Started By
Message

re: Pornhub goes dark in TX

Posted on 3/14/24 at 1:23 pm to
Posted by northshorebamaman
Cochise County AZ
Member since Jul 2009
35766 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 1:23 pm to
I mean, they have a point. Only requiring specific sites to comply just drives them to sites that don't. If I required 7/11 to ID minors and let Circle K sell to whoever they want do you think that will curb underage drinking or will all the minors just go to Circle K?
Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
29895 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 1:29 pm to
quote:

Only requiring specific sites to comply just drives them to sites that don't. If I required 7/11 to ID minors and let Circle K sell to whoever they want do you think that will curb underage drinking or will all the minors just go to Circle K?

Ancient boomers and people who have never had a non-political job don’t live in the real world.

Unfortunately that’s who passes laws. They don’t even write them. I’m sure some Bible thumping family lobbying group wrote these laws.
Posted by tiggerthetooth
Big Momma's House
Member since Oct 2010
61925 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 1:36 pm to
quote:

I mean, they have a point. Only requiring specific sites to comply just drives them to sites that don't. If I required 7/11 to ID minors and let Circle K sell to whoever they want do you think that will curb underage drinking or will all the minors just go to Circle K?


You operate under the assumption that drinking and porn consumption is impossible to derail and its nearly a rite of passage.

Why is it mandatory that children consume porn? Why do people believe it's impossible to keep children from consuming porn? It's just a strange stance to me.


This plus other blockers can make it harder. Just because it can happen doesn't mean you should help it to happen. It's the same mindset that leads states like California to create injection sites. You accept that it's impossible to stop open air drug use so you almost encourage it when you make policy based on the idea that it's impossible to stop. (I.e. they will do drugs no matter what so might as well make it clean, and now you're spending money enabling drug use)

You don't want to make the initial effort to prevent damage but the social damage will cost you the same as the initial action to stop it.
Posted by Browncd81
Member since Nov 2020
502 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 2:39 pm to
quote:

I mean, they have a point. Only requiring specific sites to comply just drives them to sites that don't. If I required 7/11 to ID minors and let Circle K sell to whoever they want do you think that will curb underage drinking or will all the minors just go to Circle K?


They've got a point, but its also amusing to read sleezy sites defending themselves with these nauseating lectures as if they're innocent Saint Stephen about to be stoned to death

People that make A** Destroyer 10 DVD's who all of a sudden sound like Thurgood Marshall making legal arguments
Posted by TbirdSpur2010
ALAMO CITY
Member since Dec 2010
134026 posts
Posted on 3/15/24 at 12:44 am to
quote:

they have a point. Only requiring specific sites to comply just drives them to sites that don't. If I required 7/11 to ID minors and let Circle K sell to whoever they want do you think that will curb underage drinking or will all the minors just go to Circle K?


This.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram