When looking for articles of interest this week I found an older blog posting about one Indiana State Representative who tried to walk a not so fine line to predict and limit where books with "explicit" material could be sold within the state. The law that Terry Goodin proposed in 2008 would force vendors who wanted to sell books with explicit content to declare this fact and to pay a $250 registration fee in order to do so.
This bill was born in response to an adult book store that opened off of Interstate 65, which had originally been zoned as a convenience store. The local community was shocked when The Lion's Den, an adult book store, opened instead. Goodin's law was very vague in the definition of what "explicit" materials entailed and while the law originally passed in 2008, it was voided by Judge Barker in that same year. Lawmakers who had supported the bill expressed the desire to come back with a more clearly worded law during the next year. I was unable to find any more recent action taken with this particular law.
There was an outcry from local book sellers when this bill was designed. Almost any store that sold books would be considered to sell "explicit" materials as designated in the bill. There is a deeper concern for those who think about this bill. By charging a fee, and therefore restricting the businesses that can sell certain types of materials, would the Indiana State Legislature in fact be censoring those materials? And if such a bill passes and is not revoked what types of books would be worthy of that fee next?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Oh, yes... absolutely... I would say this is a form of censorship. I really don't see how this can be legal. I mean, on the one hand, they are not saying that the items can't be sold; but on the other, they are essentially making store owners pay for the right to free speech.
ReplyDeleteThe fee is not huge, and it seems to be a one-time thing... but if these small things are allowed to take place, then what's next? When is it too much?
Yeah this law would be HUGE. For one, I'm assuming that's a $250 fee per title, right? In that case, it's a de facto statewide ban on adult bookstores. It would also ban adult sections of mainline bookstores and movie rental stores. If it's a single $250 fee to sell as many different explicit materials as you want, then I don't really see the point.
ReplyDeleteAlso, of course, if they actually used the term "explicit," then I think it's significant that they opted for it instead the accepted legal term "obscene," probably as a way of circumventing the constraints of that word in case law.
I think I have heard of similar situations such as this, but I think usually adult bookstores are charged fines or fees if they are located near a residential area or something like that. I could be wrong, but I remember seeing something like this on the news. If i'm wrong, maybe it was that people were trying to fight adult bookstores in residential areas or small towns. I should probably look it up.
ReplyDeleteLeah
So does the guy specify what the $250 was going to be earmarked for? It's always kind of fun to find out where our sin tax dollars are being spend.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it is appropriate to charge any fee for freedom of expression whether it is a one time fee, a yearly fee, or a fee per title. This fee would affect EVERY bookstore in the state, not just the "adult" bookstores--every bookstore has at least a few titles that could fall under the heading of explicit or obscene, including religious bookstores, where even the Bible has parts that would qualify. There are a number of small, privately owned bookstores throughout the state, both used and new, who would not be able to pay the fee and stay in business. Even if it is a one time, all inclusive fee, if we say it's okay "just this once", what is to stop legislators from deciding a year or two from now that it has to be a yearly fee, or a monthly fee? It would never stop, and eventually the smaller bookstores would be forced to self-censor if they want to stay open. This law is definitely a violation of the rights to free speech and press.
ReplyDelete~Lynn
@Linda - I didn't see anywhere that said what that money would do. I could have missed it, but none of the articles I found were very in-depth about the law itself.
ReplyDelete