Raging Stallion: Open Road - Part 2 (Tommy Defendi & Mike Dozer) (Scene 4)

Raging Stallion: Open Road – Part 2 (Tommy Defendi & Mike Dozer) (Scene 4)

Watch Tommy Defendi & Mike Dozer at RagingStallion

Plumber Mike Dozer is about to get his depths plumbed by Tommy Defendi. Mike is fixing a leaky urinal in a public restroom. When Tommy comes in to piss, Mike’s gaze is riveted to Tommy’s fat dick. Mike may have the deepest throat of any guy in porn ever, and Tommy’s length and girth are all in a day’s work. Mike’s excess drool washes over Tommy’s balls until they glisten. Now it’s Tommy’s turn and he chokes himself trying to deliver as good as he got. Mike ditches his tank top and work pants and gives Tommy an assist by grabbing the back of his head, pulling it over his super hard dick. Tommy counters by spinning Mike 180 degrees and rocketing his tongue into Mike’s hole, followed by his cock. Mike is a solid, almost immoveable mass of muscle who can take a hard, ferocious fucking. His ass turns red from Tommy’s slaps. Between the two of them, sweat pours down on the floor. Mike makes the floor more slippery with a pool of cum, then he takes Tommy’s load in his mouth and face.

Watch Tommy Defendi & Mike Dozer at RagingStallion

nercowhore says:

February 21, 2014 at 5:23 pm

Tacky with a capital “T.”

NG22 says:

February 21, 2014 at 5:37 pm

carey579 says:

February 22, 2014 at 3:33 am

Tommy Defendi represents everything wrong with gay porn!

The obsession with body hair trying to look masculine and failing miserably! His tough top act is freaking hilarious when he acts like a bottom bitch others.

bulls1 says:

February 21, 2014 at 5:47 pm

Wonder if Dozier is getting plenty of cock in jail

TheSagaOf says:

February 21, 2014 at 6:37 pm

Hot.

wuddup says:

February 21, 2014 at 6:43 pm

was this before or after he became poz?

nercowhore says:

February 21, 2014 at 7:41 pm

Dozer was POZ long before he started doing porn.

pink spider says:

February 21, 2014 at 6:57 pm

Anyone else see this?

http://www.queerty.com/gay-porn-star-mike-dozer-charged-with-statutory-rape-of-14-year-old-he-met-online-20140207/

DaveAtom says:

February 21, 2014 at 8:49 pm

Tommy Defendi worth the watch… Always

trex says:

February 21, 2014 at 8:58 pm

Yeah, very hot to watch him paired with a child molester. What exactly would Dozer have to do for you NOT to watch him?
And BTW, WayBig blog what would Dozer have to do for you NOT to promote his scenes? Stay classy.

swim400 says:

February 22, 2014 at 9:56 am

Tommy is always worth the watch. Under the circumstances, I would have shelved this scene IMO.

MattGomez says:

February 22, 2014 at 12:30 am

Ok guys, first of all, i dont think Mike can be qualified as a “child molester” since the kid was on a dating app on his own will making moves on older men (something that is not that unusual). The kid was a little horny prick and Mike was a dumb, horny and reckless. Everyone here was 14 at some point and im pretty sure some “today readers” are even younger, and i can speak for a lot of people when i say that ours 14yo selfs would be all up on mikes business. Second, the fact that hes a poz doesnt give us the right to trash him. Hes in jail just for the fact of being reckless, stupid and dumb. A 14yo on a dating app is a serious dangerous thing. Hes lucky just for being alive considering the fact that this kid hitted on many other guys before. I still think the scene is hot. Jail, no jail; poz, negative. Hes already fucked in life so i might just make the best out of it

slipperyslope says:

February 22, 2014 at 3:15 am

^^^ This. Times. A million.

There’s a huge difference between a predator who intentionally goes out to molest a pre-pubescent child and someone who gets into a situation like this. Should Mike Dozer be punished? Sure, absolutely. Should be be forced to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life? I’m not so sure on that.

Imagine you go to a bar and see someone having a beer. You buy them a drink, chat, get a little friendly in the bathroom and trade blow-jobs, or even hand jobs. Then come to find out the kid is underage. Now you’re in for contributing to the delinquency of a minor (buying alcohol) and statutory rape. Would you want people to immediately call you a ‘child molestor’ who ‘drugged’ your victims? Or would you want people to wait and hear all the details?

Until I get all the facts, I’m withholding judgment on his personal life.

As for the porn- I still think he’s hot as fuck.

swim400 says:

February 22, 2014 at 10:01 am

Both bring up an interesting question. Why is Mike Tyson all over the media at this time?? Wasn’t he incarcerated for raping a beauty queen? Is he a registered sex offender? And, he is dumb as dirt! Sure, Katie Couric have him on your cancelled talk show.

landreau says:

February 22, 2014 at 6:27 pm

The 14-year old was the initiator. It’s not an excuse, but it’s not the same as if Mike initiated it. It’s a shame that someone so physically appealing continues to make such horrible decisions.

slipperyslope says:

February 23, 2014 at 3:27 am

@andrewtor – You read a headline that says “33 year old man has sex with 14 year old boy” and you react with shock. That’s completely understandable. But do you know what the ‘age of consent’ is in many countries? Puberty. Because it’s impossible to say “Every person is a ‘child’ until age [X].” Yes, it’s up to ‘adults’ to be responsible, but frankly, I’ve met men well into their 40s who have the emotional maturity of a teenager. Each case has to be handled individually because each person is an individual. This is not a case of an adult taking advantage of a caregiver situation, like Mary Kay LeTorneau. This is a horny teenager – NOT A CHILD- who lives in a technologically advanced age where porn and hookups are readily available and he put himself into a compromising situation. Until there is evidence that Mike Dozer coerced him into doing something he did not want to do, I’m withholding judgment as a ‘child molestor.’ Is he irresponsible? Sure, yes. Does he deserve to be locked in prison ‘no ifs and or buts’? No.