Freedom Isn't Free! Fuck the FSC! - Page 3

xxxjay · 2005-07-03, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chop Smith

Most of us that have been around here for awhile have little problem with FSC other than Jay and a few others here turned this 2257 stuff into a membership campaign for them. It is way passed time to turn loose of this.

Hey, they deserve support. Massive court battles aren't free.

pornodoggy · 2005-07-06, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

Hey, they deserve support. Massive court battles aren't free.

I want YOU to pay for it so it's free for me.

xxxjay · 2005-07-07, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pornodoggy

I want YOU to pay for it so it's free for me.

That is a really lame position to take. After your first 2257 bust - call a lawyer and tell him exactly that.

Cry in one + shit in the other = see which fills up first!

xxxjay · 2005-07-04, 04:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chop Smith

Jay and a few others here turned this 2257 stuff into a membership campaign for them. It is way passed time to turn loose of this.

Are you trying to say that I have anything to gain by the FSC getting more members?

Chop Smith · 2005-07-03, 07:05 PM

And that is the reason lots of us joined

Chop Smith · 2005-07-04, 03:17 PM

No is the answer to the question.

Do I think you used bad judgement in the way you worded your 2257 posts? Yes!

xxxjay · 2005-07-07, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chop Smith

No is the answer to the question.

Do I think you used bad judgement in the way you worded your 2257 posts? Yes!

Can you expound upon that?

Chop Smith · 2005-07-07, 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

Can you expound upon that?

Jay, in all due respect, I decline. It would probably lead to a pissing contest which would not be beneficial to either of us.

xxxjay · 2005-07-08, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chop Smith

Jay, in all due respect, I decline. It would probably lead to a pissing contest which would not be beneficial to either of us.

Bring it on. Pissing contests aren't always bad...sometimes people learn things.

guitar riff · 2005-07-04, 06:03 PM

Things that make ya go hmmmm LOL

wonder what will happen if alberto gets put in the empty seat in the supreme court I'm hearing alot of talk about him being a top choice with two distant competitors behind him and this case ends up getting kicked around for awhile then ends up in the supreme court in front of the creator or author of the new revisions.

Toby · 2005-07-04, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guitar riff

...then ends up in the supreme court in front of the creator or author of the new revisions.

These current revisions were initiated under Ashcroft's watch, Gonzales just inherited them. Still, I can think of many others I'd prefer to see fill that vacancy on the Supreme Court.

SirMoby · 2005-07-04, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toby

These current revisions were initiated under Ashcroft's watch, Gonzales just inherited them. Still, I can think of many others I'd prefer to see fill that vacancy on the Supreme Court.

Gonzales is considered to moderate for the religious right to consider him and if appointed the conservatives could see some lack of support in the mid term elections so I don’t think it will happen. 63% of Americans believe that Dubya will appoint someone that will consider their own personal religious beliefs when interpreting the law. That should disqualify them from being a judge but it doesn’t.

My only real concern about Gonzales is that he’s stated numerous times that his #1 priority is to fight obscenity and not protect children. He may be saying this because he’s doing as told and that’s admirable. I think if he is appointed he may end up with a mind of his own and be more moderate and more focused on the law then many others that will be appointed in the next 3.5 years.

pornodoggy · 2005-07-06, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toby

These current revisions were initiated under Ashcroft's watch, Gonzales just inherited them. Still, I can think of many others I'd prefer to see fill that vacancy on the Supreme Court.

Gonzales may have inherited them from Asshat, but he was proud enough of them to make a brief mention of 'em in a speech given in front of the National Press Club a couple of days after he signed them. Of course, he was using the "save the children" justification.

The audio of the speech is available with a quick search on npr.com.

Chop Smith · 2005-07-04, 09:50 PM

plateman · 2005-07-04, 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chop Smith

LOL I been beating a dead horse most of my life and to be honest my stick is about worn out

Erick G · 2005-07-08, 04:52 PM

Wont the DOJ go mostly after teen sites?
I do mature sites and if the DOJ thinks my grannies are under 18 they got serious problems.

xxxjay · 2005-07-08, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erick G

Wont the DOJ go mostly after teen sites?
I do mature sites and if the DOJ thinks my grannies are under 18 they got serious problems.

They are most likely going to go after "extreme" material that they can demonize in court.

urb · 2005-07-09, 11:23 AM

What a total waste of money and resources.

The DoJ should be tackling violent crime and drugs. Tidy up that mess first and then worry about putting manpower into enforcing 2257.

It's very simple priority management.

Kinky · 2005-07-10, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by urb

What a total waste of money and resources.

The DoJ should be tackling violent crime and drugs. Tidy up that mess first and then worry about putting manpower into enforcing 2257.

It's very simple priority management.

geez Urb don't go using common sense now

i would be happy if they would find the fuckers that keep stealing my cars!! if anybody sees a couple of nice nissan 300zx's with dvd players and tv's inside for sale really cheap lemme know, they are probably mine! LOL

xxxjay · 2005-07-10, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by urb

What a total waste of money and resources.

The DoJ should be tackling violent crime and drugs. Tidy up that mess first and then worry about putting manpower into enforcing 2257.

It's very simple priority management.

I agree 100%...well, err...50% -- they should keep up with the violent crime. They lost the drug war a long time ago.

xxxjay · 2005-07-10, 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by urb

What a total waste of money and resources.

The DoJ should be tackling violent crime and drugs. Tidy up that mess first and then worry about putting manpower into enforcing 2257.

It's very simple priority management.

Oh yeah, I just rememebered...there is thsi guy running around in the middle east they haven't been able to catch...I can't remember his name...his initials were O.B. or something like that...

urb · 2005-07-11, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

Oh yeah, I just rememebered...there is thsi guy running around in the middle east they haven't been able to catch...I can't remember his name...his initials were O.B. or something like that...

You mean the guy who's family left the United States under the protection of the DoJ before the FBI were allowed to interview them regarding the whereabouts of O.B.?

Far-L · 2005-07-13, 01:27 AM

The only reason you all are pissed about the FSC is because you are misinformed.

I think if you knew more then you wouldn't see the FSC in such a negative light.

Here are some things to consider:

The FSC is a TRADE ORGANIZATION not the ACLU. That means it acts on behalf of its members which is different than the ACLU that works on constitutional issues.

There are plenty of problems the adult industry has faced over the years that the ACLU has done nothing for so don't think that is some sort of porn protection agency.

On the other hand, the FSC is a trade group that has paid lobbyists working to address issues that concern the adult industry directly.

The FSC has worked and is working on issues that have very far reaching benefits that extend to the entire industry. But keep in mind that effort costs money and the money is paid by its members. Why should the members want to spend to defend every single person in this industry when so many of them:
A. Don't put in a friggin dime to deal with the problems
B. Don't run above board legal operations and thumb their nose at the law in the first place
C. Want to run offshore rather than deal with the issue

I know from our Acacia suit that people have similar expectations but the truth is we are all just business people trying to protect our own businesses. Sure it is nice to be complimented and told "you are fighting the good fight" but at the end of the day I would much rather see someone throw in some coin so I don't have to spend as much. I laugh at all the people that will still be paying their "good business decision" licenses if we get out on non-infringement. Nothing noble about that.

I won't be crying either over any company that closed or closes down due to the new 2257 regs either. That is not vary couragous either.

I will be looking at my brothers and sisters in FSC though and saying thanks for standing up in a time of need. You can say whatever you want about that. I am just truly grateful for the FSC and what it does for our industry.

2005-07-03, 07:05 PM	#5
Chop Smith Eighteen 'til I Die Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Mississippi Posts: 2,168	And that is the reason lots of us joined __________________

2005-07-04, 03:17 PM	#6
Chop Smith Eighteen 'til I Die Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Mississippi Posts: 2,168	No is the answer to the question. Do I think you used bad judgement in the way you worded your 2257 posts? Yes! __________________

2005-07-04, 06:03 PM	#10
guitar riff Asleep at the switch? I wasn't asleep, I was drunk Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: In a van Down by the river. Posts: 216	Things that make ya go hmmmm LOL wonder what will happen if alberto gets put in the empty seat in the supreme court I'm hearing alot of talk about him being a top choice with two distant competitors behind him and this case ends up getting kicked around for awhile then ends up in the supreme court in front of the creator or author of the new revisions. __________________ Join The Rage!!!

2005-07-04, 09:50 PM	#14
Chop Smith Eighteen 'til I Die Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Mississippi Posts: 2,168	__________________

2005-07-08, 04:52 PM	#16
Erick G Look maah I moved out and got my own space:) Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 555	Wont the DOJ go mostly after teen sites? I do mature sites and if the DOJ thinks my grannies are under 18 they got serious problems. __________________ Exclusive Feeds

2005-07-09, 11:23 AM	#18
urb All the way from Room 101 Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 3,557	What a total waste of money and resources. The DoJ should be tackling violent crime and drugs. Tidy up that mess first and then worry about putting manpower into enforcing 2257. It's very simple priority management. __________________

2005-07-13, 01:27 AM	#23
Far-L Are you sure this is the Sci-Fi Convention? It's full of nerds! Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 265	The only reason you all are pissed about the FSC is because you are misinformed. I think if you knew more then you wouldn't see the FSC in such a negative light. Here are some things to consider: The FSC is a TRADE ORGANIZATION not the ACLU. That means it acts on behalf of its members which is different than the ACLU that works on constitutional issues. There are plenty of problems the adult industry has faced over the years that the ACLU has done nothing for so don't think that is some sort of porn protection agency. On the other hand, the FSC is a trade group that has paid lobbyists working to address issues that concern the adult industry directly. The FSC has worked and is working on issues that have very far reaching benefits that extend to the entire industry. But keep in mind that effort costs money and the money is paid by its members. Why should the members want to spend to defend every single person in this industry when so many of them: A. Don't put in a friggin dime to deal with the problems B. Don't run above board legal operations and thumb their nose at the law in the first place C. Want to run offshore rather than deal with the issue I know from our Acacia suit that people have similar expectations but the truth is we are all just business people trying to protect our own businesses. Sure it is nice to be complimented and told "you are fighting the good fight" but at the end of the day I would much rather see someone throw in some coin so I don't have to spend as much. I laugh at all the people that will still be paying their "good business decision" licenses if we get out on non-infringement. Nothing noble about that. I won't be crying either over any company that closed or closes down due to the new 2257 regs either. That is not vary couragous either. I will be looking at my brothers and sisters in FSC though and saying thanks for standing up in a time of need. You can say whatever you want about that. I am just truly grateful for the FSC and what it does for our industry. __________________ www.homegrowncontent.com www.homegrowncash.com

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread: