This idea is actually something I thought of before Prop B passed in California, but I didn’t care then and I kind of don’t care now if they wear condoms while fucking. History is full of stories of people finding loopholes to legal issues. I would expect there are specifics that aren’t listed in the documents of this proposition and these things can often be exploited.
Case in point is a story I heard of a guy who got pulled over for speeding. When the cop got up to the driver’s side of the car he saw the driver wasn’t wearing a seat belt. When he added that to the ticket the driver pointed out that he was wearing a seat belt, but he had made it into a regular belt and argued that the law didn’t stipulate how the seat belt had to be worn. The cop didn’t agree with the argument and left it on the ticket. So the driver took it to court and gave his argument. As the story goes, the guy won his argument and the ticket was removed from his record.
Then there is the story of a guy who was being forced to cut the weeds around his house or to pay some sort of fine. When he went to court he brought a dictionary. The definition of a weed was something like a plant that was in an undesired location. After reading that, he then said that he wanted each one of those plants where they were so they were not weeds by definition. The judge ended up having to decide in his favor much to the dismay of the city.
So here is my idea or a couple of them. I am willing to bet that Prop B doesn’t say how condoms have to be worn or how effective they have to be. So I would suggest a site be called something like let’s say, condompoppers.com. The premise for this site is pretty simple. It would feature videos of condoms getting popped. This could happen because a guy is using a really old condom. It could happen because a girl wants her boyfriend to marry her so she weakens the integrity of the condom. They could also have story lines of guys who simply want revenge on an ex so they poke holes into any condoms in the ex’s house.
It would certainly be reasonable to assume they could have endings of a girl getting knocked up, getting knocked up and married or even getting knocked up and married to a guy who turns out to be an asshole making it a true revenge story. It could even work out that a guy tried to get revenge, the girl got knocked up and married, but the guy was actually a good guy so revenge backfired.
Story lines for some videos could have endings similar to those from accidental creampie videos. The guy pulling out to show the condom has popped and the girl being pissed because she wasn’t on the pill. The guy is saying sorry as much as he can to keep her from ripping his head off. I’m sure there are other directions and story lines they could use. This is only a suggestion for starting something provided anyone likes this idea and wants to try it in a kind of protest of the proposition.
Since I don’t really want to read the entire thing, I would suggest that anyone who wants to play this game find some shit out first. But if I am correct and it does not specify how a condom is to be worn, for instance if it doesn’t actually say that it has to be worn on the penis, then someone could wear a bunch of them as jewelry: condom necklaces, condom bracelets, condom decorated sunglasses, or even a watch with condoms that make the band around the wrist. How about a belt made out of condoms? Maybe even a giant condom as a hat. Granted that would be something for a comedy, but it could work.
The point I am making is that there are plenty of ways that a condom could be technically worn and still be following the law. You could even put one on your finger/s for finger fucking. While some of these ideas might be getting into the obscure, if they law doesn’t say the condom has to be worn on the guys dick, then it can be exploited and to a point bypassed. To anyone who wants to try doing this, I suggest consulting a lawyer first and possibly even be ready to file appeals.
While I am thinking of this, the last thing I would like to say as far as Prop B goes is that I do think it is absurd to the point of being retarded that even a married couple performing on webcam could be cited for breaking this law when not using a condom. Although I would expect a cop having the ability to use discretion would choose not to cite a married couple who chose not to use condoms during a cam show.
Editor's note: We at SexIs Magazine would never condone intentionally breaking the law, but a little civil disobedience never hurt anyone.
Case in point is a story I heard of a guy who got pulled over for speeding. When the cop got up to the driver’s side of the car he saw the driver wasn’t wearing a seat belt. When he added that to the ticket the driver pointed out that he was wearing a seat belt, but he had made it into a regular belt and argued that the law didn’t stipulate how the seat belt had to be worn. The cop didn’t agree with the argument and left it on the ticket. So the driver took it to court and gave his argument. As the story goes, the guy won his argument and the ticket was removed from his record.
Then there is the story of a guy who was being forced to cut the weeds around his house or to pay some sort of fine. When he went to court he brought a dictionary. The definition of a weed was something like a plant that was in an undesired location. After reading that, he then said that he wanted each one of those plants where they were so they were not weeds by definition. The judge ended up having to decide in his favor much to the dismay of the city.
So here is my idea or a couple of them. I am willing to bet that Prop B doesn’t say how condoms have to be worn or how effective they have to be. So I would suggest a site be called something like let’s say, condompoppers.com. The premise for this site is pretty simple. It would feature videos of condoms getting popped. This could happen because a guy is using a really old condom. It could happen because a girl wants her boyfriend to marry her so she weakens the integrity of the condom. They could also have story lines of guys who simply want revenge on an ex so they poke holes into any condoms in the ex’s house.
It would certainly be reasonable to assume they could have endings of a girl getting knocked up, getting knocked up and married or even getting knocked up and married to a guy who turns out to be an asshole making it a true revenge story. It could even work out that a guy tried to get revenge, the girl got knocked up and married, but the guy was actually a good guy so revenge backfired.
Story lines for some videos could have endings similar to those from accidental creampie videos. The guy pulling out to show the condom has popped and the girl being pissed because she wasn’t on the pill. The guy is saying sorry as much as he can to keep her from ripping his head off. I’m sure there are other directions and story lines they could use. This is only a suggestion for starting something provided anyone likes this idea and wants to try it in a kind of protest of the proposition.
Since I don’t really want to read the entire thing, I would suggest that anyone who wants to play this game find some shit out first. But if I am correct and it does not specify how a condom is to be worn, for instance if it doesn’t actually say that it has to be worn on the penis, then someone could wear a bunch of them as jewelry: condom necklaces, condom bracelets, condom decorated sunglasses, or even a watch with condoms that make the band around the wrist. How about a belt made out of condoms? Maybe even a giant condom as a hat. Granted that would be something for a comedy, but it could work.
The point I am making is that there are plenty of ways that a condom could be technically worn and still be following the law. You could even put one on your finger/s for finger fucking. While some of these ideas might be getting into the obscure, if they law doesn’t say the condom has to be worn on the guys dick, then it can be exploited and to a point bypassed. To anyone who wants to try doing this, I suggest consulting a lawyer first and possibly even be ready to file appeals.
While I am thinking of this, the last thing I would like to say as far as Prop B goes is that I do think it is absurd to the point of being retarded that even a married couple performing on webcam could be cited for breaking this law when not using a condom. Although I would expect a cop having the ability to use discretion would choose not to cite a married couple who chose not to use condoms during a cam show.
Editor's note: We at SexIs Magazine would never condone intentionally breaking the law, but a little civil disobedience never hurt anyone.
I don't know what kind of city you're weed story was in, but most cities have ordinances that refer to aesthetic looks of houses and safety hazards. I have a neighbor who was forced to remove bushes (that they had intentionally planted) because the city thought they blocked drivers from seeing traffic and they were located on a corner. Most cities also have it so that if neighbors complain simply about the way a house looks they can be forced to change it. This prevents people from painting their home obnoxious colors or going weeks without moving.
Personally, I liked the law and don't think people should be trying to find loopholes but really should follow the spirit of the law.
well done
Right on yargie
I don't care about this bill or if they use condoms in porn or not. But I found this thing which get the opinion of Aurora Snow and she is for condom use and she gives some good reasons for it. But I don't know that it should be the governments job to tell the porn industry how to run it's self. The industry obviously learned a leason and started requiring testing which has cut down on the spread in the industry.
[https://www.condomdepot.com/learn/detail.cfm/cid/7650] There is the thing I read with Snow's opinion on the topic.
I will also say I think government telling a person what color they can paint their house is over reaching their bounds. If I get a house and I want to paint it pink with some odd combo of green camoflage. Then I should be allowed to do so regardless as to what other people think. I wouldn't actually do that. But it is absurd for a government to force people to change the look of something because it doesn't fit with what others like.