What should the police be more concerned with enforcing?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It seems most social conservatives think the answer is option 2. They insist that the police actually enforce all the type of laws listed there instead of concentrating on laws that actually prevent things that are a threat to public safety. I've heard about how Cincinnati has has frequently cracked down on sex stores and "adult entertainment", which strikes me as a giant waste of time since gangs and organized crime are still quite common there.

Not to mention that lately the FBI, encouraged by the Bush adminsitation, decided it was more imporant to crack down on porn dealers than terrorists.

[nclib]

Option 1, of course, but I agree that the FBI is more concerned with option 2.

[opebo]

Option 1, of course, but I agree that the FBI is more concerned with option 2.

Of course, nclib, as enforcing prudery is part of the all important project of social control.  The forces of social control use sexuality much as they use terrorism (real or imagined) - a way to scare the miserable common people and fill them with anger, hatred, and fear.  Hence the endless focus on FOX on 'sexual predation' as well as terrorism.  Perhaps the explosion the cowering American public fears most is not the car-bomb, but the male ejacuation!

[Emsworth]

Option 1. None of the activities listed in option 2 should be subject to government control, especially considering the fact that they are harmless. Regulations of "obscenity" are particularly totalitarian.

[TomC]

Well, I'm not sure the social conservatives are more concerned about pronography than crime, just that they are more concerned about it than nonconservatives.

[Jake]

The laws

[Everett]

"checking porn stores to see if any material violates "obscenity" regulations, making sure all strip clubs follow the laws on them to the letter, hunting down underage people drinking privately in their own residences or potheads who don't a"?

Nice truncation. Don't a-what? Don't abide by the laws?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

bleh, never knew there was a character limit.

What I was talking about was potheads who don't involve anyone else or cause any problems. There are a few who live in my apartment, they get stoned all the time, and never cause any problems, hence I don't mind them. I don't see any reason they should be arrested.

[Speed of Sound]

Super loaded question, but A.

[Nation]

Yeah, this isn't a biased question at all.


Stopping Violent crime should certainly take priority over "obscenity" in porn stores. You needn't add all that extra stuff.

[Bono]

Porn stores of course, to see to that everyone buys porn.

[TeePee4Prez]

Of course option 1.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The Law; that's what they're paid to enforce and that's what they should enforce.
It's not as though they actually spend much time worrying about the stuff in your little rant anyway; unless coppers in Minnesota are very different to over here. Methinks you sometimes forget that you aren't the centre of the universe.

[minionofmidas]

The Law; that's what they're paid to enforce and that's what they should enforce.
It's not as though they actually spend much time worrying about the stuff in your little rant anyway; unless coppers in Minnesota are very different to over here. Methinks you sometimes forget that you aren't the centre of the universe.

No, you keep forgetting that Better Red than Dead is indeed the centre of the universe, as has been demonstrated by modern science.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The Law; that's what they're paid to enforce and that's what they should enforce.
It's not as though they actually spend much time worrying about the stuff in your little rant anyway; unless coppers in Minnesota are very different to over here. Methinks you sometimes forget that you aren't the centre of the universe.

In Minnesota, no. In some other places, yes.

Examples:

-A county DA in Alabama once led a campaign to shut down any gas stations that sold PLAYBOY, which he claimed fell under the state's "obscenity" law.
-Some parts of the Houston area not only charged adult stores that sold videos that could be considered "obscene", but the clerks that sold them as well. Apparentely every video store clerk has to be aware of the contents of every single video in the inventory.
-The notoriously prudish city of Cincinnati once led a massive campaign against adult video stores. In one case, the owner was charged with selling an "obscene" video tape. He got off when the video was shown in court, and one of the jurors diverted her eyes. The judge ruled that the jury did not properly examine the evidence, and declared a mistrial.
-Also in Ohio, police hired a stripper to start working at and act as a sting operative at a club that supposedly was notorious for not following the regulations. Not only that, but they gave her a false identity when applying to work there, which was the identity of a college student in the area who had no clue of it and had never been to any of the clubs. She later found this out and sued the city. They unknowingly took an innocent woman's identity and without her knowledge or permission, put it on her record that she worked as a stripper. How the hell is that justifiable?

I think these examples show just how awful such laws and enforcement are.

Not to mention the FBI's recent formation of an anti-porn squad that was mentioned in the news. Shouldn't the FBI be concerned with more important things like oh, catching terrorists? Porn dealers are worse than terrorists and organized crime in the eyes of social conservatives.

[Citizen James]

That really depends.  If the porn store is trafficing in kiddie porn or snuff films, they really need to track down the culprits behind them.

And pothead drivers are every bit as dangerous and drunk drivers.

[Bono]

snuff films

Urban myth.
No one has ever sen a snuff film.