Quote:
Originally Posted by Naughty-Pages
I believe he is talking about using the new regs under the false pretense of protecting children by backdating laws illegally, as well as making the record keeping so difficult that it's obvious sole intention was to make existing legal porn illegal and also make future legal porn 10x more difficult to produce. i.e.: things like photos and videos of women who were obviously 80 years old were suddenly unusable.. (to protect children lmao.. ya right).
|
dood it's very simple .... ill give you an example... you ever go buy beer or cig's here in america and even though your for sure over 21 years old.. im talking a beard , gray hair.. and a fucking walker... and guess what... you still get ID'd .....
the new regs are not bad at all dood... all they say are prove she's over 18.... it's very simple..... weather she is 90 with wrinkles or just turned 18 with no grass on the infield the bottom line is they all need to prove they are over 18 if you can't then it shuold be just as good as child porn... that simple.....
listen I Think it's stupid that a gilf would need to prove she's over 18 but... it is what it is.. and if thats why I gotta do to protect children thats what we gotta do... you can't make laws on these things on a case by case basis..... it has to be across the board...
it's simple...
you film porn you need to prove everyone on camera is over 18.... that simple...
I am willing to bet 90% of the people that film content do not do 2257 the way it's supposed to be done.....
ill ask a simple question ... how many "files" do you keep for each girl...
lets see how many producers are actually up on the laws.....
it's very simple.....