Wednesday, February 23, 2005

Talk About a Stiff Fine

As much as I tend to sit on the pro-personal liberty side of the fence, and find myself in agreement with the ACLU in this case, I can't help but think that maybe, just maybe, the Supreme Court has more pressing issues to deal with these days.

How the case surrounding this asinine piece of legislation even made it as far as it did through our legal system astounds me. Though, once again, I take solace in the knowledge that Massachusetts isn't the only totally screwed up state in the country.

Supreme Court Rejects Appeal on Ban on Sex Toy Sale

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites) rejected on Tuesday a constitutional challenge to an Alabama law that makes it a crime to sell sex toys.


The law prohibited the distribution of "any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs." First-time violators can face a fine of up to $10,000 and as much as one year in jail.

The law, adopted in 1998, allowed the sale of ordinary vibrators and body massagers that are not designed or marketed primarily as sexual aids. It exempted sales of sexual devices "for a bona fide medical, scientific, educational, legislative, judicial or law enforcement purpose."

There is so much wrong with that last paragraph, where to start?

Can someone please explain to me what the "educational purpose" of a 24" King Kong Double Dong might be? And will they now be required to be marked similarly to high normal-capacity pistol magazines, with "For Law Enforcement Use Only" stamped on the side? I mean, I can understand how one would want to avoid the scarring and other physical evidence left behind by, say, a plunger handle, but still.

And, oh yeah, huh huh huh...they said "bona fide".