On Probation for Selling Comics?????????????????????

[mlovest]

You've made good points here, JC. The laws like this are on the books to protect our kids. Unfortunately, examples are made of some people to make sure everyone knows the law will be enforced. I would definitely prefer to keep thta filth out of the hands of kids. I don't care if adults read it, but not kids. There's way too much sex and smut on TV and in the movies anyway. Heck, look at some folks in the forum's photos! Like Gman's...

[comicwiz]

That's really a crock. Comics aren't really for kids anymore, at least not specifically. The guy didn't sell the book to someone underage....

 

Good point Brian.

 

To pit the conservative leanings of one segment of the population against a comic store owner, and force them to no longer sell adult-oriented material -- TO ANYONE, PERIOD -- to me is reminiscent of the McCarthy era. And that my friends is a very scary thought!

[joe_collector]

You've made good points here, JC. The laws like this are on the books to protect our kids.

 

Hey, I didn't say I agreed with the law, but that the guy obviously broke it. These comic news sites print 1/10 of the info and get everyone riled about the wrong thing. Just because it's a stupid law doesn't mean you can break it, and even if the law is repealed years later, it will have not effect on the clerk's fate.

 

There are two distinct things going on here: The CBLDF fight against the new law, and their fight to free a guy who broke it. Very separate situations.

 

I do think that you are right in the "example" area, and this happens up here with cigarettes. The cops send out "21 Jump Street" guys and gals to hit the corner stores, and then arrest and fine a few of them to send out the message.

[comicwiz]

I may not agree with the law, but it's pretty obvious he broke it.

 

From what I can see, the cops were casing the joint, sent in some Johnny Depp/21 Jump Street guy with a skateboard. He picked up the porno comic, brought it to counter and the clerk took his money.

 

“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.”

1 Peter 5:8

 

If an adult nightclub is raided for the purpose of finding out whether a club owner is allowing minors, and a minor isn't found anywhere, or proven to be under-aged, then who exacty is breaking the law?

 

Even more disturbing is the notion that we have become so detached from our own rights and civil liberties that we would almost expect the feds to plant a minor the next time they make their raid?

 

Anyone know how women were deemed witches during the Witch Hunts of the late 1600's? They would throw a suspected woman into the water (pond) and if she floated, she was guilty. If she didn't float, then she was innocent, but she would surely drown.

 

It seems the same rationale is driving the incrimination of a comic store clerk who happened to sell a comic book to an adult. Hell bent on laying some kind of charge on this store because it was disseminating material deemed inappropriate, not by the state, but some conservative fundamentalists who are seeking control of the state. Texas state law ACTUALLY deems it inappropriate when such material is sold to a minor.

 

One things for sure; an issue like this is likely to raise some fierce debate. It seems that the conservatives who are determined to control all aspects of family, economy and religion have clearly shown themselves the adversary in the state of Texas. The lion roared the moment the law decided to side with them on a matter that should have been overlooked. The question remains: who will the lion devour next?

[comicwiz]

You've made good points here, JC. The laws like this are on the books to protect our kids. Unfortunately, examples are made of some people to make sure everyone knows the law will be enforced. I would definitely prefer to keep thta filth out of the hands of kids. I don't care if adults read it, but not kids. There's way too much sex and smut on TV and in the movies anyway. Heck, look at some folks in the forum's photos! Like Gman's...

 

mlovest

 

Does this mean that if you go into a video store and find that they sell adult video's, you would want them shut down completely? Even if they had a seperate viewing area for that type of material?

[comicwiz]

These comic news sites print 1/10 of the info and get everyone riled about the wrong thing.

 

I've heard several spins on this story, from several different published sources and every one of them describes it as a sale of an adult-oriented comic to a consenting adult. That's all the info I need to form my opinion about the injustice in the matter.

[joe_collector]

Then the comic news sites slanted reporting has done its job.

 

Look deeper, ask around and figure out if the real crux of the issue was whether the clerk was required by law to confirm age before selling items restricted from sale to minors. If he didn't do this, then.....

 

It's not about the validity of the law, it's not about freedom of rights, it's about a guy not being careful and the cops decided to make an example of him. It's a Texas law and he'll be tried and likely convicted. Looks pretty cut and dried.

 

On the other hand the CBLDF fight against the ACTUAL LAW is a freedom/rights issue and it does represent a lot more than a fine to a clerk. This is the big deal and what most of you are so fired up about.

 

These are two separate cases, and the comic sites are trying to cloud the issue by combining them. It really does seem to be working.

[joe_collector]

I've heard several spins on this story, from several different published sources and every one of them...

 

Do you have any links to non-comic book related sites. As in relatively-unbiased news pages?

[joe_collector]

I've heard several spins on this story, from several different published sources and every one of them describes it as a sale of an adult-oriented comic to a consenting adult.

 

So what law has been broken? Texas hasn't outlawed these comics, just restricted their sale to adults. It is stated in one of the (cough) articles that the store carried material that required ID in order to buy, and I have yet to read anything that states the cop was carded.

 

And if the undercover cop came in, was carded, passed as an adult, and bought the comic, there would have been no arrest.

[comicwiz]

So what law has been broken? Texas hasn't outlawed these comics, just restricted their sale to adults. It is stated in one of the (cough) articles that the store carried material that required ID in order to buy, and I have yet to read anything that states the cop was carded.

 

From the amount of time the CBLDF dedicted towards providing expert witnesses on the literary qualities of the book in question (Demon Beast Invasion), its more than likely, that the jury examined the comic book, listened to the testimony, and decided that Demon Best Invasion comic was obscene.

 

To be obscene in the United States, a work needs to meet the three-part Miller standard. The Miller standard asks:

 

(a) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, Roth, supra, at 489,

 

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

 

© whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

 

Its hard to imagine how a jury, as foolkiller has already pointed out (equating comics=kids), would ever view a collection of mean-spirited, degrading sex scenes, with no artistic merit, as something that could be classified as a comic. According to the jury, comics are solely for kids. Anything deviating from that norm is obscene, and anyone selling such filth is breaking obscenity laws and should be imprisoned, or at least be forced to fess up US $4000!

 

In response to your first question, Texas has indeed outlawed comics for any other purpose than for children. Make no mistake about it: this decision sets a precedent that comic books are for kids, and therefore should be judged by a different standard than other media.

[joe_collector]

From the amount of time the CBLDF dedicted towards providing expert witnesses on the literary qualities of the book in question (Demon Beast Invasion), its more than likely, that the jury examined the comic book, listened to the testimony, and decided that Demon Best Invasion comic was obscene.

 

I have not seen this stated anywhere. Do you have a link to this info?

[comicwiz]

Look deeper, ask around and figure out if the real crux of the issue was whether the clerk was required by law to confirm age before selling items restricted from sale to minors. If he didn't do this, then.....

 

Vigilance towards selling tobacco and alcohol in Canada is determined moreso by the mere fact that they are both government regulated industries. The feds work hand in hand with provincial agencies to ensure stiff penalities are imposed on minors, or retailers found to sell such substances to minors. It is no coincidence that the same vigilance informs us that those two substances alone account for nearly half of Canada's SIN/hidden taxes.

 

I think that the example of selling cigarettes or alcohol to minors, although equally as controversial, does not have application in this discussion.

 

Remember, an adult-oriented book was sold to an adult, not a minor. This matter raises two major issues that diverge considerably from a discussion about whether material was sold to a minor or not. First, by the mere fact that the Texas case essentially strips First Amendment protection from comics, and secondly, with this precedence, who knows how aggressive moralists can get in their pursuits to make sure you won't have the opportunity to buy whatever comics you want to buy.

[comicwiz]

I have not seen this stated anywhere. Do you have a link to this info?

 

I just typed in "Jesus Castillo" in google and found a tonne of articles. I didn't save any of them, but bits of my previous post are found in the links I've already provided, plus some these two which I still had opened on my taskbar.

 

http://www.americasucks.net/archives/000012.html

 

http://www.topshelfcomix.com/news.php?article=6

 

 

[joe_collector]

I do understand your point, but I can't help but think we're talking about two specific cases here, with two very different implications.

 

I'm against the "adult comic" law as it stands, but I also recognize the need to obey said laws until they are repealed or adjusted (if ever). Anyone who doesn't obey the laws of the land is subject to criminal charges, and if you choose to do so in protest, then you should expect to face the consequences.

 

Or as Ronnie likes to say:

 

"We have the means to change the laws we find unjust or onerous. We cannot, as citizens, pick and choose the laws we will or will not obey."

 

 

[joe_collector]

I actually did a search and came up with some interesting info. A lot of what we're talking about is true.

 

The case is about obscenity, but it is also linked to the presence of kid's toys and items in the store and relative ease at which an undercover cop got ahold of it. The natural inclination is that selling obscenity in same store as a Finding Nemo poster might not be so cool.

 

Ah, the dangers of expanding your product line come to life!!

 

Now the real interesting part is that this decision is a one-off misdemeanor with no lasting power or effect on future verdicts. It's about as important to precedent law as two dead flies. If a future case is tried, it will not even be part of the equation.

[Smokinghawk]

They repeal the anti-sodomy law, yet they persecute a comic book seller for selling an adult oriented book to an adult?

 

 

They didn't repeal the anti-sodomy law. What they did was UPHOLD the right to privacy within the home. Other laws regarding obscene merchandise or behaviors are otherwise still in effect.

 

 

[dad-migration]

What I find fascinating about this thread is that no one has asked what seems to me to be an indispensable question: what was in the comic book this guy sold?

 

I don't see how anyone can give an intelligent opinion about this case until they know the nature of the offending material.

 

Also, if I were in the jury, I would have been offended by the DA's closing argument. The "kids across the street" were irrelevant to the facts of the case.

[comicwiz]

The case is about obscenity, but it is also linked to the presence of kid's toys and items in the store and relative ease at which an undercover cop got ahold of it. The natural inclination is that selling obscenity in same store as a Finding Nemo poster might not be so cool.

 

I've read this angle, and I can't help but raise that same example of the video store. I've walked into a Video 99 shop on St. Clair and Christie that is set-up similarly to most video stores. They have several different categories by which to select a video ranging from new arrivals to kids videos. They have an area in the back which is draped and conceals another section of the store where adult videos are found. The area is clearly draped with a sign that restricts minors.

 

I haven't been in that store for some time, but I'll bet if I walked in there tomorrow, I could buy my copy of Finding Nemo, albeit conveniently located by the cash register, which also happens to be about twenty feet from a draped area where adult video may also be found. How does this make what Video 99 does any better than what Kieth's Comics did?

 

Every article I've read on the Kieths Comics story points to the fact that he cordoned off all the adult areas from the kids. Another problem which is continually referenced is the fact that the store was in close proximity to a grade school.

[comicwiz]

what was in the comic book this guy sold?

 

The jury were given a comic book (Demon Beast Invasion) to read featuring demons variously seducing/raping humans; containing random sex scenes, objectifying women, and the kind of smut typically found in comics of an adult-oriented nature. In sum, the comic had no characterization to speak of, lousy drawing, and had nothing to say to kids.

 

Incidentally, a second book was purchased, but the charges on that book were dropped. I take it they didn't find the content nearly as offensive as they did with DBI.

[joe_collector]

I haven't been in that store for some time, but I'll bet if I walked in there tomorrow, I could buy my copy of Finding Nemo, albeit conveniently located by the cash register, which also happens to be about twenty feet from a draped area where adult video may also be found. How does this make what Video 99 does any better than what Kieth's Comics did?

 

Have you seen what's in this comic book?

 

I don't think there's a video around that can come anywhere close.