Front Page  »  

Should porn stars wear condoms?

April 30, 2014

imgresA bill that would require adult film actors to wear condoms during production is gaining traction in the California Legislature. [Greenfield Reporter]

AB 1576 passed an Assembly committee by a 4-1 vote Tuesday. The bill would mandate condom usage in all porn scenes produced in California. It would also require adult film actors to undergo regular testing for sexually transmitted diseases.

Compton Democrat Isadore Hall introduced the bill in the Assembly. The proposal is Hall’s third attempt to expand statewide a mandate passed by Los Angeles voters in 2012.

Porn industry spokesmen are opposing the bill, saying they have their own protocols to protect actors, and if passed into law, the bill would send adult filmmakers out of California.


Loading...
Subjects:             
Related:


41 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Politicians should be required to wear condoms.


0

I wonder what the “protocols” are that the industry rep said are in place to protect the actors/actresses?


I do agree that this is a workplace safety issue and should be addressed as such without another overlapping law/regulation involved. Is the legislator proposing it doing so to promote himself for re-election or is there a legitimate hole in the existing regulations that needs filling?


Finally, why is CCN getting news about this from a small newspaper in Greenfield? Is there not a more informative source that is closer to either the district represented by the legislator involved or to the places where they film the porn? (I have trouble believing that Greenfield is the new porn capital of California.)


0

Oops, it is stranger than I thought! The news source is not in Greenfield, CA but Greenfield, Indiana. They got it from the AP so what is the reason for CCN referencing the Greenfield Reporter instead of them?


0

Is it not curious that everything seems to rub conservatives the wrong way ?


Or is it the mere mention of the word ‘regulation’ that arouses them and makes them stand erect ?


Penetrating questions, but …hard to prove.


0

This one takes the cake. “Gubmint” has too much of OUR MONEY.


0

Uh, Cindy, who is “gubmint”?


0

One has to be clued in to externalising freakspeakers to even begin to understand.

Listen to Faux Noise ( Fox News ) for as long as you can stand it to get some appreciation of the ‘code’ language bandied about among the semi-literate parasites that proliferate in today’s A-MUR-KA.


0

mkaney hit the nail on the head. the problem with all USA governments is their shortsightedness. We have no long range plans, no vision of how we want our country to be. So politicians just keep proposing and passing patches to an ever growing list of regulations. The porn industry will just move to another state or another country to avoid the regulation. Stupid, stupid, stupid!


“If you don’t know where you’re going, any path you take will get you there.”


0

It does seem pretty silly. The San Fernando valley was the porn capital of the country until they legislated condom use… all the producers just moved their production.


It’s supply and demand really… no one wants to watch covered performers and the industry knows it.


0

Ahhh, I knew we had big Gooberment around for something.


0

Why? Who really wants to pay for compliance and the inevitable corruption, out of your taxes? A new State department or sub-dept of porn compliance, we pay people to watch and visit porn filming sets. Oh c/mon, enough already


0

I can see it now…”California State Department of Weiners.”


0

I think we already have that department…it’s called the State Legislator.


0

Oops…Legislature.


0

“California Department of Weiner Sheathers”, maybe?


0
1 2