Las Vegas- Come on Out Attorney Marc Randazza Says to Big Porn

With the debate over Big Porn possibly moving there, I’ve been running down the list of cities in Nevada and none of them are anywhere near as hilarious as the ones in Florida.

Pahrump, which sounds like someone clearing their throat or passing gas through a pair of rubber pants, comes closest. Not that it’s really a persuasive argument, but all this leads me to conclude that the “Silver State” lacks the panache and color suited to the adult entertainment industry, ninety degree night time temperatures aside.

Of course there’s Las Vegas, itself, but even a dumb pimp knows that prostitution is illegal in Clark County which is so boring Lisa Ann admits that she didn’t bother to sue anyone there for appropriating her likeness in an escort ad.

But, like First Amendment attorney Latana Larry Walters did in an article for XBiz, www.adultfyi.com/read.php?ID=56486 Marc “The Dazzler” Randazza similarly extolled the benefits of the mobster state.

It’s a known fact that the bent noses built Las Vegas and Bugsy Siegel even got his eyeballs shot out for grifting from the boys when they were financing The Flamingo hotel & casino. So, yeah, I want to shoot sex scenes in Las Vegas especially when the desert surrounding the city is the world’s largest unmarked grave site. [Did you watch the movie Casino?]

This minor point, however, doesn’t face Randazza in the least.

“So far, Interstate 15 has not been jammed with moving vans, but [porn] production has been slowly but steadily moving to Las Vegas,” Randazza wrote.

According to Randazza, aside from the nagging condom issue in Los Angeles county, the real allure of Nevada for both production companies and talent alike is the state’s low taxation, friendly business climate, opportunity-laden real estate market, and traditionally friendly relationship with all aspects of the sex industry.

“The fact is, Condom Wars or not, there are very good business, legal and logistical reasons for relocating to Las Vegas,” Randazza says.

In his article, Randazza points out that, other than California, the only state where porn is legal to shoot is New Hamsphire as a result of New Hampshire vs.Theriault.

“In that case, the New Hampshire Supreme Court held, like its California counterpart, that paying someone to be in a porn film was not the same as paying a prostitute for sex,” Randazza explains.

“Going a little further, the Theriault court held that the New Hampshire free speech clause would not permit the state to enforce the prostitution statutes against adult filmmakers.”

While New Hampshire might be attractive for skiing, hiking and tapping trees for maple syrup, it wouldn’t necessarily appeal to porn producers who fancy the fashion statement of open neck shirts to the waist which relatively mild Porn Valley winters accommodate.

“Despite being a tax haven and a libertarian bastion, New Hampshire is simply not destined to become the next porn Mecca,” Randazza concludes.

Making his pitch for Nevada, Randazza feels that the state courts there aren’t likely to prosecute porn producers and would be likely to adopt similar views as expressed by the California courts in the Freeman decision.

Given the similarity of the state’s prostitution statute and California’s in Freeman, says Randazza, it would take a stunning display of intellectual dishonesty for the Nevada Supreme Court to reach a contrary conclusion.

“Moreover, Nevada’s social, political, and economic mores are likely to make it at least as friendly as California has been to the adult entertainment industry,” Randazza argues.

The other argument is taxes. California’s state tax is burdensome, he notes, whereas Nevada’s winning hand is its lack of a state income tax. [Which would change immediately if Big Porn even hinted at a migration.]

“In California, regulations on businesses, gross receipts taxes, corporate income taxes, and often byzantine and illogical employment regulations make California a business-stifling environment,” Randazza points out.

“On the other hand, in Nevada, the regulations are so simple that they may as well be nonexistent.”

Randazza also makes the case that what happens in Vegas really stays in Vegas, as long as no one’s nose is rubbed in the activities of the porn industry. [That would also change with a two-column headline in The Las Vegas Review Journal.]

On the condom issue, Randazza’s also of the opinion that where the Aids Healthcare Foundation has all but had its way in Southern California, that’s not likely to occur in Nevada.

“Las Vegas and Nevada, on the other hand, have carefully cultivated a ‘live and let live’ libertarian philosophy,” he points out, not realizing that Michael Weinstein would lobby for leotards on show girls.

“A busybody trying to press his way into a county commission meeting with a job-killing bill with dubious utility will not find the same reception in Nevada that he found in California — and especially not now.”

Randazza also notes that in Los Angeles, a six-figure salary will probably leave the average worker with enough take-home income to rent a modest home in a decent neighborhood.

“Take that salary up I-15, and he can move out of that 2,300-square-foot, 3-bedroom house and into a mansion that will make his California friends wonder if he has actually become a South American dictator.”

To which I’d argue that South American dictators usually wind up with bullets in their skulls. I’m fine where I am, thank you.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*