tony286 · 06-07-2008, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beaver Bob

one of the best posts in this thread in a while.

the line of what is obscene and isn't is going to be subjective to every individual.

i'm sure there is a nice percentage of people in the U.S. who would find our BBW stuff obscene simply because some of the women are 300+ lbs.

no chances are they would find it in bad taste at the worse but you have a much better argument. Our goal is to show bbw can as be pretty and sexual women.

GatorB · 06-07-2008, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bringer

id be willing to bet this "clear line" you speak of would be drawn at gay porn for nearly 75% of americans today. is that reasonable? the others around you argument is moot in this instance btw. this wasnt broadcast on cbs or projected on the side of a building forcing everyone to watch. people had to seek this content out. you like "fairly extreme stuff"? im sure some of the stuff you enjoy WOULD be considered obscene by a jury so are they wrong in judging your taste and right in punishing max for his? also, arent there are already laws on the books to protect people being victimized? if anything wasnt consensual, a different law could be used to protect the victim. consider this: would max of been prosecuted had there not been a camera there filming it? is filming it where he went wrong or the action itself? if its the action itself, why wasnt that pursued instead of a distribution of obscenity charge? this is the point many have been trying to make. if the camera wasnt there and what was done was within the law, why did filming it make it illegal? before you submit your reasoning, see if it also could be applyed, IN THE EYES OF AN AVERAGE JUROR, to the "fairly extreme stuff" you enjoy. look, i dislike his stuff just as much as everyone here. unfortunately, most here dont realize that censoring what they would consider obscene is what religious fundamentalist do to "plain vanilla" . ggw is obscene in their eyes and trying to convince them that the line should be drawn where you want it is as pointless as this thread.

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_99657.asp

Yep some people in my state that are in government thing GGW ads are obscene. Even thoug ther is ZERO sex and "naughty" bits are blacked out.

Personally I think movies like Saw and Hostel are nothing more than snuff films and are in my view obscene. I don't feel however the makers of them should be put in prison.

bringer · 06-07-2008, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

No I don't think he has a right to abuse people on film because he does it to a paid model in a porn shoot. Do you think people should be allowed to abuse others if they pay?

i guess in your world bsdm isnt allowed either. just so you know, people are payed to be abused all the time and even family friendly networks like CBS air the "abuse" in primetime. from bull riding to ufc and everything in between, youll see people getting abused for a paycheck. i think in your mind the models were called in to do a shoot for nakednews and got ******* instead when in reality they knew what they were signing up for and got paid to do it with a smile. just because ignorant people lump you and max together doesnt mean you get to limit his freedom to protect your reputation.

steved · 06-07-2008, 03:38 PM

Never promoted his content because I didn't like it, but many people purchased it and promoted it. Are they going to charge all the users that accessed his sites and bought his videos for having obscene material as well? Will those people have a case against him for selling them obscene material?

directfiesta · 06-07-2008, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

The FBI is fully aware of your arrests/convictions...and you are on a watch list.

read idiot ... acquitted ... and it was in 1983 ... Had property in Florida for over 20 years .. Sold it when you guys decided to go bersek ( 2003 ) made a 200K more then if I would sell today ( exchange & strong market ). And I go every 2 weeks in the State of New York for a few days.

My god you really are dumb .... and why are you here, old fuck ?

Please die, but do leave your computer open ....

theking · 06-07-2008, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by directfiesta

read idiot ... acquitted ... and it was in 1983 ... Had property in Florida for over 20 years .. Sold it when you guys decided to go bersek ( 2003 ) made a 200K more then if I would sell today ( exchange & strong market ). And I go every 2 weeks in the State of New York for a few days.

My god you really are dumb .... and why are you here, old fuck ?

Please die, but do leave your computer open ....

Sure...sure...sport.

C_U_Next_Tuesday · 06-07-2008, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

Hate it if you will, but everything has its limits... even the 1st amendment...
Just because something can be done or said doesn't mean it will follow that the 1st amendment protects one's right to do or say it.

Those that choose to push the envelop do nothing but put others in jeopardy without regard to future consequences, for the sake of the all might dollar.

well said

booker · 06-07-2008, 04:39 PM

I agree with the comment that the jury must be retarded. They had to ask (and not very eloquently) what would happen if they didn't find on all 20? And how long they had to deliberate? Where did they find these people that they have no clue how a jury works?

I've never seen his stuff so I won't comment on the obscenity, but I do agree that something is only obscene if you think it is. If you are offended by something (music, pictures, video, books, ideas, thoughts, actions, whatever), then you have the choice not to engage them. The Religious Right is neither.

After Shock Media · 06-07-2008, 04:57 PM

Slightly off topic as it doesn't involve vomit.
Considering nearly every scientific source claims that squirting is just pissing when the amount of liquid is more than a tablespoon or so. Also that I have seen numerous videos of people squirting into other peoples mouths and quite a bit of very hard pussy slapping. Where would the line fall.

I mean I do know anal alone let alone DP anal is pretty out there if one wishes to break it down. Medically speaking anal sex is not only a much higher risk of sex. It also leads to medical issues such as what is referred to as a rosebud, anal tearing, anal leakage and the like. Now these models are putting themselves to a physical risk and honestly anal sex is a wee bit sick. I also will not even bring up ass to mouth, hell I really think the CDC should possibly ban that crap.

Now one of you rational folks please tell me point blank were the line of self censorship should fall between consenting adults.

kane · 06-08-2008, 03:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steved

Never promoted his content because I didn't like it, but many people purchased it and promoted it. Are they going to charge all the users that accessed his sites and bought his videos for having obscene material as well? Will those people have a case against him for selling them obscene material?

As far as I am aware it is not illegal to be in possession of obscene content, it is illegal to sell it or transport it through the mail. So I believe you can legally own a Max Hardcore DVD, but you can't sell it and ship it to someone else. Don't quote me on that because I'm no lawyer.

Nikki_Licks · 06-08-2008, 10:31 AM

[QUOTE=tony404;14291916]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikki_Licks

I wouldnt say they know damn well with 100% certainty.

Maybe I should have written it a bit different.......
I should have wrote .......I would think any model that is going to work with a producer would at least check their background, what they produce and look over a sample of their work.
This still does not excuse what he produces, but I guess some girls are willing to go through this because of the all mighty dollar.
You would think in this day and age models would take precaution. I could be wrong....

06-06-2008, 07:38 PM	#203
bringer i have man boobies Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: van down by the river Posts: 13,082	i wonder if gay porn is next. i bet most americans think gay sex is obscene and should be stopped. __________________ 333-765-551

06-06-2008, 07:47 PM	#204
tony286 lurker Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: atlanta Posts: 57,021	Who here is from indiana? My wife's sister is having problems with her landlord.Who is not taking care of things and so I want to look up the law for the kid. Is it state or county?

06-07-2008, 01:27 AM	#208
The Duck Adult Content Provider Industry Role: Join Date: May 2005 Location: Europe Posts: 18,243	thats bad __________________ Skype Horusmaia ICQ 41555245 Email [email protected]

06-07-2008, 11:40 AM	#217
Nikki_Licks Confirmed User Join Date: May 2005 Location: Behind The Lens Posts: 6,323	[QUOTE=Paul Markham;14290596] No I don't think he has a right to abuse people on film because he does it to a paid model in a porn shoot. Do you think people should be allowed to abuse others if they pay? Paul, I don't think it is right and never said it was, but these models damn well know what they are getting in for as BeaverBob stated and I fully agree with his statement. Whether I or you feel it is right is not the issue. If he operates within the boundaries of law, then he is entitled to produce whatever he wants...whether we like it or not. Please do not insinuate that I feel it is Ok to abuse models. Please don't be a mouse; they will not go after the softer stuff. They will apply 2257 and other laws, but they will not try for softer stuff which will get thrown out when there are people like MH to score off. First off Paul, I am not being a mouse, be rather gesturing that once this government gets an open doorway it could create a path of destruction in any direction they feel they can push. Maybe you feel like this government is not going to do anything like this, but I would not put anything past this government. You would have to live under the rule of the American Government to maybe understand this. I don't think porn and Freedom of Speech gives him the right to do that. What does porn have to do with him being able to do what he does? Once again....if he operates within the boundaries of the law then there is not much you, I or anyone else can do about it. Until the laws change in this country, he or anyone else has the right to produce extreme content. __________________ Amateur Content ICQ: 292 356 077

06-07-2008, 03:38 PM	#226
steved Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: New England Posts: 1,963	Never promoted his content because I didn't like it, but many people purchased it and promoted it. Are they going to charge all the users that accessed his sites and bought his videos for having obscene material as well? Will those people have a case against him for selling them obscene material? __________________ - Make $$$ with Cam Traffic - Last edited by steved; 06-07-2008 at 03:39 PM..

06-06-2008, 07:33 PM	#202
Redrob Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: In a refrigerator box by the tracks. Posts: 4,790	I remember some comedian once said that "If you aren't occasionally offended, you don't live in a free country."

06-06-2008, 07:49 PM	#205
Kudles Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Here There and Everywhere Posts: 5,477	Geez that super sucks

06-07-2008, 02:52 AM	#210
V_RocKs Damn Right I Kiss Ass! Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Cowtown, USA Posts: 32,409	Isn't he the guy that does the seriously hardcore stuff? I don't agree with his brand of porn and I think it sickens an unsick mind to see it. If you don't agree with my point of view that is fine. You are probably one of the sick fucks that doesn't understand WHY you are a sick fuck.

06-07-2008, 07:57 AM	#213
Electric Lights So Fucking Banned Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 224	I hope he gets ass raped by negroes. He gives porn a bad name. I know that sounds ridiculous but it's true.

06-07-2008, 12:09 PM	#218
Peaches Old broad Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Away Posts: 13,933	If the models were being abused then this should have been brought as a criminal case for assault, not an obscenity case. I think the government may have done themselves a disservice by muddying the waters on this one.

06-07-2008, 04:39 PM	#230
booker Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Baltimore Posts: 1,370	I agree with the comment that the jury must be retarded. They had to ask (and not very eloquently) what would happen if they didn't find on all 20? And how long they had to deliberate? Where did they find these people that they have no clue how a jury works? I've never seen his stuff so I won't comment on the obscenity, but I do agree that something is only obscene if you think it is. If you are offended by something (music, pictures, video, books, ideas, thoughts, actions, whatever), then you have the choice not to engage them. The Religious Right is neither. __________________ Xanadu024 (aim) or 286785389 (icq) "Hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard."

06-07-2008, 04:57 PM	#231
After Shock Media It's coming look busy Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn". Posts: 35,299	Slightly off topic as it doesn't involve vomit. Considering nearly every scientific source claims that squirting is just pissing when the amount of liquid is more than a tablespoon or so. Also that I have seen numerous videos of people squirting into other peoples mouths and quite a bit of very hard pussy slapping. Where would the line fall. I mean I do know anal alone let alone DP anal is pretty out there if one wishes to break it down. Medically speaking anal sex is not only a much higher risk of sex. It also leads to medical issues such as what is referred to as a rosebud, anal tearing, anal leakage and the like. Now these models are putting themselves to a physical risk and honestly anal sex is a wee bit sick. I also will not even bring up ass to mouth, hell I really think the CDC should possibly ban that crap. Now one of you rational folks please tell me point blank were the line of self censorship should fall between consenting adults. __________________ [email protected] ICQ:135982156 AIM: Aftershockmed1a MSN: [email protected]