Dizeman wrote:
I can't remember at 2:30 a.m., I did not know there was going to be a test.

The golden rules for staying alive in the MM forums are:-

1. Don't post shit you make up and claim it's the law
2. Don't attack people whose work is better than yours
3. Don't accuse people of being perverts and pornographers
4. Don't keep arguing once you've been shown to be an ass

(Disclaimer: not all the above may apply to you personally.)

Danger Ninja Production wrote:

hahaha and now we got someone getting brigged

thread is a success

eh um not brigged yet..

CK2 Photography wrote:

eh um not brigged yet..

Patience grasshopper.....

Dizeman wrote:
The topic was never NUDITY, it was photographing MINOR CHILDREN NUDE. Talk about apples and oranges.

the topic was some guy not just photographing children nude but actually touching them on their exposed genetalia lil man.its about a crime and the children even said he touched em stick with the point and forget about yours

Stefano Brunesci Raw wrote:

The golden rules for staying alive in the MM forums are:-

1. Don't post shit you make up and claim it's the law
2. Don't attack people whose work is better than yours
3. Don't accuse people of being perverts and pornographers
4. Don't keep arguing once you've been shown to be an ass

(Disclaimer: not all the above may apply to you personally.)

+1

CK2 Photography wrote:

eh um not brigged yet..

it's cool bra just give it time

Dizeman wrote:
Brigged for discussion? So you can only talk when you agree with everyone?

no you can only talk when you stay with the op of the thread and don't thread jack now please stop posting unless its about what happened to those poor little girls

Dizeman wrote:
My post was a direct comment to the post that said there is a big difference between photographing nude minors in a studio setting and what happened to the girls.


To which I posted, in the eyes of the law both are illegal. Which they are not!



But I'm done!

That's my wasted time budget for the day.

Fixed it for you.

MirrorImage Photography wrote:
http://www.postcrescent.com/article/20091001/APC0101/91001165/1004&located=rss

umm....and where was there mother?

Miss Fifi wrote:


The title is really what you derived from this story? Really?

What.....vagina finger painting isn't a normal part of a photoshoot?!

Cherrystone wrote:

No your mixing apples and oranges. If you cannot read your own writing, I'm not going to waste my time.

Photographing minors in some state of undress or nude, and child pornography are two entirely seperate things. You just blended them into the same mixing bowl as many others do who are ignorant of what the law is saying.

Stick around long enough, someone will come into this thread and give you a proper legal education.

I guess all those seminars,  and bazillion's  of exposures he's shot gives  him  some  weight around  here.....oh  wait...nope.

Dizeman wrote:
Whatever you NEED! Chat Sprites, ya gotta love em.

You can say it all night, but photograph a minor nude and you're going to jail in every state in this Union.

Please go back and read the law that you quoted earlier in this thread. Your statement here is not supported by that law.

You have successfully hijacked this thread with your continued efforts to prove something that is not true.

I know that it's easy to misunderstand such things and for one to think that they know something, we all do it at times, but when the error is pointed out to you it is wise to listen rather then continue to argue an untruth.

You are wrong about this, misinformed and misguided....please stop trying to defend your position.

If you continue to do so, I will consider it trolling and hijacking, both of which is against the rules.

Merlinpix wrote:

quoted snipped

Watch the attacks....

Merlinpix wrote:

I guess all those seminars,  and bazillion's  of exposures he's shot gives  him  some  weight around  here.....oh  wait...nope.

That was an entirely immature and caustic attack. What does any of that have to do with this discussion?

Wow!

Cherise Fox wrote:
Did you fail reading comprehension in grade school?

Thanks! lol!

Lazyi Photography wrote:
So finger painting kids, photographing children in sexual acts and photographing a nude child are all the same thing?!?

According to the dude in this thread will all of his years of experience and knowledge. Yes.


Everyone else with reading comprehension skills and the logic of adults is totally wrong.

Lazyi Photography wrote:
So finger painting kids, photographing children in sexual acts and photographing a nude child are all the same thing?!?

Well photograph a nude minor child and take it down to the local police department and I think they will explain it to you better than I have been able to. Hey! Give it a shot!

Dizeman wrote:

That was an entirely immature and caustic attack. What does any of that have to do with this discussion?

Wow!

I dunno, you're the one who brought it up. You know, when you said "as a photographer shooting for 30 years I need to know the law" etc. when in fact you don't know the law.

Dizeman wrote:

Well photograph a nude minor child and take it down to the local police department and I think they will explain it to you better than I have been able to. Hey! Give it a shot!

Can I just ask you a question I've always wanted to ask a troll of your caliber.



Do you really believe the tripe you spew, or do you just do it to get a rise out of people because you know it's complete and utter idiotic nonsense that you're posting?

Dizeman wrote:

Well photograph a nude minor child and take it down to the local police department and I think they will explain it to you better than I have been able to. Hey! Give it a shot!

Years of experience and knolwedge... horrible traits all.

Dizeman wrote:
That was an entirely immature and caustic attack. What does any of that have to do with this discussion?

Wow!

Spare us the fake outrage.  You don't care about this discussion.

Miss Fifi wrote:
Do you really believe the tripe you spew, or do you just do it to get a rise out of people because you know it's complete and utter idiotic nonsense that you're posting?

He only cares about being "right".

Dizeman wrote:
You are arguing for the sake of arguing.

Yes, you are.

Dizeman wrote:

Well photograph a nude minor child and take it down to the local police department and I think they will explain it to you better than I have been able to. Hey! Give it a shot!

so sad that you honestly believe that touching a model and photographing a model is the same thing. Hope others know this when they come in for a nude shoot with you.

Dizeman wrote:

Years of experience and knolwedge... horrible traits all.

well they are if the knowledge is wrong, which makes me question the experience, but I shall not do so here.

Lazyi Photography wrote:

so sad that you honestly believe that touching a model and photographing a model is the same thing. Hope others know this when they come in for a nude shoot with you.

That's a cheap shot, even for this forum. I clearly stated way too many times, my comments had nothing to do with how I feel about the issue and that I may or may not agree with the law, but the LAW sees photographing minors NUDE as an issue.

Dizeman wrote:

Thanks! lol!

What? Oh, that was directed at the OP.

Danger Ninja Production wrote:
i can't believe this guy hasn't stopped yet

honestly one of the worst trolling attempts ever on this site

There are three to five comments to my one and I am the one trolling?

Dizeman wrote:

That's a cheap shot, even for this forum. I clearly stated way too many times, my comments had nothing to do with how I feel about the issue and that I may or may not agree with the law, but the LAW sees photographing minors NUDE as an issue.

There is this really cool word, it is called "intent", learn it, understand it.
And no it wasn't a cheap shot, it was a statement of fact. You don't understand the difference between nude, explicit nude and touching. You make them all equal. Statements of fact are a bitch.