[binary visions]

Think again. By blocking access to pornography sites the library is basically taking away the first amendment right for the owner of that particular site. The library can't filter legal content, that's like telling all the authors of books with swear words in them that they are pulling them off the shelves because parents complained. Now, if they put filters on the kids computers then that's not a violation of free speech as the kids aren't even of age to view the material.

This whole train of thought kind of cracks me up. You clearly aren't going to be swayed here, but to think that blocking content that could be easily viewed by minors - both minors who are walking by or sitting in the library, or minors who are browsing on the computers - is a violation of first amendment rights... It boarders on the absurd.

I suppose there could be library setups where everyone had their own little cubicle, blocked off from the rest of the world, and they didn't allow minors into them... But that's stretching it.

The fact is that many libraries DO have filters, and DO block pornography, and if you honestly believe that's a first amendment rights violation... I don't know what to say.

It is illegal, plain and simple, for minors to view porn. Therefore, filters in a public library are there to comply with the law. Someone viewing porn on a public computer could easily be viewed by anyone else in the immediate vicinity.

 

[Toshi]

bv, but what about the legitimate content blocked by filters?

 

[SkaredShtles]

people still go to Libraries?

Damn straight. Everything is *FREE* there.......

-S.S.-

 

[JRB]

bv, but what about the legitimate content blocked by filters?

I'll take that one. It will block some good stuff, but the legal rammifications of a kid seeing it are far worse. I don't have kids, but know how mad I would be if I did have. Using the constitution here seems dumb to me.

 

[dh girlie]

Could you imagine this guy in the library checkin out porn during the children's story time...hahahaha!

 

[MikeD]

Think again. By blocking access to pornography sites the library is basically taking away the first amendment right for the owner of that particular site. The library can't filter legal content, that's like telling all the authors of books with swear words in them that they are pulling them off the shelves because parents complained. Now, if they put filters on the kids computers then that's not a violation of free speech as the kids aren't even of age to view the material.

It's in no way taking away the site owner's right to free speech. Preventing him from hosting his site might violate that right, but limiting a publically-funded computer's access to what he says/shows doesn't affect his right to say or show anything.

That's like saying you've violated Larry Flynt's right to free speech because you don't have Hustler on the library shelves.

MD

 

[SkaredShtles]

It's in no way taking away the site owner's right to free speech. Preventing him from hosting his site might violate that right, but limiting a publically-funded computer's access to what he says/shows doesn't affect his right to say or show anything.

That's like saying you've violated Larry Flynt's right to free speech because you don't have Hustler on the library shelves.

MD

Or like saying some author's rights have been violated because their book isn't even *in* the library........ libraries have the discretion of purchasing the books they see fit for the shelves.

-S.S.-

 

[MikeD]

Or like saying some author's rights have been violated because their book isn't even *in* the library........ libraries have the discretion of purchasing the books they see fit for the shelves.

-S.S.-

Well, that's true, too, but I see Honeywell's point with regard to books, in that there's some books that are culturally or topically significant that still contain content that some people might object to, and refusing to carry them in public libraries does in some way prevent public access to the books.

But that's a war waged on a fine edge; the broader limits are easily defined by common sense. No one's saying we should have bound volumes of Penthouse Forum letters in the library. (Although they DID have them in Camp Schwab library on Okinawa, oddly enough...) It's also an issue affected by locality...a library in the Bible Belt will meet the wants of the community it serves, just like a library in San Fransisco.

Looks like Bigginssis' library is meeting the desires of certain community members just fine, too...until she spoiled all the fun.

MD