If HB 1042 becomes law, I predict an increase in vendors of “neck massagers.” Passing the House by a margin of 88 to 5, the law regulates people and businesses selling “sexually explicit materials, products, or services.” At its broadest extent such materials, products or services are defined as those designed for use in sadism, masochism, or the stimulation of human genitals.
To sell such products, you have to register with the secretary of state and list the products or services. The secretary of state is then required to notify the county commissioners, the mayor (if in a city), and all zoning boards with jurisdiction. If you sell such things without having registered, you have committed a Class B misdemeanor.
I don’t know, does Borders sell BDSM for Dummys? Will they have to register? If Wal-Mart suspects that not all of those ladies buying the Hitachi Magic Wand have sore necks, will it have to register?
Well, I’m sure the sales clearks are not required to sell the products to someone if they “believe” they will be used for sexually explicit purposes.
WTF???!!! Give me a break. Of course, the definition of “sexually explicit products” says they must be without any “social value.” If “massagers” make people happy, that’s a plus for society, right?
Nope, there is a disjunctive “or” in between the “social value” bit and the “use for stimulation of the genitals” bit. So, the materials or services are “sexually explicit” if they meet the definition of (1)(A) or (1)(B) or (2)(A) or (2)(B). Four different ways to be sexually explicit.
what is with their obsession with sex?
Whah, Ah’m truly gratifah’d that someone has fahnally stepped fo’wahd to uphold the Hoosiah honah – suh!
I read the statute differently Doug. The definition of “sexually explicit product” begins:
“For purposes of this chapter, materials, products, or services are “sexually explicit materials, products, or services” if the materials, products or services are entirely without redeeming social value AND:”
…it then goes on to talk about prurient interests, stimulation of genitals, etc. under (1) and (2). I read that to mean even something that appeals to prurient interests, stimulates the genitals, etc., does not qualify as a “sexually explicit product” if it has some redeeming social value. That seems like a big hold & fodder for litigation over vagueness.
Whoops, right you are Glenn. I was skipping right ahead to the community standards and prurient interest part, which was a mistake on my part. The reason I sort of lumped that in with the “social value” part is because I think all of that is a part of the obscenity test articulated by the Supreme Court some time ago. So, you’re right .. it’s without socially redeeming value AND
# 1) community standards – prurient interest or patently offensive;
OR
# 2) designed for use in stimulating genitals or BDSM
My own whoops, there’s a big loophole, not a big “hold,” whatever that meant…
kinda the same stupidity as requiring the clerks at the local Marsh to ask an 18yo to scan my bottle of wine.. which seemingly has the power to corrupt the 16 yo clerk right through the bottle.
So are our grocery stores going to be filled with signs saying “DANGER! – Bananas!” or “DANGER – Cucumbers!” Or even “DANGER! Hot Apple Pie!”.
I think we should allow 16 yr olds to buy sex toys, so they dont try to stuff other unusual things up their .. well, you know.
you know, that great mecca of cultural and human enlightenment, alabama has a law on the books, similar, and so far, the mail order stores in california are doing a land office business in brown paper wrappers.
sometimes, i think the problem is the elected GOP dildos IN the statehouse, that are the real problem. to misquote the NRA :
when sex toys are outlawed….
from my cold dead fingers…
giggle! stop the GOP Senate, before they make Indiana look like a hick backwater.. oops- too late?
Looks like I picked the wrong year to run for Secretary of State! Having this bill to talk about sure would have made the campaign a lot more interesting!
Mike Kole,
Hmm, better get it over with and replace your gravatar with a picture of Lloyd Bridges, because now that’s all I can see you as. ;-)
Mike, I’m sure you could have found something more “interesting” than the issues you ran on: increased voting, “voting machine we can trust,” and bringing the BMV under the control of the Sec. of State. Not exactly issues to inspire a revolution.