Jump to content

Scott Virginian

Members
  • Posts

    483
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Scott Virginian

  1. 1 hour ago, Enchanted said:

    he chose instead to change the status to unavailable, and to bring it to minimal standards with pics and details.

    More sadly, it seems it's gone completely to 404 - File Not Found. 
    I'm bummed.  Given the warm compliments here, I was hoping to reach out to him.

  2. 38 minutes ago, BabyBoomer said:

    Anne Heche has died.

    ~Boomer~

    Most unfortunate.  Apparently she was held on life support to determine whether her organs could be given to others, as she requested.  If her death gives new life to others, that's something positive arising from tragedy.  Her life was often troubled by mental health problems and leaves two sons, 20 and 13, surely grieving the loss of their mother.  

    I also regret that she harmed others on the way out of this world.  I hope her heirs and estate executors will try to set that right.

     

  3. From the website www.responsibility.org:20209849_ScreenShot2022-08-10at10_32_23AM.thumb.png.6a7d8fc5fb0dc8b31173bc55e4223993.png

    Every state has an implied consent law that stipulates that drivers consent to be tested if they are suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs. Test refusal (breath, blood, urine, etc.) is often the first step a drunk driver takes to avoid prosecution. Test refusals are most common among high-risk/repeat impaired drivers, primarily because these individuals know that their test results are likely to have a high-BAC and they are familiar with the system. In most states, the penalties for refusal involve administrative license suspensions ranging from 90 to 180 days. This is typically less punitive than the criminal sanctions for per se DUI.

    On 6/23/2016 the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruled in Birchfield v. North Dakota that motorists may not be criminally punished for refusing to submit to a blood test based on legally implied consent. Since that time, a number of states that had criminal sanctions outlined in statute have begun the processing of amending legislation and now only permit civil sanctions. For example, both Kansas and Minnesota had criminal penalties for test refusal but the Supreme Court in each state ruled that the existing refusal laws violate the federal constitutional rights of drivers. States that still have criminal provisions in statute include AK, AR, FL, KY, ME, NE, ND, RI, VT, and VA. Also, in these states some caveats apply to when/how the law can be applied:

    • Arkansas – law only applies to drivers under 21
    • Florida – refusal becomes a misdemeanor if the driver’s license has previously been suspended for refusal
    • Kentucky – refusal only carries criminal penalties if the individual is convicted of the DUI
    • Louisiana – law only applies if the individual has refused to submit to a chemical test on two previous occasions
    • Maine – refusal can be considered an aggravating factor at the time of sentencing
    • Vermont – refusal only carries criminal penalties if the person has previously been convicted of DUI or is involved in a collision causing serious bodily injury/death

     

  4. 14 hours ago, arnie said:

    Can you get the semi-private photos by sending a request to the provider. I am not and will not be a premium member.  Could not find a way with the beta to do this.  I went to place a review on a provider and you apparently have to be a premium member to do that.  So fuck them.   But I did find the search filters easier to use and it told you how many escorts were available with your filters and you can selectively add them as you search.  Teh big pictures were nice.  

    I also could not find any sort of obvious "request" link.  

    Can't speak to whether providers have some sort of ability to unlock if you message them, but maybe one of the providers also among our membership will see this and let us know.  

    You have to be a premium member to review?  Hmm.  I wonder if that will change the weak reliability of reviews.  My cynical guess is no, but I'm no expert at their business model.

  5. One thing that appears to be disappearing -- or rather getting monetized: previously, you could ask providers to share their private galleries.  Unless they adjust the site, private galleries can only be seen by paying premium membership.

    I noticed that a couple of galleries that I can currently see on v 6.0 are no longer visible on v 7.0, and there's no way to ask a provider to share.

  6. 2 hours ago, Eddie Morales said:

    To be safe, it’s best to feel him up all over first. Go from his arms, shoulders, chest, abs, and back. Then descend to the legs and thoroughly inspect his thighs, calves, and ass cheeks. Better make sure there’s nothing between his legs too!

    Lordy, I hope there’s **something** between his legs…. 

  7. Markxabier's ad popped up on my screen. I don't know if it's new/renewed or I just haven't seen it before.

    Very attractive.  There are some prior threads (now closed) with generally good reactions and opinions.

    https://rentmen.eu/Markxabier/

    https://www.companyofmen.org/topic/104698-markxabier-in-nyc/#comment-132273

    https://www.companyofmen.org/topic/75726-411-on-markxabier-gushung-or-nandos/#comment-786581

    https://www.companyofmen.org/topic/79701-markxabier-visiting-hartford/#comment-856483

     

  8. 9 hours ago, samhexum said:

    She had a miscarriage.

    That is always a severe blow and deeply sad, for both.  Miscarriage so early is sometimes a sign that the fetus was not genetically viable and there was something wrong in the DNA that stopped further growth.  It doesn't mean it hurts any less.  I'm terribly sorry for their loss.

×
×
  • Create New...