Printable View
Has anybody had any exprience or knowledge on these two girls?
Are they GFE, whats the price, stay the full hr, most importantly is msog offered? I like to get my moneys worth haha. I'm a true sucker for a whie girl with a nice round buble ass. Pheonixxx has been posting for a while and amber is the 'hot irish chick' that was workin in wesley chapel and now on dale mabry but mispells mabry. Any info would be greatly appreciated.
I was crusin the other day and I started thinkin. What is the difference between a guy paying a girl to be in a porn, or picking up a SW and giving her cash.
The ONLY thing I can come up with is that the porn girls sign a release and it is "for hire".
Any thoughts?
There is very little difference, and in-fact that is one way that the laws in California are avoided. A legal release and a video camera are all that's required.
I am AMAZED no one has thought of this before. There is legal precedent. I'd run it through a lawyer first, but you might have found a legal loophole that could allow a legal brothels to open. Sign the waivers, do the deed, get a home video to keep! LOL
[QUOTE=Photo Sniper]I was crusin the other day and I started thinkin. What is the difference between a guy paying a girl to be in a porn, or picking up a SW and giving her cash.
The ONLY thing I can come up with is that the porn girls sign a release and it is "for hire".
Any thoughts?[/QUOTE]
There is one in the works here in tampa. All I know is that you pay a mebership fee sign a release, pick your girl and have fun. It is all on cam. As long as you don't mind being vidio'd I say go for it. Not to shure when it will open or even if it will. You know how the gov is.
[QUOTE=J Melbourne27]There is very little difference, and in-fact that is one way that the laws in California are avoided. A legal release and a video camera are all that's required.
I am AMAZED no one has thought of this before. There is legal precedent. I'd run it through a lawyer first, but you might have found a legal loophole that could allow a legal brothels to open. Sign the waivers, do the deed, get a home video to keep! LOL[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=J Melbourne27]There is very little difference, and in-fact that is one way that the laws in California are avoided. A legal release and a video camera are all that's required.
I am AMAZED no one has thought of this before. There is legal precedent. I'd run it through a lawyer first, but you might have found a legal loophole that could allow a legal brothels to open. Sign the waivers, do the deed, get a home video to keep! LOL[/QUOTE]Now thats what im talking about!
Model Releases for sale now! PM Me!
Just kidding!
[QUOTE=Drew Park]Yes, it is a condominium that agencies use for incall girls. In the Metro Dc area there are a number of them, most run by Chinese. There are some others with Thai girls. The experience is similar to an AMP without the table shampoo. For the going rate of a DC AMP visit, you get 30-45 minutes with an Asian girl. Massage and full service is the menu. Unlike AMPs were some girls work for weeks at a time, the condos have an almost weekly turnover, so you could hit weekly and never see the same girl twice.[/QUOTE]I've only heard those referred to as AAMP's (as opposed to AMP's) rather than "Chinese Condo's". This is from the first line of this Forum's Abbreviation Guide:
"AAMP Apartment Asian Massage Parlor. Based in a residential apartment instead of a commercial storefront."
[QUOTE=Chase Star]I've only heard those referred to as AAMP's (as opposed to AMP's) rather than "Chinese Condo's". This is from the first line of this Forum's Abbreviation Guide: "AAMP Apartment Asian Massage Parlor. Based in a residential apartment instead of a commercial storefront."[/QUOTE]
I know. But in the local DC Metro vernacular they're the Chinese Condos.
with the idea of a camera and release covering you on the legal aspects. There was a discussion of this on the Orlando board recently and I really do not think the decision by the California Supreme Court interpreting California statutes would be very persuasive here. It is NOT binding, and the case was rejected by the Supreme Court as the California Supreme Court overturned the conviction (pandering convictions for making adult movies) on independent state grounds.
Overview here:
[url]http://xenonsworld.blog.ca/2008/02/28/california_v_freeman~3775099[/url]
or here:
[url]http://wapedia.mobi/en/People_v._Freeman[/url]
For further details google California v Freeman
Any way you look at it, I do not think that defense would fly here in Fl.
Nemo
[QUOTE=J Melbourne27]There is very little difference, and in-fact that is one way that the laws in California are avoided. A legal release and a video camera are all that's required.
I am AMAZED no one has thought of this before. There is legal precedent. I'd run it through a lawyer first, but you might have found a legal loophole that could allow a legal brothels to open. Sign the waivers, do the deed, get a home video to keep! LOL[/QUOTE]
So you are kind of saying that whenever LE feel like it they can say adult can be prostitution?
[QUOTE=Nemodc]with the idea of a camera and release covering you on the legal aspects. There was a discussion of this on the Orlando board recently and I really do not think the decision by the California Supreme Court interpreting California statutes would be very persuasive here. It is NOT binding, and the case was rejected by the Supreme Court as the California Supreme Court overturned the conviction (pandering convictions for making adult movies) on independent state grounds.
Overview here:
[url]http://xenonsworld.blog.ca/2008/02/28/california_v_freeman~3775099[/url]
or here:
[url]http://wapedia.mobi/en/People_v._Freeman[/url]
For further details google California v Freeman
Any way you look at it, I do not think that defense would fly here in Fl.
Nemo[/QUOTE]
Ok, well how do the Producers get away with it?
Orlando/Tampa is the #2 place in the WORLD for production of Adult movies, second only a city in Cali (San Diego?).
[QUOTE=Nemodc]with the idea of a camera and release covering you on the legal aspects. There was a discussion of this on the Orlando board recently and I really do not think the decision by the California Supreme Court interpreting California statutes would be very persuasive here. It is NOT binding, and the case was rejected by the Supreme Court as the California Supreme Court overturned the conviction (pandering convictions for making adult movies) on independent state grounds.
Overview here:
[url]http://xenonsworld.blog.ca/2008/02/28/california_v_freeman~3775099[/url]
or here:
[url]http://wapedia.mobi/en/People_v._Freeman[/url]
For further details google California v Freeman
Any way you look at it, I do not think that defense would fly here in Fl.
Nemo[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=J Melbourne27]Ok, well how do the Producers get away with it?
Orlando/Tampa is the #2 place in the WORLD for production of Adult movies, second only a city in Cali (San Diego?).[/QUOTE]I'll leave that first question to our legal eagles. As for the second one, I believe the city in Cali is actually Sherman Oaks which is just north of Hollywood and LA over the Santa Monica Mountains in the San Fernando Valley (next door to Burbank).
I'm not a legal eagle, but that particular line of thinking has been followed before. In truth pornography is produced in many states, but only fairly legally in California. The famous case that sets the Californian precedence is California vs Freeman.
You might find this article in line to answer your questions:
[url]http://randazza.wordpress.com/2008/03/18/why-is-prostitution-illegal-but-pornography-is-not/[/url]
Much like prostitution itself, the laws are enforced on a local and state level rather then constitutionally. I.E. it becomes a matter of how the area in question views the acts - and in Florida, pornography does equal prostitution.
[QUOTE=J Melbourne27]Ok, well how do the Producers get away with it?
Orlando/Tampa is the #2 place in the WORLD for production of Adult movies, second only a city in Cali (San Diego?).[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=J Melbourne27]Orlando/Tampa is the #2 place in the WORLD for production of Adult movies, second only a city in Cali (San Diego?).[/QUOTE]
Wikipedia: According to the HBO series Porn Valley, nearly 90% of all legally distributed pornographic films made in the United States are either filmed in or by studios based in the San Fernando Valley.
It's good to know these things. What good is it? I don't know but it's good.
ciao
Mal
I got that idea from this site: [url]http://*******.com/88rdzm[/url]
Which is pretty bad ass by the way... in a sick way of course!
[QUOTE=Nemodc]with the idea of a camera and release covering you on the legal aspects. There was a discussion of this on the Orlando board recently and I really do not think the decision by the California Supreme Court interpreting California statutes would be very persuasive here. It is NOT binding, and the case was rejected by the Supreme Court as the California Supreme Court overturned the conviction (pandering convictions for making adult movies) on independent state grounds.
Overview here:
[url]http://xenonsworld.blog.ca/2008/02/28/california_v_freeman~3775099[/url]
or here:
[url]http://wapedia.mobi/en/People_v._Freeman[/url]
For further details google California v Freeman
Any way you look at it, I do not think that defense would fly here in Fl.
Nemo[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Photo Sniper]I got that idea from this site: [url]http://*******.com/88rdzm[/url]
Which is pretty bad ass by the way... in a sick way of course![/QUOTE]I didnt know I could not post links here so if anyone is interested in the site PM me and I'll give it to ya. It is a must see!