Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   But let's talk about what's really important... (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49062)

GenuineRisk 11-07-2012 01:17 PM

But let's talk about what's really important...
 
... which is that in the California porn industry, condoms are now state-mandated safety equipment. ;)

(I just like using "condom" and "state-mandated safety equipment" in the same sentence. Heh.)

Danzig 11-07-2012 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk (Post 900997)
... which is that in the California porn industry, condoms are now state-mandated safety equipment. ;)

(I just like using "condom" and "state-mandated safety equipment" in the same sentence. Heh.)

how would you like being the osha inspector on a call relating to a 'safety equipment' violation? :eek:

Cannon Shell 11-07-2012 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk (Post 900997)
... which is that in the California porn industry, condoms are now state-mandated safety equipment. ;)

(I just like using "condom" and "state-mandated safety equipment" in the same sentence. Heh.)

Who will be in charge of enforcement?

bigrun 11-07-2012 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 900999)
how would you like being the osha inspector on a call relating to a 'safety equipment' violation? :eek:


I'd like that job but only if i inspected the female violaters..:D

Antitrust32 11-07-2012 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk (Post 900997)
... which is that in the California porn industry, condoms are now state-mandated safety equipment. ;)

(I just like using "condom" and "state-mandated safety equipment" in the same sentence. Heh.)

hahahah. free country, eh.

i prefer my porn latex free, though i have no idea why.

bigrun 11-07-2012 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell (Post 901000)
Who will be in charge of enforcement?

Long Dong Silver..:)

Rupert Pupkin 11-07-2012 01:47 PM

They say the law will require the Los Angeles Department of Public Health to visit the film sets to monitor whether condoms are being used. Leave it to the brilliant citizens here in Los Angeles to pass this law and waste resources. It would be one thing if the city was doing well financially. But that is not the case. The city is very short on money and every government agency is spread really thin. These city and state agencies barely have the resources to do their jobs right now. Where are they going to get the resources to satisfy this new law?

Antitrust32 11-07-2012 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin (Post 901007)
They say the law will require the Los Angeles Department of Public Health to visit the film sets to monitor whether condoms are being used. Leave it to the brilliant citizens here in Los Angeles to pass this law and waste resources. It would be one thing if the city was doing well financially. But that is not the case. The city is very short on money and every government agency is spread really thin. These city and state agencies barely have the resources to do their jobs right now. Where are they going to get the resources to satisfy this new law?

that and if a porn company doesnt like the new law, they can move shop to another state and take their $$ out of Cali completely.

Honu 11-07-2012 02:03 PM

The state of California and its cities need to take a few lessons from single mom's who have to live within a budget. The whole condom thing came about because the porn capitol of the world Simi-Valley had some actors and actress's come back testing positive for HIV.

Rupert Pupkin 11-07-2012 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 901014)
that and if a porn company doesnt like the new law, they can move shop to another state and take their $$ out of Cali completely.

I hope that doesn't happen. What will I do for work?

Antitrust32 11-07-2012 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin (Post 901020)
I hope that doesn't happen. What will I do for work?

you'll have to travel outside the LA county!

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...-leave-la.html

Rupert Pupkin 11-07-2012 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 901031)
you'll have to travel outside the LA county!

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...-leave-la.html

I wonder when the new law takes effect. I just signed a deal to star in a new film titled "Big Daddy Long Leg". I'm wondering if we will have to film it in a neighboring county.

Riot 11-07-2012 04:34 PM

Rupert, I like the name of your new film ... :eek:

Seriously, though - this was needed, because they just went through some massive infectious disease transmissions like last year or something (AIDS, etc) in the porn industry where people got sick and several died.

Hey - it's OSHA type stuff :D

cal828 11-07-2012 04:57 PM

I hope they resolve this problem to everyone's mutual "satisfaction."

pointmanscousin 11-07-2012 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honu (Post 901018)
The state of California and its cities need to take a few lessons from single mom's who have to live within a budget. The whole condom thing came about because the porn capitol of the world Simi-Valley had some actors and actress's come back testing positive for HIV.

Uhm, is this topic something you should be commenting?


Another reason you should not, it's best to leave the nincompoopense to Genuine Crazy Lady and Yakity Danny.

Sightseek 11-07-2012 07:49 PM

Too bad Prop. 37 failed...

Honu 11-07-2012 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sightseek (Post 901091)
Too bad Prop. 37 failed...

It was very poorly written, it needs to be re-written and brought back at a later date.

GenuineRisk 11-07-2012 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honu (Post 901093)
It was very poorly written, it needs to be re-written and brought back at a later date.

Was that the one about GMO labeling?

Sightseek 11-07-2012 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk (Post 901096)
Was that the one about GMO labeling?

yes

Rupert Pupkin 11-07-2012 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sightseek (Post 901091)
Too bad Prop. 37 failed...

The big companies like Monsanto spent about $50 million to defeat Prop 37. They know that if people see products labeled as GMO, and there are alternative products that are not genetically modified, people will go with the alternative choice.

The campaign against 37 was a based on a bunch of lies. They outspent the Yes on 37 people by about 10x. In the end, all the lies fooled people into voting "no". I don't know how anyone in their right mind could vote "no". How could it be a bad thing to have products labeled?

One of the phony arguments against 37 was that it would only apply to certain products. In reality, it was going to apply to any products that were relevant and that the state had jurisdiction over. It couldn't be applied to meat because the USDA is the governing body that oversees meat. It couldn't be applied to alcohol because the FAA oversees the labeling on alcohol.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:50 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.