Smith, who lives on the 1600 block of 1st Avenue North, said the problem began when he noticed a large decal on the back window of a car in the parking lot of Quality Life Concepts. The decal is a white silhouette of a naked woman.
"To me, this has crossed the line," he said.
Offensive or not, Shanna Weaver, who owns the car and decal in question, said it's her right to display the picture.
"It's my freedom of speech, which he can't take away," Weaver said. "It's no different than the mud flaps that you see on trucks."
So, a few things here. Just because you want to call it pornography doesn't make it so. The fact is, you can't tell the woman is naked. It's a solid block shape, she could be wearing tight fitting clothes for all we know. There is no display of genitals, no sexual activity being depicted. It's a sexy silhouette and that's all. And if it bothers him so much he can look away. Weaver is correct, I've seen this exact image on mud flaps all across the country.
The issue does bring a problem to light with how laws are written.
Great Falls and the state of Montana both have laws that make it a misdemeanor crime to knowingly distribute or display "obscene material" to minors. According to Great Falls city code, "obscene" is defined as any material that depicts nudity or sexual conduct "in a manner that is patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community with respect to what is suitable for minors."
Those terms aren't specific, and they should be. It would allow the law to be enforced in a way that isn't subjective, and would allow for a clear line to be drawn. Because one super conservative jackass feels he can tell others what they can display on their vehicles, the cops have had to come point out that her sticker is not a violation of decency laws.
Real obscenity where minors can find it? Bad. Controlling jerks who use their personal beliefs to stomp over others? Just as bad. Too bad this guy can't tell the difference.
No comments:
Post a Comment