Posted on 07/06/2012 5:31:58 PM PDT by madprof98
(Reuters) - Los Angeles County voters will decide in November whether to require porn actors to use condoms during film shoots, in a ballot measure that marks a new front for an AIDS group that has long targeted the adult entertainment industry.
The ballot initiative is the latest salvo against the industry, after the city of Los Angeles passed a similar requirement in January that has yet to be enforced.
Backers of the initiative submitted about 370,000 signatures to qualify for the ballot, well over the 232,000 required, said Ged Kenslea, a spokesman for the group AIDS Healthcare Foundation which is behind the proposal.
It would force health officials and regulators to enforce laws already on the books, the ballot measure's backers say.
The proposed ballot measure, if approved by voters, would require porn producers to get a health permit from Los Angeles County to make their movies showing explicit sex and nudity.
Weinstein, whose group began pushing for condoms in adult films after a porn actor was infected with HIV eight years ago, said the ballot measure would impose more far-reaching controls on porn producers than the city rules.
Using condoms on the set would be a requirement of the permit, whether the shoot was in a studio or elsewhere, Weinstein said.
Existing California workplace laws mandate the use of condoms by porn performers, but AIDS Healthcare officials say the state statute is not specifically aimed at the industry and is widely violated.
The group expects that involving Los Angeles County health officials and the use of health permits, which already apply to everything from barber shops to restaurants, will win compliance.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
“New laws are always a ‘good idea’ until the first time you have to enforce them.” - Unknown
I’ve got no problem explaining it to the kids (well, grandkids lol) but I am in L.A. County and this is a tough one. While I am decidedly anti-porn, I am decidedly anti-government regulation. At this point, the latter is trumping the former because it applies to more than just this statute. Just because I don’t like what you do, doesn’t mean I want the government to regulate it.
Further evidence that our culture is in the toilet. A great culture, once the decline gets a foothold, as ours did in the ‘60’s, never recovers at the ballot box. The marxist takeover is nearing the final stage when people like us will be visited between 3 and 4 in the morning after which all criticism will cease.
Exactly. I read a comment like the one in post #3 and sense that there is really no hope from the “conservatives” either.
I’m quite sure that limited population isnt at the greatest risk of contracting AIDS or other diseases. But of course, as we all know here, “workplace safety” isn’t the motivation here.
Good grief.
Embryonic stem-cell billion $$ boondoggle/rip-off.
Any Mark Leno proposed legislation. (ie, multiple parent statute)
Moonbeam and Kamala refusing to uphold Prop 8.
Gay federal judge holds kangaroo court and decides to redefine marriage.
And now they want us to vote on condoms for porn actors!? Make us accompices to their debauchery?
(spit)
Stupid law —how to enforce.
Another tax on tolerance.
Hey let’s ALL eat our candy with the wrapper ON.
PASS.
What fun it will be to explain this one to the kids when you take them along on voting day.Are these kids also oblivious to the constant barrage of Cealus and Viagra "erectile disfunction" commercials and magazine ads?...Could we vote on those instead?...PLEASE!!
Law enforcement agents will have to spend their time scrutinizing all the video evidence, obviously.
The thing is that porn can be produced anywhere, not just California. Technology has made it so anyone can make porn with a minimal investment.
I think if L.A. makes it more restrictive, all it will accomplish is moving the industry elsewhere and costing the county more tax revenue.
So it’s all a tougher call than it appears on the surface. Having no interest in ever having sex with a porn star, I suppose I have no personal opinion here. Either way, the taxpayer is likely apt to lose.
Obviously this is not a great thing. However from a business standpoint, once this is passed, more businesses leave California for areas that allow for this. California just does not want any business whatsoever. Yes I know this is a horrible way to make a living but again I am looking at it from a business standpoint ONLY.
Having this conversation is madness.
An ELECTION to determine whether or not porn actors should wear condoms?!
Oh, for the love of Pete.
Create a department of Condoms Enforcement, hire a director, secretary (sorry! Administrative Assistant), two deputies, 4 regulators, 6 IT guys, and 1 illegal alien.
Procure office space, computers, desks, toilet paper, and access to all kinds of vehicles.
Give everyone a credit card.
All in the interest of SAVING PORN STARS!!!!!
Do they insist on condoms in gay bath houses or bars?
By putting this issue to a vote of the people, regardless how we vote, or even if we decide not to vote, we become complicit in their evil.
Precisely my point in posting the article in the first place. But right away, I get these still-more-bizarre posts from the fiscal conservatives and the libertarians: "Well, gee, what if they take the porn money out of our Californication economy???" That simply convinces me that we have passed the point of no return. The only question left is which fiddle to play while we watch the city (or, rather, the whole country) burn to the ground.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.