Accessing Adult Internet Sites in Public Libraries

[jcrcagot]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is the name of your state?Indiana I live in Gary,In.Ihave library cards for many different library districts within this county.They all have rules about accessing adult sites on public access terminals.All of their rules include loss of internet priveleges if caught accessing these sites.I wanted to know the legality of such rules and if the US Supreme Court has ever ruled or handed down a decision in such cases?It seems the law is very vague,because I found out other library districts in other states,like Illinois,for example,have no filters on their systems and let any patron of legal age look at whatever they choose.Thank you for any clarification you can give me.My email is [email protected]
__________________

 

[divgradcurl]

The government (in this case, the library) may, but does not have to, restrict access to "obscene" material. Obscene material is not protected speech, so the government has pretty much free reign (within some limits) to limit access.

Of course, the question is, what is obscene. The current test for obscenity is:

"Thus, in 1973, in Miller v. California, Justice Burger announced the second definition of obscenity - the majority position of the Court, and the definition, which, more or less, is still in effect today. It is as follows:

"(a) whether the 'average person, applying contemporary community standards' would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,

(b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and

(c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."

This holding specifically replaced the old test and also held that community standards could be local rather than national. This change swung the pendulum back toward a more conservative definition of "obscenity" by local, some times rural communities"

and further,

"As many had complained that these rulings were so vague that they were impossible to comply by those trying to obey the law, the Court set forth examples of what was "hard core", or that which the Court considered obscene and illegal. The Court's list of illegal acts was as follows:

"(a) Patently offensive representations or descriptions of ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated.

(b) Patently offensive representations or descriptions of masturbation, excretory functions, and lewd exhibition of the genitals.""

http://library.lp.findlaw.com/articles/file/00982/008860/title/Subject/topic/Constitutional Law_First Amendment - Freedom of Speech/filename/constitutionallaw_1_86

and finally,

"Since Miller, the Court has clarified and explained aspects of the Miller standard:

Jurors are to apply the standards of the area "from which he comes for making the required " decision as the "community standards" for obscenity; [5]

"[A]ppeals to the prurient interest" means that which appeals to "shameful or morbid interests" in sex, but not that which incites normal lust [6] and includes materials designed for and primarily disseminated to a deviant sexual group (for example, sadists) which appeals to the prurient interests of that group; [7]

"[A]verage person " includes both sensitive and insensitive adult persons, but does not include children; [8]

Serious artistic, political, or scientific value, using a national standard, is required for a finding that something is not obscene and a finding of some artistic, political or scientific value does not preclude a finding that a work is obscene.[9]

Additionally the Court has created a sort of middle category of materials – "indecent" materials that are protected speech. Indecent materials are defined as those which show "nonconformance with accepted standards of morality."[10] After reviewing the above, most persons, including lawyers, remain confused about what is and is not legally permissible."

Illinois can choose to do what they want, as can Indiana -- they don't have to choose the same thing. Further, because part of the test above is based on community standards, what might be considered "not obscene," and therefore protected speech, in San Francisco may very well be considered "obscene" and therefore unprotected speech in Peoria.

And yes, the law is very vague.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

My response:

It's only lawful if you can't pass the "Limp Dick" test when you walk out.

But, why would you be such a stupid idiot to have porn on your monitor when children walk by? I'll bet you like that.

IAAL

 

[JETX]

Finally, why should I allow MY tax dollars to be used so that YOU can view porn on the computer equipment and system owned by US???

 

[HomeGuru]

Finally, why should I allow MY tax dollars to be used so that YOU can view porn on the computer equipment and system owned by US???

**A: now if you were viewing the freeadvice website, that would be different.

 

[superbovine]

Finally, why should I allow MY tax dollars to be used so that YOU can view porn on the computer equipment and system owned by US???

Well, don't forget about the thousands of college students that attend public colleges and live on campus. granted they pay for internet access in their rent, but that is university equipment that their internet traffics funnels through. think about the web server logs of the porn industry. how have .edu sites you think they have.

 

[JETX]

Well, don't forget about the thousands of college students that attend public colleges and live on campus. granted they pay for internet access in their rent, but that is university equipment that their internet traffics funnels through. think about the web server logs of the porn industry. how have .edu sites you think they have.

And what the hell does ANY of that have to do with this thread???

 

[superbovine]

And what the hell does ANY of that have to do with this thread???

i was pointing about that you comment about tax dollars has wider implication.

 

[JETX]

i was pointing about that you comment about tax dollars has wider implication.

Wow, what a spin???
So, EXACTLY how are "the thousands of college students that attend public colleges" and "university equipment" related to taxes?? I guess you haven't heard about that thing called 'tuition', huh??

And even LESS related to "web server logs of the porn industry."

What a skewed sense of logic.... almost scary!!

 

[BelizeBreeze]

(egg)
This is your brain.

(egg frying)
This is your brain on drugs...

(fried egg turning into a dancing chicken)
This is your brain with a little knowledge......

 

[superbovine]

Wow, what a spin???
So, EXACTLY how are "the thousands of college students that attend public colleges" and "university equipment" related to taxes?? I guess you haven't heard about that thing called 'tuition', huh??

And even LESS related to "web server logs of the porn industry."

What a skewed sense of logic.... almost scary!!

i did say they pay for it in my orignal post.