MIss Usa was only 17 in those pictures
 

http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/12/2....ap/index.html

Serious warning people... it's CP to publish them. Mods, you might want to do a cleanup is aisle 6.

not goooddddddddd

She's hot and I'd happily have had a good time with her :D

;) 17 IS legal here in the UK you know!

I know... I am one of the queen's loyal subjects (just lost in a different country)... but for purposes of porn, well... it's not a good idea. I know these pics are going to be all over the place, so watch out. They really are CP.

They're perfectly legal, nothing sexually explicit and they're in public... relax

Actually I think some ARE sexually explicit--isn't titty-licking-action going on?

I don't even know what pics you're on about ... I just saw one swimsuit image on CNN ...

Looked tasty enough ... but I dunno ... I was just making a point that just because she's 17, doesn't mean it's CP ... I mean ... let's be honest ... it's 'officially' CP right up to one minute til she hits 18 ... so it's kind of silly ...

I dunno... :)

stevo: Titty licking... and considering how strict the newer post 2257 rules are, you would need (1) a model release, and (2) proof of age. Titty licking, simulated blowjob, etc... all sexual. It was public yes, but you are only off the hook until you know she is underage (her statement) and then you are in the pooh.

Stupid rules I know...

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=688998

That thread has a full set, thankfully starred... but still not good... plus a link to the uncensored ones.

I always think it's a bit off ... how over here in the UK, we can have sex legally at the age of 16 ... But we're not allowed to buy porn til we're 18 ... I mean .... WTF?!

I can fucking HAVE sex when I'm 16, but not SEE it??

Sex laws are all over the place ...

I just find it all a bit funny really. I don't REALLY wanna see some 16 year old girl getting her tits out ... I'd feel odd about that ... BUT ... 17, I don't see a problem with technically. DOn't ask me why ... It's an odd thing but I mean ... I've had sex with a 17 year old and ... shit... she was fucking good in bed! BUT... I'd not wanna sleep with a 16 year old ... I'd feel wierd about it ... Maybe it's coz at 16 she'd only left school ... the connection is still close ...

Man ... odd.

Oh well :)

:D

It's odd, it's arbitrary, and it's just one of those things... one day she is jail bait, next day she can be a pornstar and die in a war in a country she can't find on a map.

Makes ya wonder.

Oh shit, those arent pics from a recent night out?

She was a pretty 17 yearold girl..big deal

Hot pics.

I'm pretty sure GFY is in the US.

Read the CNN story... She says she was 17. Who else can you trust except the model?

Just goes to show that more girls are lil partying sluts these days...

she's a free spirited teen.. she's definitely hot!

Hot perhaps. Subject of a porn board or porn blogs? Not a good idea.

have to love a thread of smut merchants trying to reason showing underage pics

man o man, whats the world coming to...the same old shit, everyone needs to have some fuckin fun once in a while

Yet, you can find the images posted on almost every major news source on the net.

C P -- schmee pee -- loosen up!

I'd have fucked her when she was 16 !! :pimp

and GFY is no different - this is a news story, the public i.e. members of GFY have the same rights to disseminate news as anybody else.

She's hot

and every TV news bulletin :thumbsup

Think it's a bit of an over reaction to label it CP

bump for an important thread


spaz

she had a little fun, big deal, let her be miss Ohio then

she can be miss GFY

This thread is useless.

only 17?! I still would fuck her!!

Context is a wonderful thing, and posting them on a porn board is, well, porn.

I agree with sarah, it is impressive watching people here trying to come up with some reason why they think they can post a naked 17 year old without issue.

Damn.........

CP = Child Porn.

It seems to me this is not "Porn" and she is surelly not a "Child" in those pics. My deffinition of CP would be that you hit the CP marker when a child is forced into or talked into (yes, some children are VERY naive) nude or exposing pictures or movies or even worse, pictures or movies with sexual intercourse. This is surelly not the case here, she seems a young woman having some fun knowing what she is doing. :2 cents:

exactly!

btw id hit it!

It's a fucking NEWS story dipshit. You, Sarah, etc.. should join some "Family Values" organization and shut the fuck up.

It's not porn. It's some silly little girl goofing around and posing for pictures. Give the whole "CP" issue a rest with it. You know what they say about those who cry the loudest...

it may not be CHILD porn but she was underage. It doesn't even matter to me about her personally but it is really dumb for a group of people that know exactly what can happen to people that put pictures of underage models on their sites to be trying to find reasons of why it should be okay for them to put those pictures up.

Personally, I don't care what she did but I also think anyone that knowingly buts up underage (in the States..yes, I live in the UK so I know the arguments) pictures deserves what they get.

17 Is illegal in the UK (to show) ever if it is just fully clothed.. if it is suggestive, you can be in serious trouble... 16 is the legal fucking age here, but pics of under 18's is illegal. A law that makes no sense, but there ya go..

Just my own opinion, but I think 18 is the right cut-off line anyway.

It's just TALK Sarah.. The whole fucking nation is discussing it. It's on every internet newspaper site, in the news, on TV, etc.. No one's pushing her pictures AS porn.

It's just the current scandal.. the Miss USA sluts.

holy shit if this is what gets someone upset - I can hardly wait to see your reaction to Dakota Fanning's rape scene in the new movie Hounddog

I think she'd do just fine in porn.

i hope cnn doesn't host their domains with directnic ...:(

CP is defined in both Canada and the USA as sexualized nudity of underage minors. Pics of a clothed 17 yr old acting slutty hardly qualify. Those pictures are so NOT CP so get over it.

If they offend you then I'd say you'd be better off exercising your right to not view them. (as in quit looking)

CD, have you seen the pics w/o the stars? She wasn't completely clothed. 17 year olds with their breast hanging out and licking each other's breasts is CP IMO (and probably the opinion of a judge). Putting a star on a nipple doesn't make it any better.

you are silly - The photos show no nudity - so they are perfectly legal - You think TMZ, CNN, FOXNEWS, and ALLL THE OTHER MAJOR NEWS SITES that have the same pictures up would be posting them if it was illegal? lol - think a little bit before you post - I made that thread so I get a little testy when people cry, especially on GFY, about something so ghey. Especially when you try to say I am posting child porn I get offended.

If you guys don't think people in the porn industry get judged harder that the news outlets, then you really shouldn't be in the porn biz.

That's a ludicrous statement ...

It's probably true in some respects ... but I don't see how a porn forum posting these pics would get fucked when CNN, FOX News etc would be happily linking and showing them all over the place...

Jeez.

I rest my case.

ICQ me whoever has the uncensored ones =)