LOS ANGELES—A right-wing news site has published an article on the gleeful reaction by anti-porners Morality in Media to the alleged “porn flight” from Los Angeles to Las Vegas because of the new mandatory condom law. According to the article, “An advocate for morality in media says a drastic drop in porn production in California shows that laws do effectively crack down on pornography.”
The advocate is none other than Pat Trueman, the former federal prosecutor who went on to either represent or advocate for such devilish organizations as MiM, the Family Research Council and the American Family Association, among others.
The gist of the OneNewsNow.com article is that following the passage of Measure B by Los Angeles voters, “pornography producers are looking to Las Vegas as the new porn capital of the world.”
Trueman is quoted as saying of the alleged reason behind the alleged migration, “If we really believe that pornography is a harmful matter, [than] we ought to do everything we can to enforce these laws.”
The article goes on to note that “Las Vegas does not require health permits and grants location permits for a reasonable fee. Los Angeles County typically charges producers hundreds of dollars for location permits and mandates health permits.”
All of that is moot to Trueman, however, who is quick to indicate his disinterest in the condom mandate—or, presumably, the health concerns that inspire support for it—and what he would really like to see happen.
“We're not interested in just hurting the porn industry or requiring that condoms be involved in all porn films," he said. "What we are interested in doing is outlawing all distribution of pornography."
The article concludes that the gambling Mecca is currently home to “several major porn producers and many other major producers are considering a move to the city.”
There is no mention in the article of the lawsuit (now appeal) challenging Measure B, and one could certainly take issue with some if not all of the assumptions made in it; as well, Trueman contradicts himself by commenting in support of laws that provide sanctions he is not even interested in pursuing. But of course, that is the by now expected line of confused and desperate reasoning from this former lawman whose real agenda is the utter squelching of constitutionally protected speech.