Public library okays porn viewing despite parent complaint.
#Stack the states computer software
If, on the request of an adult user, a librarian will unblock filtered material or disable the Internet software filter without significant delay, there is little to this case. 194 (2003) seems to indicate that the ability of adult users of a public library to disable Internet filters in order to view lawful content is constitutionally critical to the question of whether such filters are allowed, as stated in a concurring opinion by Justice Kennedy: I am actually mildly surprised by this decision, because United States v. Reidinger was issued a citation for disorderly conduct under WIS. Had received several complaints, and witnesses had stated that Reidinger viewing pornography at that location made them feel uncomfortable. Lancour testified he told Reidinger his watching pornography was causing a disturbance, to which Reidinger responded that he had a constitutional right to view pornographic material at a public library. Lancour then personally observed Reidinger watching pornographic material on the computer for approximately thirty seconds before asking him to close the browser and move with him to a library stairwell to discuss the matter. The officers a picture they had taken of Reidinger’s computer screen that showed open pornographic images. Lancour and Henry met with the complaining students, who showed Two university police officers, Edward Lancour and Amanda Henry, responded to the complaint. The complaining student testified that she and her roommate were working on homework at the library when they noticed Reidinger watching pornographic material on the computer next to them. Supervisor at the McIntyre Library on the UWEC campus, testified she received a complaint from a student at 10:40 p.m. Backgroundįollowing a bench trial, Reidinger was found to have violated WIS.ĪDMIN. Reidinger also vaguely alludes to a conspiracy between numerous public officers and employees to harass him. On appeal, Reidinger argues he has a First Amendment right to view legal adult pornographic material at a public library. The evidence at trialĮstablished that others witnessed Reidinger viewing pornography in a public library on the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire (UWEC) campus.
#Stack the states computer code
CODE § UWS 18.11(2), which prohibits disorderly conduct in University of Wisconsin System buildings or on university lands. From the most recent (January 2016) appeals court decision:ĭavid Reidinger was found to have violated WIS. I bring you the story of STATE OF WISCONSIN v DAVID J. Tl dr there is at least one instance of a disorderly conduct charge for watching pornography in a public library.
This addition doesn't change the question, it simply justifies it as a Federal question rather than one for the States as this is primarily a Constitutional issue. Flynt won regarding the display and definition of pornography vs expression. Flynt vs Fallwell in the Supreme Court regarding the 1st Amendment. Regarding localization to US States and commentary to that effect. I imagine this may trail out into state laws and skip Federal altogether but I seem to remember Larry Flint having a Supreme Court victory related to pornography sales and Hustler magazine as a product being visible to potential consumers in stores. Is it legal in the US to watch pornography in public places? Not that they would allow it but, you get the idea.
Imagine walking up to Starbucks dragging along a 1st and 3rd grader and running into streaming porn on laptops throughout the store. We all began to wonder about US law and whether or not it was legal to watch pornography in public places. This question popped up on the HNQ sometime over the last couple of days and it started a discussion in one of the chat rooms.
0 kommentar(er)
