Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Lol. Another moronic troll

That post was so ignorant, it almost made me genuinely mad. Luckily though, these retarded ideas would be impossible to enforce unless the government had total control over the internet.

ITT: I get accused of liking Child Pornography.

At 5/28/14 09:37 PM, CresIsis wrote: ITT: I get accused of liking Child Pornography.

It wasn't so much accusation as it was pointing out what you said

Who gives a fuck? Let people get off to whatever the hell they want to. Also, regulation doesn't do shit. If someone want's to do/see something, there's a way, trust me. That's like saying that keeping rape illegal will eventually stop rapists from raping people.

At 5/29/14 02:51 PM, somespammer224 wrote: Also, regulation doesn't do shit.

Um, yes it does.

That's like saying that keeping rape illegal will eventually stop rapists from raping people.

It does stop people from being raped, as opposed it it being legal.

Rofl what are you trolling? Cause it's not very good

At 5/27/14 04:43 PM, Spedmallet wrote:

3. Outlawing any form of pornography other than normal intercourse (for example, fetishes, snuff), punishable by mandatory jail time.

You're demonizing fetishes, and homosexuality, by the way. Also snuff is already banned BECAUSE IT'S MURDER.

Seriously, what makes YOU the alpha and omega on what sex is NORMAL? So say someone is turned on by feet, is it your right or mine to say they shouldn't be?

Also, it's their bodies and lives, it's not my problem nor the law's if they sacrifice it to pornography. It's at least more productive than wrestling.

At 5/27/14 04:43 PM, Spedmallet wrote:

As is my point. Pornography permanently destroys the lives of the actors, scaring them for life. Many people act in pornography as a measure of desperation and are left with an irreversible mark on their own personal history, and on the internet to boot (or VHS tape if you're from the stone age.)

Except, porn doesn't destroy the actors or actresses at all; nor is it from desperation at all. I have a lot of friends from both sides of the sexuality scale (porn/prostitution). I would be more inclined to believe that prostitutes have daddy issues or past history than porn stars.

I feel as though it should be as regulated as a firearm or weapon would, since it can be as equally damaging. Here are some of my ideas:

1. Require a government issued licence to view, make and star in pornagraphy (thus, where a site would normally direct you to a 'are you 18 yes or no' page, it prompts you to input your pornography licence.)

too expensive. also, in order to sell things like alcohol, you cannot just have an id stating you're over 21. you need a microbrew license.

2. A mandatory psychological screening before, and if need be counseling after, playing a role in pornography (for example, a woman with a history of sexual abuse would be permanently barred from obtaining a pornography actor licence.)

Discrimination. Also, most places that screen for porn jobs do some sort of mental wellness check for the safety of them and their co-stars.

3. Outlawing any form of pornography other than normal intercourse (for example, fetishes, snuff), punishable by mandatory jail time.

Fetishism is normal in life. Deal with it, turbonerd.

At 5/29/14 04:52 PM, HKS wrote: Fetishism is normal in life. Deal with it, turbonerd.

Well fucking put, mang. Well fucking put.

At 5/29/14 04:57 PM, SCTE3 wrote: ITT: People taking Speedmallet seriously and get touchy troubled over it.

I know I get touchy with myself when I watch pornography

At 5/29/14 04:51 PM, protoAuthor wrote: You're demonizing fetishes, and homosexuality, by the way.

No, just fetishes. Homosexuality is a perfectly acceptable lifestyle choice

Seriously, what makes YOU the alpha and omega on what sex is NORMAL?

Let's see. Affection between two people is normal, while pissing on someone's face is abnormal. I think that's pretty self explanatory.

So say someone is turned on by feet, is it your right or mine to say they shouldn't be?

I think it's certainly weird, but that specific example isn't terribly bad. I'm honestly much more focused on the more grotesque stuff and perhaps should have made myself less broad.

Also, it's their bodies and lives, it's not my problem nor the law's if they sacrifice it to pornography. It's at least more productive than wrestling.

It is your problem if a woman kills herself so you can have a wank.

At 5/29/14 04:52 PM, HKS wrote: Except, porn doesn't destroy the actors or actresses at all; nor is it from desperation at all. I have a lot of friends from both sides of the sexuality scale (porn/prostitution). I would be more inclined to believe that prostitutes have daddy issues or past history than porn stars.

You misunderstand. Your handful of people that aren't bothered by acting in films would most likely be cleared in rule 2 (psychological screening). I am not objecting to them.

too expensive. also, in order to sell things like alcohol, you cannot just have an id stating you're over 21. you need a microbrew license.

Yes, which is why you'd need a separate licence to make pornography. And implying rule 1's pornography viewing licence would be as simple as tacking it onto a driver's licence.

Also, most places that screen for porn jobs do some sort of mental wellness check for the safety of them and their co-stars.

Ahahaha "most pornographers care about their stars even though they're not federally required to.

Newsflash; no. No they don't.

Fetishism is normal in life. Deal with it, turbonerd.

It's an abnormality hidden within the walls of normalcy and should be exposed as the disgusting act it is

At 5/29/14 05:27 PM, Spedmallet wrote:

It is your problem if a woman kills herself so you can have a wank.

No it absolutely isn't.

At 5/29/14 05:28 PM, protoAuthor wrote:

At 5/29/14 05:27 PM, Spedmallet wrote:

It is your problem if a woman kills herself so you can have a wank.

No it absolutely isn't.

Well fine, if you want to wank to feet being peed on and innocent women committing suicide that's your business. That doesn't belong in my thread

At 5/29/14 05:31 PM, Spedmallet wrote:

Well fine, if you want to wank to feet being peed on and innocent women committing suicide that's your business. That doesn't belong in my thread

It totally does belong in your thread, though.

Pornography rations have been decreased to 25 grams.

At 5/27/14 04:43 PM, Spedmallet wrote: (or worse, the 'I'm 14 years old and fuck you' train)

I regret not having ridden this train as much as I could have.

At 5/29/14 03:19 PM, Spedmallet wrote:

At 5/29/14 02:51 PM, somespammer224 wrote: Also, regulation doesn't do shit.

Um, yes it does.

Most of the time, no, it doesn't.

The catholic churches regulation and banning of science created underground scientific groups, The US's ban on alcohol in the 20's created illegal alcohol industries and speakeasies, Regulation and ban on drugs created drug cartels, I could keep going on forever.

Regulation tends to create more problems than it solves.

At 5/29/14 05:27 PM, Spedmallet wrote: Homosexuality is a perfectly acceptable lifestyle choice

Why did I respond to you with seriousness, twice in a row

At 5/29/14 06:29 PM, Xenomit wrote:

At 5/29/14 03:19 PM, Spedmallet wrote:

At 5/29/14 02:51 PM, somespammer224 wrote: Also, regulation doesn't do shit.

Um, yes it does.

Most of the time, no, it doesn't.

yup

you can't outright ban or regulate something 100% if there is still a large enough demand or want for the product in question. All you're doing is creating a ton of unintended consequences as a result, such as criminalizing a product and the people who consume and demand it.

If you make fly-fishing illegal, the every fly-fisher is a criminal outlaw as a result.

At 5/29/14 05:27 PM, Spedmallet wrote: Let's see. Affection between two people is normal, while pissing on someone's face is abnormal. I think that's pretty self explanatory.

Man, I really hate having to explain to people that yes, their midget cyberpunk scat fetish is weird as fuck. It's so lame how these weirdos have absolutely no self awareness.

At 5/29/14 06:29 PM, Xenomit wrote: regulation and banning of science
ban on alcohol in the 20's
Regulation and ban on drugs

Regulation and banning are totally separate things dude. Like regulating how many posts you can make in a day is different from not allowing you to post altogether.

At 5/29/14 06:29 PM, Xenomit wrote: The catholic churches regulation and banning of science created underground scientific groups, The US's ban on alcohol in the 20's created illegal alcohol industries and speakeasies, Regulation and ban on drugs created drug cartels, I could keep going on forever.

So your message is p. much "just give up." I could site that regulation of church and state was a success, the US's crackdown on drunk drivers was a success, that drug lords killing each other isn't as important as saving people from being addicted to heroin, and so on as well.

At 5/29/14 06:35 PM, Urban-Champion wrote: you can't outright ban or regulate something 100%

Sure, you can't make a driver's licence without somebody driving without one. But that doesn't mean a driver's licence shouldn't exist

Nice try! But you can't troll me!

At 5/29/14 05:27 PM, Spedmallet wrote:

At 5/29/14 04:52 PM, HKS wrote:

You misunderstand. Your handful of people that aren't bothered by acting in films would most likely be cleared in rule 2 (psychological screening). I am not objecting to them.

It's not just a handful of people that isn't bothered by doing pornography; a very good population of people who actively do pornography are not emotionally drained at all.

Yes, which is why you'd need a separate licence to make pornography. And implying rule 1's pornography viewing licence would be as simple as tacking it onto a driver's licence.

Again, that is so rudimentary and basic. Your logic is almost like making people wear badges for what they believe in.

Ahahaha "most pornographers care about their stars even though they're not federally required to.

Where are your facts there? They do care, because in most "normal" types of porn, including hardcore porn; you dont wanna break your flesh, because breaking your women or men requires finding an actor and negotiating wages.

Newsflash; no. No they don't.

Yes they do ;)

Fetishism is normal in life. Deal with it, turbonerd.

It's an abnormality hidden within the walls of normalcy and should be exposed as the disgusting act it is

I think you keep saying that word and you have no idea what it means. Fetishism is not just "leather whips and gags". There are very, very, very specific fetishes that exist in life that may seem normal.

At 5/29/14 07:17 PM, HKS wrote: Where are your facts there? They do care, because in most "normal" types of porn, including hardcore porn; you dont wanna break your flesh, because breaking your women or men requires finding an actor and negotiating wages.

I'm just going to drop this here and let you figure it out

At 5/29/14 07:23 PM, Spedmallet wrote:

At 5/29/14 07:17 PM, HKS wrote: Where are your facts there? They do care, because in most "normal" types of porn, including hardcore porn; you dont wanna break your flesh, because breaking your women or men requires finding an actor and negotiating wages.

I'm just going to drop this here and let you figure it out

Max Hardcore's goal was to test the limit of pornography and acceptability. He's also hated by the rest of the community. There's always bad apples in every apple tree and that one went to prison for obscenity charges and "child pornography". Your point is what? That if one person does something morally wrong, the whole community is wrong?

At 5/29/14 07:40 PM, HKS wrote: Max Hardcore's goal was to test the limit of pornography and acceptability. He's also hated by the rest of the community. There's always bad apples in every apple tree and that one went to prison for obscenity charges and "child pornography". Your point is what? That if one person does something morally wrong, the whole community is wrong?

I suppose the porn industry is pretty honkey-dory for the producer, cameraman, editor buyer and seller. I'm certain they don't mind.

I really do find it hard to believe you think a producer would care any more than to administer an std test to prevent a lawsuit

At 5/29/14 06:51 PM, Spedmallet wrote:

At 5/29/14 06:35 PM, Urban-Champion wrote: you can't outright ban or regulate something 100%

Sure, you can't make a driver's licence without somebody driving without one. But that doesn't mean a driver's licence shouldn't exist

I see the words, I see the user, I see the stupid, but I can't logically comprehend the actual post. I don't think those are even statements, and they barely pass the grade as a comprehensible sentence.

At 5/29/14 06:51 PM, Spedmallet wrote:

At 5/29/14 06:29 PM, Xenomit wrote: The catholic churches regulation and banning of science created underground scientific groups, The US's ban on alcohol in the 20's created illegal alcohol industries and speakeasies, Regulation and ban on drugs created drug cartels, I could keep going on forever.

So your message is p. much "just give up." I could site that regulation of church and state was a success, the US's crackdown on drunk drivers was a success, that drug lords killing each other isn't as important as saving people from being addicted to heroin, and so on as well.

At 5/29/14 06:35 PM, Urban-Champion wrote: you can't outright ban or regulate something 100%

Sure, you can't make a driver's licence without somebody driving without one. But that doesn't mean a driver's licence shouldn't exist

Okay, now I'm almost positive you're just trolling. Prohibition did not work. It failed terribly. It practically started and fueled the Mob, one of the single biggest crime problems in the United States, so Congress just made a new amendment annulling it. Now, let's think about this. If we were to regulate pornography like this, pornography sites would lose so much money (Side Note: Most websites make most money from Ad Revenue and Subscription-Based Services), it wouldn't be funny. People would just go on networks such as Tor and watch their porn illegally there.

Secondly, why try to regulate something that isn't causing a problem? Other than keyboard-cleaning service's skyrocketing profits, there's really no notable concern about porn.