It seems to me that the behavior involves masterbation, viewing of illegal
materials, etc. The question is this: what would happen if a patron walked
into the public library and started viewing a very hard-core magazine. Would
we not ask the person to stop? And if they didn't put it away, would we not
ask them to leave?
Secondly, if we spot someone viewing child pornography, are we not bound by
law to report them? If we don't report them, we become accessories after the
fact.
Finally, can not libraries form policies to deal with what is appropriate in
terms of time, place, and manner restrictions? Constitutional jurisprudence
has been very clear that cities may require parade permits and that sort of
thing. Even though the right to assemble is a constitutional right, there is
no right to assemble and make speeches with a microphone on a residential
street at 2 in the morning.
I think that there are issues of behavior, and that is a big part of this.
--Bryan
Linda Defendeifer wrote:
>
> So if I give each of two people $1000, and one donates hers to Habitat
> for Humanity and the other uses hers to solicit my murder, the problem
> is U.S. currency? Your argument seems to assume that the patron bears
> no responsbility for following library rules.
>
> For what it's worth (I'm a lawyer but not a librarian), it
> does not seem to me that evicting patrons who view "inapropriate"
> websites can be considered as dealing with behavior. Assume two
> patrons are sitting quietly in front of their terminals, doing
> nothing more than navigating to various websites and viewing
> them. There is no difference in "behavior" between the patron who
> is viewing an "appropriate" website versus the patron who is
> viewing an "inapropriate" website. The only difference is the
> content of the website being viewed. And that, given the First
> Amendment, is the crux of the problem.
>
> Russ Armstrong
> russ@casefinder.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:56:38 PST