19073 Members
14 Forums
40349 Topics
614156 Posts
Max Online: 639 @ 01/18/23 06:59 AM
|
|
|
#248337 - 06/05/07 05:59 PM
Re: Max Hardcore Indicted on Obscenity Charges
|
Human Garbage
Registered: 06/23/06
Posts: 1557
Loc: New York
|
Other than doing time? Yeah, thats the big point. Face it, government is always going to try and limit porn, until the courts tell them they can't. When the government proceeds in civil court, they give the adult industry a chance to respond in court, before a judge/ jury. If no one is being threatened with losing their freedom, its just a business decision.
_________________________
"This thing is ready to do damage!"
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248338 - 06/05/07 06:09 PM
Re: Max Hardcore Indicted on Obscenity Charges
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Isn't that what you lawyer types call "chilling effect?"
The first such ruling is said to have "a chilling effect." It is also said to start "the slide down the slippery slope."
My point though is that there would be no difference to the industry or the fans, for all intents and purposes, if the war against pornography were to be waged in a civil or a criminal nature, apart from the expected incarcerration of Max and others under a criminal prosecution. Both would have the "chilling effect" of shutting down the industry and depriving folks of thier incomes, or their content. Beyond being a modern witchhunt, it's nothing short of a war against the First Amendment. Unfortunately, too many "Mainstreamers" don't see it. I'm reminded the words of Lutheran Pastor Martin Niemöller, a special target of the Nazis:
Quote:
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Whether we are willing to acknoledge it or not, These are the stakes.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248339 - 06/05/07 06:18 PM
Re: Max Hardcore Indicted on Obscenity Charges
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
When the government proceeds in civil court, they give the adult industry a chance to respond in court, before a judge/ jury. If no one is being threatened with losing their freedom, its just a business decision.
I believe Max is also facing a Judge and Jury, albeit one that is sure to convict him given the venue.
But Moxie, this is more than "a business decision. This is part of an all-out Assault on the Bill of Rights, and anyone who believes otherwise has their head in the sand as much as Pastor Niemöller. The people who cherish Freedom have to make a stand for Freedom. As Edmund Burke said "The only thing necessary for the triumph of wicked men is for good men to do nothing."
I loathe Max's product. I think it's only good for torturing Islamic prisoners in the War on Terror. But he has the absolute right to make it, his fans have the absolute right to watch and possess it and the Government has no business trying to regulate it beyond ensuring that all performers are over 18.
If people don't stand up for their rights now, by the time they notice what's been happening, it will be too late. These are the stakes.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248340 - 06/05/07 06:48 PM
Re: Max Hardcore Indicted on Obscenity Charges
|
Human Garbage
Registered: 06/23/06
Posts: 1557
Loc: New York
|
Jim lovely speech about government not having the right to regulate obscenity. Too bad the supreme court sees it differently. I find Maxs argument that he hires consenting adults to perform for consenting adults persuasive. I'd have no orblem if the court found that in the age of internet and DVD that government regulation of obscenity is no longer warrented.
Now back to the original point of whether republicans or democrats are more likely to prosecute obscenity.my point Was simply that you have to look at the candidate and not make generalizations.
If the industry is in jeopardy because of Max, its mostly Maxs fault. Its like he was begging to be indicted.
_________________________
"This thing is ready to do damage!"
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248341 - 06/05/07 07:53 PM
Re: Max Hardcore Indicted on Obscenity Charges
|
Porn Jesus
Registered: 03/22/07
Posts: 5186
Loc: Joshua Tree National Park
|
A real Republican believes in minimal government and keeping the government's nose out of it's citizens private business. Whereas traditionally it has been the Democrats that believe that people are to stupid to know what is best for them and that government should be involved as much as possible in their lives. Seeing how the federal deficit has grown like Michael Jackson's schlong at Disneyland under Bush's administration is proof that he is not a true Republican. The most important thing to notice about todays neocon are those last three letters. The Bush administration is not focusing on porn prosecutions because they are Republicans they are focusing on them because they are morons. What is a higher priority today given the world we live in, prosecuting porn or developing a system to track who is entering our country and why? Yet which one does Bush have a boner over and which one has he stuck his thumb up his ass for six years over. I would bet my left nut that any of the Democrat candidates elected would proecute porn more than Ron Paul would.
_________________________
I would eat Allie Sin's asshole until I got an emotion out of her.-Jerkules
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248342 - 06/05/07 09:42 PM
Re: Max Hardcore Indicted on Obscenity Charges
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Moxie, you may scoff and call it Rhetoric, but the fact remains that the Battle for the First Amendment begins with a prematurely aged, alchoholic pervert named Paul Little. It's not just Porn that's at stake here, but our most basic Liberties themselves. Again, those who ignore this are burying their heads in the sand.
Did Max ask for it? Yeah, he did. But if it wasn't Max, it would have been Jeff or anyone else on the edge. Those who push the boundaries are inevitably the targets of reactionaries. Ask Gallileo, Thomas More, Socrates or any of Ten Thousand people whose works posed a challange to Conventional Wisdom or Taste.
As for which party would be more likely to criminally prosecute Porn producers, well, you said it yourself: Look at the candidates. Name me one Republican who would kill US v. Paul Little. I can't think of one of them that would. I can easilly see any of the Dems doing it, quietly, as I've noted elsewhere.
Perv, you might be right that there's a greater likelyhood of a Dem prosecuting Porn than Ron Paul, but the simple fact is that Ron Paul is not going to win the nomination, let alone the Presidency. So I'm trying to focus on those who have a chance. And among these, it's the Dems that are less likely, by far, to prosecute Pornographers than any of the (realistic) Republican candidates.
Edited by Jim B. (06/05/07 10:05 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248345 - 06/08/07 06:11 PM
Re: Max Hardcore Indicted on Obscenity Charges
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
It's a holdover from the WPA and the New Deal. I honestly don't have much of a problem with funding art. The pennies they spend on it are a pittance compared to some of the things they waste money on, like corporate bailouts and subsidies to fat cats. But you're right, they should set one standard. All or nothing.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248348 - 06/10/07 09:53 AM
Re: Max Hardcore Indicted on Obscenity Charges
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
If Max has to go to court maybe he could try crying. It seemed to work wonders for Paris!
Ben... 
This is Max we're talking about here. Can you honestly picture him crying like some stuck up spoiled rich cunt? Jesus, I wonder about you.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248350 - 06/11/07 03:38 PM
Re: Max Hardcore Indicted on Obscenity Charges
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Sadly, if convicted, I see Max as the one who's mascara will be running after a series of "gag factor" like BJs and facials as the convicts take turns reenacting their favorite scenes ....
Honestly, Fatman, if Max cries about anything at all, it will be the fact that he'll be deprived of booze.
Until, that is, he learns how to make his own Prison Hooch.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248352 - 06/12/07 02:00 PM
Re: Max Hardcore Indicted on Obscenity Charges
|
Porn Jesus
Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 4203
Loc: Bakersfield Plumbing Supplies ...
|
Someone should have a tattoo made of this.
_________________________
I also am subcribe to postal pornography - CAOH
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248356 - 06/12/07 02:19 PM
Re: This just in!! *DELETED*
|
Max Hardcore Prison Bitch
Registered: 10/15/06
Posts: 412
Loc: NYC
|
Quote:
Quote:
Post deleted by Douche_Bagalow
Dude: Why delete the yellow couch, the blonde in a cowboy hat & the link to Max pix on eBay?
I moved it to the cage. Sorry dudes. 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248357 - 06/13/07 06:37 PM
Re: Max Hardcore Indicted on Obscenity Charges
|
Rob Black's Crack Pipe
Registered: 06/16/05
Posts: 95
|
dude is 50
he has fucked more ass than a politician
at this point max has more money then he'll ever be able to spend
why doesn't he take a fucking hint and retire already
or move his operation to europe where he would never get fucked with
i mean after the last false indictment you would think that Max would pack up and head to Holland
but at this point he is trapped in their[bullshit] game
My humble prediction is that this case will go to the supreme court of FL and Max will win,The ACLU will have to get involved etc.
Those mail fraud charges scare me though...we'll see
Edited by freakdoughnut (06/13/07 06:39 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#248358 - 06/13/07 07:00 PM
Re: Max Hardcore Indicted on Obscenity Charges
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
My humble prediction is that this case will go to the supreme court of FL and Max will win,The ACLU will have to get involved etc.
Those mail fraud charges scare me though...we'll see
Max is going to be tried in Federal Court (Middle District of Florida.) The case will never go to the Florida Supreme Court. Instead it will first go to a 3-judge panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, where he will likely lose again. From there, he can either request that the case be heard en banc (meaning before the full panel of judges) or he can proceed to the US Supreme Court (assuming that the Court agrees to hear the case, which they likely would, if only to establish/re-affirm precident.) At that point, assuming the Court has the same make up as it does now, it will basically come down to Justice Kennedy, the lone swing vote since Sandra Day O'Connor retired. I haven't had time in recent weeks to review Justice Kennedy's prior decisions, so I can't say with any certainty how that would go. Basically, it's a toss up.
As for going to Europe, what no one has yet suggested on this board is the "Roman Polanski" scenario: Go to Trial, lose; Appeal, Lose; THEN flee to Europe. Makes sense to me.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 registered (),
261
Guests and
2
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index
