Let's have a adult discussion about gonhorea. Ohhhh Fun!!! :-)

[tony404]

Originally Posted by pornlaw

Why is he shooting people without tests ? Thats the real problem.

I know model did a g/g shoot the girl she shot with girl who had a vaild aim test and the girl got gonhorea is her throat. The doctor said that's the funkiest sore throat I have ever seen.Unless the person is tested then locked in a room until its time to shoot. It doesnt make you bullet proof.

[kath]

Originally Posted by tony404

I know model did a g/g shoot the girl she shot with girl who had a vaild aim test and the girl got gonhorea is her throat. The doctor said that's the funkiest sore throat I have ever seen.Unless the person is tested then locked in a room until its time to shoot. It doesnt make you bullet proof.

I've always kind of thought the same thing... what did they do AFTER the clean test? Seriously - it's not like one good test lasts a lifetime... well, unless she turns into a nun and takes those vows seriously. lol

I agree about the BF - I'm sure he's the culprit. If everything she's saying is 100% true then he's the source.

[pornlaw]

Originally Posted by tony404

I know model did a g/g shoot the girl she shot with girl who had a vaild aim test and the girl got gonhorea is her throat. The doctor said that's the funkiest sore throat I have ever seen.Unless the person is tested then locked in a room until its time to shoot. It doesnt make you bullet proof.

Shooting talent without valid tests is asking for a lawsuit. And if its something like AIDS or Hep C, that producer is going to be paying for medical treatment for a long long time.

Testing is to protect talent, but it is also there to protect producers.

[tony404]

Originally Posted by pornlaw

Shooting talent without valid tests is asking for a lawsuit. And if its something like AIDS or Hep C, that producer is going to be paying for medical treatment for a long long time.

Testing is to protect talent, but it is also there to protect producers.

You're a lawyer and you know anyone can sue anyone for anything. I think all b/g should be condom only and still trying to figure what the condoms have to do with free speech. lol

[EmporerEJ]

Originally Posted by tony404

You're a lawyer and you know anyone can sue anyone for anything. I think all b/g should be condom only and still trying to figure what the condoms have to do with free speech. lol

Well, I understand it. Perhaps you should have paid a little closer attention in History class.

Where shall we draw the line? Or rather, SHOULD we draw a line? And what gives you, (in the 3rd person,) the right, to draw ANY line?
I don't like to see condoms when I watch porn. Next, you'll say "Gee, women should wear long skirts, and cover their ankles......I don't know what long skirts & showing one's ankles, have to do with free speech!"

[tony404]

Originally Posted by EmporerEJ

Well, I understand it. Perhaps you should have paid a little closer attention in History class.

Where shall we draw the line? Or rather, SHOULD we draw a line? And what gives you, (in the 3rd person,) the right, to draw ANY line?
I don't like to see condoms when I watch porn. Next, you'll say "Gee, women should wear long skirts, and cover their ankles......I don't know what long skirts & showing one's ankles, have to do with free speech!"

Yeah condoms and people getting aids are the same as women wearing longer skirts. thats too funny.

[pornlaw]

Originally Posted by tony404

You're a lawyer and you know anyone can sue anyone for anything. I think all b/g should be condom only and still trying to figure what the condoms have to do with free speech. lol

I wont get into the condom issue, but it isnt about suing anyone for anything. If a producer shoots a scene and they fail to insure talent is properly tested AND there is a transmission of a life threatening disease, that can provide a basis for either a PI lawsuit or a work comp claim. The industry has set a standard for testing.

In California it has already been adjudicated that performers are employees and under California work comp law, if they contract a disease on set its going to be a work related injury.

[tony404]

Originally Posted by pornlaw

I wont get into the condom issue, but it isnt about suing anyone for anything. If a producer shoots a scene and they fail to insure talent is properly tested AND there is a transmission of a life threatening disease, that can provide a basis for either a PI lawsuit or a work comp claim. The industry has set a standard for testing.

In California it has already been adjudicated that performers are employees and under California work comp law, if they contract a disease on set its going to be a work related injury.

Unless the producer takes the talent to the test and then locks them in a room until its shooting time. They cant insure anything.