LA County to Create a Condom Vault?

LOS ANGELES—It's not like anyone has anything else to worry about in Los Angeles County, but the Los Angeles Times is reporting that county officials are preparing to swing into military style action to "confront" the challenge posed by enforcing the mandatory condom provisions contained in Measure B, which was approved by voters Tuesday. Few who voted for B probably understood the scale of work that will need to be accomplished in order to keep county citizens safe from the "epidemic" of STDs that apparently flow unfiltered from porn sets into their homes (and bodies), but the Times has spelled it out in gruesome detail. "The county," it reported, "has said the law, pushed by AIDS activists concerned about disease outbreaks, forces the establishment of a new bureaucracy complete with inspection schedules, a permitting process, a training program for dealing with bodily fluids and a special vault for evidence seized from movie sets. County employees could even be called upon to screen X-rated titles for condom compliance." Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, a veteran pol if there ever was one, understands the limitations faced by the county and the truth of the situation. He told the Times it will be "difficult for the county to enforce the law because many porn shoots occur in private homes and are never registered with authorities." Still, he added, the voters have spoken and the county is obliged to comply. But a special vault? For condoms? Ejaculate? Rubber gloves? Used dental dams?! What exactly is going into that vault, and why? To hold evidence for use in prosecutions? Are they kidding? Will this vault be aboveground or built into a mountain? How will the "evidence" be transported to this special vault, and will the citizens of Los Angeles be safe with this hazardous material being transported on public roadways? What if there's a spill? Should we look into hazmat suits anyway? Will the Nuclear Regulatory Commission play a role in any of this? Are drones involved? Is there an FAQ somewhere that answers this? No matter how you feel about adult performers and condoms, the spectacle of a county in dire financial straits creating a "new bureaucracy" to police the use of condoms is insanely surreal. Let's not forget that this is very same county that announced this April that budget cuts have forced it to "ration justice" by closing 56 courtrooms—including 24 civil, 24 criminal, three family, one probate, and four juvenile delinquency courts—and lay off 350 people in addition to the 329 laid off over the past two years. Now, it may be that creating a new condom enforcement bureaucracy to protect against an epidemic that the public was not aware existed until Measure B told them trumps keeping 56 courtrooms open, but only if you are Michael Weinstein on mescaline. He, by the way, also veered into the surreal yesterday when he scolded county supervisors for being concerned about enforcement. “If you have a hot dog stand, you apply for a permit and periodically a health inspector comes out and determines whether you’re operating safely, so you don’t give food poisoning to people,” he said. “We have 134 businesses that require county permits. Why is this so exotic?” Of course, he was being conveniently dense or was lying through his teeth by insinuating that periodic inspections by a health inspector will do anything to enforce a provision that targets activity that takes place on sets and in private homes and not at businesses. But then this is the same man who also told the Times that enforcement should be a walk in the park because "the county has required sex clubs and bathhouses to obtain government permits since 2006," failing to note that neither are required under penalty of jail to make sure every patron uses a condom, like with B. They just have to make them available! Ah, mendacity.