Mississippi bans sex toys

[nini2287]

Wow, amazing how much support this has on this forum, which everyone is saying is so socially liberal. Stupid right-wing forum.

It only has support of 28% of the Forum so far, including 33% of Democrats

[memphis]

What is the point of banning sex toys?

Same point in banning marijuana. If it feels good, it must be bad.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

No, of course I would not have supported this. 

And these are the people you say we should be taking our cultural cues from.

[riceowl]

Heh.

The title shows on the main page as "Mississippi bans sex"

And no, I don't support this.

[Umengus]

Stupid law. Like Jfern.

[MODU]

Wow, amazing how much support this has on this forum, which everyone is saying is so socially liberal. Stupid right-wing forum.

Yeah, them darn right-wing democrats.

[J. J.]

Wow, amazing how much support this has on this forum, which everyone is saying is so socially liberal. Stupid right-wing forum.

Yeah, them darn right-wing democrats.

Ironically, the greatest support for this law comes from Democrats. 

I agree with those who say it's constitutional, but stupid.

[John Dibble]

No, of course I don't support it.

However, I must point out that the title of this thread and the article itself are misleading - sex toys aren't banned outright, only the sale of sex toys. One can legally possess them if they want to. One could go out of state or use the internet to purchase them if one wanted to.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

the title of this thread and the article itself are misleading - sex toys aren't banned outright, only the sale of sex toys. One can legally possess them if they want to. One could go out of state or use the internet to purchase them if one wanted to.

Well, if that is the case, I have no problem with this law.

[°Leprechaun]

How many of the people that support this law also support Dick's right to own a gun so he can shoot people, and then wait for the people whom he shot to apologize to him? Or is he entitled to do whatever he wants because he is the VP?

[John Dibble]

the title of this thread and the article itself are misleading - sex toys aren't banned outright, only the sale of sex toys. One can legally possess them if they want to. One could go out of state or use the internet to purchase them if one wanted to.

Well, if that is the case, I have no problem with this law.

Actually, there's good reason to. Putting my objections to infringement upon the rights of individuals to sell a harmless product aside, there are still reasons. Primarily, you need to consider that Mississippi is a poor state - one of if not the poorest. They need to keep the money they have in state when possible. Since people will have to send their money out of the state, they are not doing that. This is further a problem as Mississippi and local governments there will collect no taxes for it, which as a poor state they need. If they aren't able to collect the taxes they need, the federal government will be sending them more money in the end - money paid for by taxpayers like you and I. Undue restrictions on what can and can't be sold like this can affect you even if you don't live in the state in question.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

They can have my multi-speed red ryder when they pry it out of my cold dead hands!!

So, can we assume you voted for Mississippi as your most hated state in the other thread? 

[afleitch]

What an awful law. Besides if you know what you're doing you can just use something from the kitchen

[Gabu]

However, I must point out that the title of this thread and the article itself are misleading - sex toys aren't banned outright, only the sale of sex toys. One can legally possess them if they want to. One could go out of state or use the internet to purchase them if one wanted to.

What exactly is the point of banning the sale of something in the state, but saying that it's okay if you got it through some other means?  It seems to me that all this is doing is putting a completely useless barrier up that is not likely to deter most people from getting it, but which will simply make people's lives harder.  At least banning them entirely would please the people who feel that sex toys are immoral.  This will do absolutely nothing.

[The Dowager Mod]

They can have my multi-speed red ryder when they pry it out of my cold dead hands!!

So, can we assume you voted for Mississippi as your most hated state in the other thread? 

Nope

[John Dibble]

However, I must point out that the title of this thread and the article itself are misleading - sex toys aren't banned outright, only the sale of sex toys. One can legally possess them if they want to. One could go out of state or use the internet to purchase them if one wanted to.

What exactly is the point of banning the sale of something in the state, but saying that it's okay if you got it through some other means?  It seems to me that all this is doing is putting a completely useless barrier up that is not likely to deter most people from getting it, but which will simply make people's lives harder.  At least banning them entirely would please the people who feel that sex toys are immoral.  This will do absolutely nothing.

Well, the idea is they don't like having sex shops around. God forbid a child ever see one.

[Gabu]

However, I must point out that the title of this thread and the article itself are misleading - sex toys aren't banned outright, only the sale of sex toys. One can legally possess them if they want to. One could go out of state or use the internet to purchase them if one wanted to.

What exactly is the point of banning the sale of something in the state, but saying that it's okay if you got it through some other means?  It seems to me that all this is doing is putting a completely useless barrier up that is not likely to deter most people from getting it, but which will simply make people's lives harder.  At least banning them entirely would please the people who feel that sex toys are immoral.  This will do absolutely nothing.

Well, the idea is they don't like having sex shops around. God forbid a child ever see one.

They don't like having sex shops around, but they're okay with having what's sold within them around?  Why not ban what's sold in them, too, if we need to protect the innocence of omg teh children?

This doesn't even begin to make sense.

[afleitch]

Id rather a child picked up a sex toy left lying around than a gun....

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

This doesn't even begin to make sense.

It makes perfect sense....I don't like the fact that I have a liquor store 3 miles from my house...unless I am the customer.  If I could reasonably order booze over the internet, I would vote to outlaw the sale of alcohol in my county.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

This doesn't even begin to make sense.

It makes perfect sense....I don't like the fact that I have a liquor store 3 miles from my house...unless I am the customer.  If I could reasonably order booze over the internet, I would vote to outlaw the sale of alcohol in my county.

Why? How does that liquor store affect you negatively? I have a liquor store even closer to me, probably 1/5 of a mile away, and I've never had any problems with it.

[Gabu]

It makes perfect sense....I don't like the fact that I have a liquor store 3 miles from my house...unless I am the customer.  If I could reasonably order booze over the internet, I would vote to outlaw the sale of alcohol in my county.

If someone didn't like the fact that there was a church 3 miles from their house, would they be justified in banning its existence?

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

No. I oppose any such lws liek this.

[TomC]

This is a conspiracy engendered by the Cucumber Lobby.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

No, of course I don't support it.

However, I must point out that the title of this thread and the article itself are misleading - sex toys aren't banned outright, only the sale of sex toys. One can legally possess them if they want to. One could go out of state or use the internet to purchase them if one wanted to.

It could be argued that using them breaks the poorly written law.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[nlm]

Hahaha, stupid law.

It does remind me of when I was developing a number of townhouses on an in-fill parcel and a sex shop got approved on an adjacent parcel despite my best efforts. They got that thing up in a matter of weeks complete with giant flashing neon signs. My sales rate dropped by almost 75%. That stupid place cost me many thousands of dollars in carrying costs and I had to drop my prices. I can laugh about it now, and I cerainly don't think they should be banned or made obsolete by laws such as this one - but they should be controled by zoning better in some areas. They do effect their neighbors property values, and as such can do actual financial harm.