I could not submit an eApp for a life insurance application a few days ago because the applicant's AZ drivers license, while still valid for four more years, was issued in 1993, and those numbers are no longer searchable by whatever software insurance companies use for this stuff. I found a workaround and I'm 52. I'm pretty sure a teenager will be able to figure something out. Just a hunch.

When I lived in VA (1995-2008), they had cops go around to adult video stores and take photos of cars with out of state plates to use in the "community standards" argument, claiming non-VA residents were buying stuff they couldn't get elsewhere. So VA's porn must have been off the hook.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Hypocrites. Many Virginia legislators are perfectly fine with naked men parading in front of young children, but they want age vefification for porn sites. It's getting to be that almost the entire world is full of shit.

this is very true, we have a fucked up Dem and Repub party

quote:

Originally posted by Milliron:
The other issue is privacy. Pretty much any court is going to say you have the right to watch all the scrogging you want as a private matter. Should you have to cough up your personal information to do so? I think not.

Well, the government already knows what everyone is looking at and to some degree, the tech companies do also. That ship sailed - there is no privacy online unless you're using a VPN to access the dark web, and even then, there's probably someone watching you. The finer details are how to ensure that a device paid for by an adult isn't being used by a minor when things like this are being accessed. How exactly that happens, I don't know, but there's a lot of money being generated by the porn industry that they are going to be loathe to lose, and that is a lot of incentive for someone to step up with answer that addresses privacy in the face of increasing restrictions. Not my problem to figure it out.

quote:

Originally posted by BlackTalonJHP:
People have engaged in prostitution, adultery, drunkenness, you name it for thousands of years. That doesn't mean that it's right.

Whether it's right or it's wrong isn't part of the conversation to me, it's whether the government has any business regulating it, and to what degree. We can get off the path deep in the weeds about whether pornography is ok for adults, but I know we agree that it isn't something kids should be looking at and that it has been effectively unregulated to date. It's time for that at least to change.

quote:

Originally posted by StorminNormin:
So is this another state Pornhub blocked or is this jibjab of a prior post about Pornhub blocking a state due to their rules? I remember reading this on here before.

When I grew up, if you wanted “porn” you had to find a Playboy magazine somewhere. That sure wasn’t porn in today’s terms. Seeing Playboy back in my day wasn’t bad in my opinion, but today’s porn is bad in my opinion.

Pornbub only allows content creators to access the website, in VA,
pornhub is on off several online porn companies, youporn, redtube, pornhub and a few others will not allow a VA internet connection

Xhamster is doing the validate you age bs,

quote:

Originally posted by BlackTalonJHP:
I agree with BH and P220 Smudge. The only thing I'm reluctant about is that placing an age restriction of 18+ on pornography seems to say that it's fine if you are 18 or over. It's wrong at any age.

It reminds me of certain "pro-life" groups that celebrated the ban on late-term abortion or in cases of sex selection or birth defects. It makes it sound like sometimes it's morally acceptable.

Vices are not crimes. Moral qualms and righteous indignation aside, you don't get to dictate to me, or anyone else for that matter, what I as an adult choose to do with my time, what activities I engage in, who I spend time with, etc.....this remains true no matter how little you like it right up to the end of your nose. If it isn't affecting you, and people looking at porn is not (unless they're forcing you to watch it), there needs to be a whole lot of mind your own damn business going on. The last time I checked this was still America.....until it isn't people are still free to pursue life, liberty, and happiness in the way that seems best to them. Calling for the banning of all the things that you don't like or find morally reprehensible according to the tenets of your faith is itself morally wrong.

There's a whole lot of folks calling for legislation, rules, and banning of things lately......and on some level I get it, it's what the left does and it seems to work. The end result is always the same, regardless of which side or group is doing the banning though: bigger, more invasive government and not-so-incremental-anymore loss of freedom.

As for myself, I'll take the inherent dangers of more freedom over the "peace" of slavery. I don't expect this will change anyone's mind.....but maybe stop and think about what you're really asking for when you call for more legislation to do "x" thing. In my book the answer is ALWAYS less government, rules, laws, legislation rather than more.

To quote C.S. Lewis: "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”

That's my .02, and it's worth exactly what you paid for it.

People trying to debate the morality question often use it to justify the government's involvement in the first place.

quote:

Originally posted by DaBigBR:
People trying to debate the morality question often use it to justify the government's involvement in the first place.

Exactly.

quote:

Originally posted by Milliron:
So I can get the idea that you don’t want little kids accessing porn. And these days that’s pretty easy to do. Couple of problems with this implementation, though.

Pornography, believe it or not, is Constitutionally protected free speech. Obscenity is not. What’s the difference? Good question. Like Potter Stewart said: “I know it when I see it”.

The other issue is privacy. Pretty much any court is going to say you have the right to watch all the scrogging you want as a private matter. Should you have to cough up your personal information to do so? I think not.

Or maybe you should? You have to fill out a 4473 to buy a gun. Is this the same? Should it be treated the same?

See, things I like are a right, and things I don't like should be heavily regulated, and possibly banned. In that way I can also still claim to be all for freedom, the freedom to do the things I like, and the freedom from things I don't like. By the way, has anybody seen my rainbow wig, and big red nose?

Be careful giving the government power, even for things you think you want them in control of. They rarely give that power up without a fight, and inevitably they will expand that power. You're one bad legislative session away from stepping on your own dick.

For the legal minded, Why does Pornhub care what Va does if they are not located in Va? For this discussion, lets say the company is in CA and all their servers are in CA as well.
What requires them to follow a law passed in Va? Can VA regulate the home server I rum because my neighbors can access it over the intelnet to view security camera footage?

And Pornhub would never re-sell any "verified identities" to others who might see these people as a potential revenue source to be spammed with all sorts of unbelievable offers. Never.

But, back when I was a youth and porn of all types was completely illegal, I can't recall having much difficulty accessing it. This law will fail to have the effect that its proponents desire, and is nothing more than another example of "feel good" legislation. I am embarrassed that conservative politicians would fall prey to the same sort of magical thinking that is prevalent among leftists and others of small mind.

"Squish" Youngkin has lost pretty much all credibility with me, not just because of this piece of legislation, but his whole MOR stance. Yeah, I get that it got him elected, but the upshot is that the whole Republican party in VA has looked to his equivocation on conservative principals as a guidepost to victory. A massive move to the center, and adopting the questionable tactics of the left. "We can't beat them in a fair fight, so we'll just cheat too." So far, mostly in primaries and other local races, but watch this space...

"I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery".

It used to be the common belief that one must tolerate distasteful things which other people enjoy lest other people find the things you enjoy distasteful and prohibit it.

It was pretty simple to identify those things which consenting adults are enjoying in private. (Public activity is a bit more complex arena).

There were many versions of "none of your business" in reply to the do-gooders.

Government and big data are so completely untrustworthy that even well intentioned age restrictions on online content are intolerable.

Laws like this are unnecessary. What's needed is solid parenting. Then again, these days many parents are fine taking their kids to a place where men dress like slooty women and then go wave their wangs in front of the children.

Where is that sweet metor of death?

Well, I guess one can celebrate that it is states doing this ineffective, useless feel good stupidity rather than the Feds.

I’d agree that children shouldn’t be accessing porn and that it would be unlikely to help them develop healthy relationships. I wouldn’t agree that it is the place of a nanny-state government to solve the problem. Not Federal government, not State government, not local government.

It's funny how tech can mess things up sometimes. Like you figured out a way around the insurance app issue, people will probably find ways around the Virginia porn ban too. There will always be ways to get what you're looking for, whether through different sites, VPNs, or other tech tricks. Plus, for those who are interested, there are still plenty of best adult webcams platforms out there. The internet is like that. If people want something, they'll find a way to get it.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: mac_220,

quote:

Originally posted by XinTX:
Laws like this are unnecessary. What's needed is solid parenting.

Agreed. This law is just another version of the state trying to parent. Whether we like it or not, kids WILL find ways to get porn. It will happen. They also get pot and alcohol, too.

quote:

Originally posted by flesheatingvirus:

quote:

Originally posted by XinTX:
Laws like this are unnecessary. What's needed is solid parenting.

Agreed. This law is just another version of the state trying to parent. Whether we like it or not, kids WILL find ways to get porn. It will happen. They also get pot and alcohol, too.

Correct. This is a parenting issue. Why don't these states who want to ban porn have townhall meetings about how to restrict access on your children's internet devices. Oh wait, that would involve being an active parent.

quote:

Originally posted by gpbst3:
Correct. This is a parenting issue. Why don't these states who want to ban porn have townhall meetings about how to restrict access on your children's internet devices. Oh wait, that would involve being an active parent.

But there no power to be gained by having more involved parents ... oh wait that would be a loss of power.

i certify that i wish i was under 18 yrs of age

quote:

Originally posted by flesheatingvirus:

quote:

Originally posted by XinTX:
Laws like this are unnecessary. What's needed is solid parenting.

Agreed. This law is just another version of the state trying to parent. Whether we like it or not, kids WILL find ways to get porn. It will happen. They also get pot and alcohol, too.

Same with abortion.
But... shouldn't we have SOME community standards?

And if you say, "You can't legislate morality."
I'll simply reply "All laws legislate morality."