In Someone Else's Words...

This is probably one of the better articles/essays/columns I've read on the issue of pornography in our public libraries. Ernest Istook took the time to research the entire issue and write a fairly accurate summary of the entire situation, including the role the American Library Association plays. (A little background on Mr. Istook, he's from the Heritage Foundation and has served 14 years as a Republican Congressman (Kansas).

The article is aptly titled "Libraries Need Not Expose Kids to Porn" and was published online today in the Sacramento Bee (sacbee.com). I definitely recommend it as a brief overview of the issue at hand for anyone looking for a quick take and I appreciate Ernest's approach to this from a lawmakers POV. He give good reason for what the situation is and clearly places action items and next steps for local and state governments to use and enforce CIPA. (YAY! for clear next steps!) Read an excerpt from his article below (bolding mine).

These libraries still rely upon public funds from the state or local level. Lawmakers who provide that funding have an opportunity to protect children. States and local governments can do so if they use CIPA as their model. They can require that schools and libraries funded by local and state governments must protect children from Internet porn by installing these software filters. No such filter is perfect, but they protect children and they help parents who want libraries to be safe places for their entire family.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/02/27/4294010/libraries-need-not-expose-kids.html#storylink=cpy

Read more!

Inside Edition Investigates CPL!

Inside Edition Investigates Who's Lurking Inside Our Library!

First, let it be known that I simply can't even believe that this is still going on. Seriously?! Anyway, the porn peddling that CPL insists they "have no ability to control" is continuing to be noticed. Glad that IE caught wind of it.

Important that they even noticed how guards are patrolling the patrons as they use the machines. There goes the argument that monitoring computer use will create a police state, eh? Any old way - again, there are several children near people that absolutely have to watch porn in public - no matter the cost. GRRRR!

We can only hope that as more people are affected by this horribleness, the outcry will become even greater and change will finally be known. Then the public library can once again be a place you can leave without immediately feeling like you need to bleach your eyeballs. Or maybe just a place you can take your children with you to pay a bill online. (We hear ya single mommas...)
Read more!

Sounds familiar...

I came across a news story this morning that's all too familiar. It reminded me a lot about my own experiences at CPL back in 2008 and ruffled my feathers enough to get me to draft a post about it. This story was about a ten year old girl who was exposed to hardcore pornography in her public library during a Sunday mid-afternoon outing with her mother and sister. Read the news story linked above for the deets. But the mother was with her daughters - they were both being properly supervised.

Kudos to the mother for reacting in a very logical and appropriate, even sensible manner. The daughter was very upset by the experience. I'm upset too - and here's why:

1. The mother noticed what was going on and tried to address it by asking the librarians about it (she was given the classic "that's their right to view that material" garbage line)
   
2. The mother even asked the male patron (notice I chose to not use the term "gentleman" here) to view that elsewhere. And his reply was that he needed "30 more seconds". {ewwww... shudder}
3. After her daughter had been exposed and started crying, the mother responsibly email the library administration to alert them to the situation. And she states excellent supporting points.
   

   "At a minimum, there should be warning signs posted, stating that some screens may contain adult content. ... I had no idea my girls could be exposed to such images at our local library,"

Protecting prurient materials is not a constitutional right, regardless of the garbage we're being told. If you have any questions about that, check out the actual Constitution and Free Speech Amendment people are quoting without actually reading (obscene speech is not protected. prurient material is considered obscene). And most tax payers would shudder to think they're helping fund library porn. Particularly when children can be - and very much are - being exposed to hardcore pornography - and it's damaging effects.

More on Freedom of Speech
The First Amendment
More on the First Amendment
Read more!