If anyone is curious, it seems like it was part of a long running dark horse franchise: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grendel_(comics)

And this is the text of the law she is charged with:
https://www.ncleg.net/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bysection/chapter_14/gs_14-190.1.html

Can't have anything because of stupid kids.

>>153489189
>Grendel
Oh, ehhh, yeah....
That's like giving a kid Grave of the Fireflys....

>>153489306
Sure, it might not be ideal for them, but it was probably accidental and shouldn't get you sent to prison

>>153489231
That's not what made it a crime in this case though it does increase the type of felony:
>(g) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a violation of this section is a Class I felony. A violation of this section committed knowingly in the presence of a minor under 18 years of age is a Class H felony.

I deleted my previous post because it was innacurate.

also from what i can tell, it was just adults drawn nude in the book that got her arrested. it wasn't like nude drawings of kids.

>>153489189
This is insane hopefully she gets it dismissed

>>153489189
Giving R rated material of any kind to kids is pretty dumb. And those kids no doubt probably have a bunch of mature rated games with far worse content that their parents bought for them.

File: bead.jpg (596 KB, 1067x1600)

596 KB JPG

>>153489189
It's bad, but come on.

>>153490385
The person who drew this should be locked up for life and anyone who participated in its distribution likewise. How can you make such sick filth in the guise of children's entertainment (comic books)?

>>153489231
>Can't have anything because of *Republicans
FTFY

>>153490274
i think it was accidental. It had a warning on hte cover though

i feel bad for her and the charges are overblow.

she was sloppy and shouldn't have given out a copy of Grendel. Like idk use your judgement, did you not thumb thru the books in the pile?

This is why publishers make those Halloween giveaway comics

Woman moment
>b-but it could've happened to YOU too!!!
No, I'm not retarded enough to hand out a fucking Grendel comic in a state with strict obscenity laws

>>153492782
It was kinda dumb not to triple check but I get how she would have overlooked it, if these are from bargain boxes she’d been through a million times, and assuming other mature comics at the shop were stored separately. I understand why parents aren’t happy though. In the case of a random accident like this it’s awkward for that family but there’s no threat of harm or repeat incidents. Hopefully they will drop it and just fine her or something.

She should have been more careful. Just pulling any non code approved books from the give aside pile could have prevented this.

But the fact that they’re super quick to charge her with a crime and locker up and yet kids are seeing way worse stuff on the internet and Bezos or Muskrat don’t get the same treatment is just hypocritical.

>>153490385
woah! cool!

File: freecomics.jpg (20 KB, 292x264)

20 KB JPG

>>153489189
This is just an old boomer woman with her husband and a Spiderman, mannnn.
I scrolled through several posts in local groups on Facebook and couldn't find any anger.
Per a grandfather on FB
>These shop owners deserve way better treatment than this. They helped me pick out appropriate comics for my grandkids and, on a personal level, they helped me work through some distressing issues I was having with my puppy
The mom first posted to FB first but took the post down when she got backlash, based on what the groups say. You gotta be the biggest Karen of Karens to have reported this to police.

>>153492831
From a Bible Belt state here. Depends on the book cover.
9/10 times a book ends up banned here, it's because some idiot didn't realize they just put a grindhouse horror or spicy erotica novel on a middle school shelf because they're underfunded and therefore no one gets paid enough to vet the books they read and a lot of books are something someone just goes out and grabs or something that gets donated.

So someone will just grab a collection of books from their shelves, donate it to a local public school, and it spirals from there.

There are schools who will hear about this popular new "Icebreaker" book that all the girls are reading or know the spooky clown movie is based on a book.

It looks innocuous enough, they'll put it on the shelf without fucking reading it.

Kid reads it. Usually a horror, historical, or romance novel. The kid isn't really old enough to hide the crazy stuff they just read and still ask adults to help them with it. Then the school utterly flips their shit and comb the library for more of the offending content.

>>153492831
How? It’s a boomer moment. Plenty of kids have “accidentally” read a more mature comic one time and it didn’t hurt them long-term. This is as stupid as a feminazi screaming that video games are responsible for mass shootings.

>>153489201
I have one issue of Grendel. In it, Grendel shoves a spear through a pedophile's throat.

>>153493187
I don’t really blame the mom for overreacting, any parent would be upset about it. It’s good the community has their back to not fuel hysteria though.

File: Spoiler Image (3.61 MB, 1800x2700)

3.61 MB JPG

>>153493346
Handing this to a child is deranged. Stop being retarded.

File: Spoiler Image (3.3 MB, 1800x2700)

3.3 MB JPG

>>153493413
>>153493346
I mean ffs you cant seriously think this is acceptable can you? Will it ruin the kid’s life? No. Is it absolutely retarded to give to a child? Yes.

>>153492831
There are federal obscenity laws too. Most states have them.
>>153493413
I read worse when I was a kid.

>>153493413
That’s no worse than the violence and nudity in Maus, and that comic is wildly circulated in schools.

>>153489189
I don't live in NC, it ain't my tax dollars

>>153493460
>>153493457
>graphic corpses that have undergone genital mutilation
>a man pissing on headless bodies
Bro Im not saying nobody shohld make or read these comics but youre absolutely being intentionally obtuse for the sake of argument if you think this should be handed to kids at a trunk or treat event for families. Stop being such a degenerate faggot fuck and be honest for a second.

>>153493460
It shouldn't be, then.

>>153493187
Same anon as this one. >>153493244
According to wikipedia. This place is a small island town with 60.8% of the population being 65 or older, located right along the SC-NC border. Near the Brunswick metropolitan and within the same county
Population quadrupled in 20 years.

Yeah, so here's what actually happened. The ecosystem got disrupted.

The Carolinas especially have a ton of these. Small little islands that rely on time shares and tourism to survive. Usually having small mom-and-pop DVD stores. Typically a farmer's market every summer, tennis courts, rec centers, whole shebang.

As a kid, my mom and dad took me to these kinds of island beaches.
Considered it their favorite vacation spot because of the lax environment. All of em ballooned in popularity as the Carolinas got more gentrified and more liberals moved into the urban areas.

You don't fuck around at these places. Their communities are basically entirely made of boomers who have by design made them the worst option for a "crazy" spring break and made it "take your kids, we have a church" types of joints. Many who were tourists themselves and wanted to move there for retirement.

Something like this happens? Small community, word spreads quickly, Evangelical purity spiral and panic in the whole fucking town over this "satanic" place.
Shopkeeper used to selling to tourists and out of towners has no idea what to fucking do.

File: Spoiler Image (513 KB, 2560x919)

513 KB JPG

>>153493499
You can barely make out the penis >>153493413

It's more clearly defined in Maus.

File: Spoiler Image (549 KB, 1016x1564)

549 KB JPG

>>153493519
No, it’s definitely too obscene for “trunk or treat” age kids. The charges and publicity are overkill for an accident, but she fucked up not catching it.

>>153493499
> but youre absolutely being intentionally obtuse for the sake of argument if you think this should be handed to kids at a trunk or treat event for families. Stop being such a degenerate faggot fuck and be honest for a second
I didn’t say that. The shop owner probably didn’t read the contents, or gave it out by accident since there was a warning label on the cover.


Sure it shouldn’t be given out at a family friendly event, but that’s not a reason to arrest someone on 20 grand bail. There’s a first amendment in the USA.

>>153493244
You've written so much that's completely irrelevant to this case. As Anon pointed out, the shop owner should have known not to give Grendel out to kids. I've never read any Grendel series but I know they're adult content just from being in the hobby. Her defense argument will rely heavily on her ignorance of her own product. What an embarrasment.

>>153493616
Did you read the law she was charged with?

>>153493519
Dude one is a mutilated corpses, a man pissing on bloody headless bodies and multiple pages with closeups of penises and flayed naked bodies. the other is a story about the dehumanization of people showing sparsely how they were dehumanized. Please tell me you’re just being argumentative for kicks. You’d genuinely have to be autistic to not see the difference.

And to repeat again so you can’t ignore what I said before, these types of comics and stories should absolutely be available and keep getting made. They should not be distributed to children at a family friendly trunk or treat event.

>>153493413
>>153493444
>>153493499
Stop being such a faggy pearl-clutcher. You should be responsible for what your kids read, but that doesn’t mean they won’t occasionally look at something they’re too young for. It’s not that hard to use it to teach them the difference between fantasy and reality.

>>153493648
Come on, man. You know better.

>>153489189
>Yes, I know this news is from late last year. However, I checked in archives and it seems like it got zero discussion or even mentions. And it's pretty significant news. I personally believe she'll be acquitted or the charges will be dropped, but it's something to keep your eye on. And it's still your tax dollars at work.
Why even care about this? There was no fault in charging her with obscenity, though if this incident was an accident it should be reconsidered. I've never heard of this story until just now, so its significance is quite low. There is nothing wrong with this story, so far as I or anyone else is aware of.

>>153493644
Sure it shouldn’t be given out to kids, but that’s not a shouldn’t get you arrested.

>>153493608
Bail is set based on personal finances not the crime. Also of course she should have been processed. Go hand a kid a copy of cannibal holocaust and see what happens.

>Le prudish murricans!

>>153493519
OK so Maus shouldn't be given to kids either.

>>153493665
What do you mean there was no fault in charging her with obscenity?

>>153493644
No one’s disagreeing that they should still be distributed. You should be careful at what they read, yes, but she didn’t tell every kid there she had a super-secret grown-up comic and not to tell their parents about.

>>153493648
Them searching something out and them being handed something by an adult is completely different. And no, you dont get to talk tough and call me faggot when you’re literally the fwggot here who is too immature to accept the clear differences between fucking maus and Grendel

>>153493684
He's being retarded on purpose. It's protected under the Miller test.
>Whether the average person, applying contemporary adult community standards, finds that the matter, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interests (i.e., an erotic, lascivious, abnormal, unhealthy, degrading, shameful, or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion);

>Whether the average person, applying contemporary adult community standards, finds that the matter depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way (i.e., ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated, masturbation, excretory functions, lewd exhibition of the genitals, or sado-masochistic sexual abuse); and

>Whether a reasonable person finds that the matter, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

>>153493668
See: >>153493678


Yes it should. You can’t be disseminating weird shit to kids. Thats worth having a case opened. The reality is no prosecutor would take it to court because they wouldn’t be able to prove it was intentional. The presumption of innocence would lead them to offer her a deal that she publicly apologizes and gets off fully.

>>153493689
What if she handed the kid a hentai?

>>153493648
> You should be responsible for what your kids read
That has nothing to do with what is being discussed. The discussion is whether someone should be handing this out to children. Not whether or not it should exist in a world that children might stumble upon it.

>>153489201
>https://www.ncleg.net/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bysection/chapter_14/gs_14-190.1.html
Gonna copy paste the law here, since idk if people even open links.


>§ 14-190.1. Obscene literature and exhibitions.
>(a) It shall be unlawful for any person 18 years of age or older, firm, or corporation to intentionally disseminate obscenity. A person, firm or corporation disseminates obscenity within the meaning of this Article if he or it:
>>(1) Sells, delivers or provides or offers or agrees to sell, deliver or provide any obscene writing, picture, record or other representation or embodiment of the obscene; or
>>(2) Presents or directs an obscene play, dance or other performance or participates directly in that portion thereof which makes it obscene; or
>>(3) Publishes, exhibits or otherwise makes available anything obscene; or
>>(4) Exhibits, presents, rents, sells, delivers or provides; or offers or agrees to exhibit, present, rent or to provide: any obscene still or motion picture, film, filmstrip, or projection slide, or sound recording, sound tape, or sound track, or any matter or material of whatever form which is a representation, embodiment, performance, or publication of the obscene.
>(b) For purposes of this Article any material is obscene if:
>>(1) The material depicts or describes in a patently offensive way sexual conduct specifically defined by subsection (c) of this section; and
>>(2) The average person applying contemporary community standards relating to the depiction or description of sexual matters would find that the material taken as a whole appeals to the prurient interest in sex; and
>>(3) The material lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value; and
>>(4) The material as used is not protected or privileged under the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of North Carolina.

>>153493838
And the rest of it:

>(c) As used in this Article, "sexual conduct" means:
>>(1) Vaginal, anal, or oral intercourse, whether actual or simulated, normal or perverted; or
>>(2) Masturbation, excretory functions, or lewd exhibition of uncovered genitals; or
>>(3) An act or condition that depicts torture, physical restraint by being fettered or bound, or flagellation of or by a nude person or a person clad in undergarments or in revealing or bizarre costume.

>(d) Obscenity shall be judged with reference to ordinary adults except that it shall be judged with reference to children or other especially susceptible audiences if it appears from the character of the material or the circumstances of its dissemination to be especially designed for or directed to such children or audiences.

>(e) It shall be unlawful for any person 18 years of age or older, firm, or corporation to knowingly and intentionally create, buy, procure or possess obscene material with the purpose and intent of disseminating it unlawfully.

>(f) It shall be unlawful for a person 18 years of age or older, firm, or corporation to advertise or otherwise promote the sale of material represented or held out by said person, firm, or corporation as obscene.

>(g) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a violation of this section is a Class I felony. A violation of this section committed knowingly in the presence of a minor under 18 years of age is a Class H felony.

>(h) Obscene material disseminated, procured, or promoted in violation of this section is contraband.
>>(i) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to preempt local government regulation of the location or operation of sexually oriented businesses to the extent consistent with the constitutional protection afforded free speech. (1971, c. 405, s. 1; 1973, c. 1434, s. 1; 1985, c. 703, s. 1; 1993, c. 539, s. 1194; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c); 1998-46, s. 2; 2023-127, ss. 1(a), 3(a); 2023-151, s. 7(a).)

>>153493684
>give a comic with violence and gore to a child
That's what she's been charged with
>>153493721
How many of your hentai doujins have been confiscated?

>>153493852
>An act or condition that depicts torture, physical restraint by being fettered or bound, or flagellation of or by a nude person or a person clad in undergarments or in revealing or bizarre costume.
I guess even the kid-friendly capeshit they gave out was obscene in it’s own way.

>>153493838
> The material as used is not protected or privileged under the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of North Carolina.

As a reminder:
https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/
> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Here is likely the most relevant parts of the state constitution of North Carolina:
https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/Constitution/NCConstitution.html

>Sec. 13. Religious liberty.
>All persons have a natural and inalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences, and no human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience.

> Sec. 14. Freedom of speech and press.
>Freedom of speech and of the press are two of the great bulwarks of liberty and therefore shall never be restrained, but every person shall be held responsible for their abuse.

>>153493632
No, I didn't. But having now read it, she seems even more fucked. I guess they could argue artistic merit, but she's fucked on (c)(3).

>>153493909 #
That would potentially make depictions of Jesus and the (events leading up to the) crucifixion illegal. Since he was whipped and tortured in other ways, while carrying the cross and mounted upon it.

But there is the earlier exemptions in regards to anything with “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;”

>>153493616
You gotta realize something important.
Boomers in these parts have a very "comics for kids" mindset. This shit happens all the time.
I'm willing to bet she's not very involved with the hobby beyond MARVEL and DC.

There was a trick for every medium.
>"Comics are for kids", say it's "a comic book" and their mind jumps to superheroes
>Gamestop guy isn't gonna fight super hard, especially regarding a single player game. Mom and Dad will only have super hard objections to the M games they heard about or the ones with guns and sexy women on the cover.
>You can start watching R-rated movies early by watching the ones your dad likes with him.
Beyond anything else though, the real trick was always remembering that whether or not they're apprehensive about a piece of media. They don't actually know what's in it and it's a matter of telling them something like
"No, in Dead Space, you use laser guns and mining equipment to fight the zombies, not regular guns!", showing them the "cartoony" graphics of TF2, telling them that 300 is historical, or how that edgy anime has bible stuff, tons of little fucking tricks.
This lady probably literally just googled "good comics for Halloween" and grabbed the stack without reading the article.

Lmao, flyovers

Charges are a bit silly but it was also stupid of her to be giving kids shit like Grendel and not expecting some sort of blowback.

Could someone who knows the law better than me explain how internet porn is allowed if we still have obscenity laws on the books? That seems like a way more obvious example of distributing obscene material than giving out an edgy comic book.

>>153494297
>Could someone who knows the law better than me explain how internet porn is allowed if we still have obscenity laws on the books?
In North Carolina it's not, they have age verification laws for porn that require you to show ID to access it.

>>153494174
>she's not very involved with the hobby beyond MARVEL and DC.
She a fucking retailer. She had the inventory which means she purchased it from the distributor at some point. If she doesnt know her product maybe she shouldn't do it. It's clear you dont know shit about comics either. I really cant tell what your angle is an all your bs generalizations.

>>153493346
>Plenty of kids have “accidentally” read a more mature comic one time and it didn’t hurt them long-term
Normally I agree but in that case the onus is on the kids for deliberately seeking that stuff out. In this case it's the comic book shop's fault for handing out clearly age-inappropriate comics

>>153494297
selective enforcement? Clueless cops? idk.

>>153494314
But age verification still means it's allowed to be distributed to people over 18. Why is it not completely banned if it's patently obscene and we still have laws banning obscene materials?

File: 574566784_875304618403122(...).jpg (154 KB, 1152x1117)

154 KB JPG

>>153494174
>Boomers in these parts have a very "comics for kids" mindset
The flyers for the event certainly paint it that way.

>>153494297
state-based enforcement on the internet is too much of a headache

>>153494328
Because general obscenity laws don't really exist since they're considered unconstitutional, usually the law just prevents material deemed obscene from being given to kids.
Though, this is mostly a flyover thing, not my problem, I live in Massachusetts, if I want I can go to my local library and rent a manga with graphic child fucking in it without showing anything but a library card (which I can obtain without even providing an ID).

>>153490385
>>153493413
>>153493444
this is fucking disgusting stuff, not even adult tV shows would show this. Comics are way too unchecked in what they can depict, it's tasteless.

>>153494523
in case you aren't being sarcastic/ironic, have you seen the boys tv show?

>>153494487
>Because general obscenity laws don't really exist since they're considered unconstitutional, usually the law just prevents material deemed obscene from being given to kids.
It's a little more complex than that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_test

>>153494682
The miller test is borderline impossible to enforce, since "I know it when I see it" differs wildly from person to person.
A judge in California and a judge in Mississippi will have very different ideas of what constitutes "obscene."
Which is why it's pretty much never used outside of flyover shitholes like North Carolina.

>>153494718
>Borderline impossible
Not really. Mutilated bodies and visual depictions of sex organs is pretty obscene. Any adult would label it inappropriate

>>153494809
>Not really.
Again, outside of aforementioned flyover shitholes, yes really.
Let's posit this another way.
Is antisemitism obscene?

>>153494835
No it's actually really easy to enforce especially in this case.
>Is antisemitism obscene?
That's completely irrelevant to the fact that mutilated bodies and adult nudity is inappropriate for any kid in any state. The miller test is perfectly fair in this situation

>>153494809
>visual depictions of sex organs is pretty obscene
So all porn is illegal then by your reasoning?

>>153494949
>That's completely irrelevant
It's not actually, because according to North Carolina, Texas, Florida, and many other flyover states, antisemitism is indeed obscene.
I want you to understand your own laws and understand what you advocate for, but I understand that as a flyover, you are very very fucking stupid, so you need to be slowly walked along the line of your beliefs and what they lead to, like a child.

>>153494951
Are you dense? This discussion is in direct relation to kids being exposed to adult material. Just don't give kids explicit material
>Is antisemitism indeed obscene
Yeah it could be classified as that but that's irrelevant to giving children depictions of violence and adult sex organs being wrong, which is what this case is about. She owns a comic store and have a kid grendal. Irresponsible and ignorant of her business. Pretty easy to understand

>>153494809
In order for something to be obscene, it has to meet 3 prongs of the miller test:
>Whether the average person, applying contemporary adult community standards, finds that the matter, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interests (i.e., an erotic, lascivious, abnormal, unhealthy, degrading, shameful, or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion);

>Whether the average person, applying contemporary adult community standards, finds that the matter depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way (i.e., ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated, masturbation, excretory functions, lewd exhibition of the genitals, or sado-masochistic sexual abuse); and

>Whether a reasonable person finds that the matter, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Is a nude image always patently offensive?

>>153495084
When it's being presented to children, yes. What do you not understand about that aspect of the situation? She gave it to a kid. Not an adult

>>153495070
>Are you dense? This discussion is in direct relation to kids being exposed to adult material. Just don't give kids explicit material
Did you read the law that was posted in the thread?
Giving the comic to a kid doesn't make the comic obscene. If the comic is obscene, giving it to an adult would still be illegal. It's just that the severity of the felony increases if you give it to a minor:

>>153493852
>(g) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a violation of this section is a Class I felony. A violation of this section committed knowingly in the presence of a minor under 18 years of age is a Class H felony.

>>153495110
So do you think a book like In Cold Blood shouldn't be read by students in school?

>>153495110
Can you show me the case law that agrees with you?

>>153495110
>When it's being presented to children, yes. What do you not understand about that aspect of the situation? She gave it to a kid. Not an adult
That doesn't matter. The miller test doesn't care about whether an adult or a child sees the image.

>>153495125
>Read by
We're talking about images. This is completely irrelevant
>>153495134
You need proof that showing explicit material to children is illegal?

>>153489189
I hope that bitch is found guilty, peddling filth to children so carelessly.

>>153495178
>We're talking about images. This is completely irrelevant
It's actually not, the miller test doesn't apply exclusively to images.
I don't know why I bother, you flyovers really are too stupid to have any kind of discussion with.

>>153495193
You're calling others stupid but defending a clear cut case of someone handing out explicit material to kids? Strange

File: 1763763137356624.png (584 KB, 1280x720)

584 KB PNG

>>153495218
Here anon, jingle jangle.

>>153495182
Yeah how do you run a comic shop but not know what Grendal is or understand the basics of age ratings?

>>153495236
So you can't actually defend what this woman did? It's not like she's being executed? She genuinely fucked up badly

>>153495178
> You need proof that showing explicit material to children is illegal?
Yes I do expect to see evidence for your claims. Anyways, She wasn’t charged with showing explicit material to children.

she was charged with disseminating obscenity, which is still a crime if given to an adult.

>>153495353
This. There's still a significant difference between showing vs. just distributing.

>>153495353
>she was charged with disseminating obscenity, which is still a crime if given to an adult.
Why shouldn't it be? You don't just get to give out explicit material to people and face zero consequences. She gave out explicit material under the guise it's appropriate for children. Regardless if it's a mistake that's an issue for a lot of people and legal repercussions for that isn't wrong

>>153495461
My point is that you keep bringing up the fact that children are involved, when that detail doesn’t matter.

>>153495384
That’s true in some cases, Though this law she was charged under covers both.

The more significant detail is that explicitness and obscenity are not the same thing.

>>153494174
Even a lot of comics from dark horse aren’t as adult as this.

>>153494523
>>153491655

Maybe the comic book code had a point.

>>153493519
>You can barely make out the penis

That's what your girlfriend said to me :(

>>153495497
Not that Anon, but mechanistacally the detail matters if only because it's unlikely a complaint would have been made to the charging authorities if it wasn't a child that received the material.

I'm not, and haven't been, arguing the merit of this law or obsemity strictures generally. My perspective is that this bitch should have been smarter about her risk management, even ignorant of the law. If you're handing out comics to children for Halloween, you should probably make sure your stock is age appropriate just to avoid social opprobrium.

Dunno why everyone is debating gore or obscenity when the real purpose of a Bible Belt statute like this is a dragnet to criminalize LGBT content.

>>153497474
It's to criminalize all 3.
And also porn.
They're pretty open about this too, it's not like this is some unknown aspect of their beliefs.

>>153497474
Because half the posters on this board would celebrate that

>>153497537
How the hell did people get tricked into thinking the GOP was the free speech party? Fuckers thought "racism" was a word thrown around too much until it lost its meaning when the real diluted word was "censored" to the point of letting actual censorship under force of law right through the front door.

>>153489189
and yet every kid above 10 has an iphone capable of bringing up shit 10x worse with a single google search

>>153495497
That detail absolutely matters though. Why wouldn't it? If she just gave Grendal to some dude or even an older teenager we wouldn't even be talking about this, but she gave it to a kid.

>>153497642
Why does that matter?

>>153497629
>How the hell did people get tricked into thinking the GOP was the free speech party?
They put too much stock in annoying trannies on the internet, most of whom have no real political power.
The reality is, neither party is as good as you'd want when it comes to free speech, which is why we have a fucking constitution and bill of rights that's meant to protect us when either party tries to overstep their boundaries.

>>153489189
Shit like this is why superhero comics and two companies have choked out the entire medium. Dumb woman probably has thousands of useless superhero comics that will never sell she could’ve used but she just had to get kitschy with it and give out a dark horse comic

I had no idea there were so many moralfags on /co/.

>>153497474
This one is an older statute. It's been around for a while and modified over time.
The bottom of the law pages tells you It was first created in 1971 or so.

>>153497980
It's our resident /pol/tard infestation, they're all like this regardless of the board.

>>153497934
It's really just a dumb bitch moment at the end of the day
>>153497980
What do you mean? Anons are pointing out that it's fucked up to give explicit material to children. What is wrong with that moral?

>>153497629
>>153497717
>>153491734

An 60 something year old woman in Alabama was arrested in October 2025 (and was acquitted last month), because she wore an inflatable penis costume to a protest:
https://www.courthousenews.com/penis-costume-protester-prevails-in-court/

It wasn't really a graphic or explicit costume. Apparently you could get it at Spirit Halloween.


This was a different state and a different context, but it was less explicit than the comic the woman in the OP was arrested for.
Although they both got arrested around October 2025.

>>153498118
Yes, this is what the south is like.
Everyone knows this, it's why the north has become more and more wary of religion over the years.
Especially evangelicals.

>>153497342
>Not that Anon, but mechanistacally the detail matters if only because it's unlikely a complaint would have been made to the charging authorities if it wasn't a child that received the material.
>>153497675
>That detail absolutely matters though. Why wouldn't it? If she just gave Grendal to some dude or even an older teenager we wouldn't even be talking about this, but she gave it to a kid.
I wasn't saying that in a null context. Look at the previous posts, I was saying this because another user somehow was thinking that the definition of obscenity changes when a child views an image.

>>153489189

LAND OF THE FREE

>>153498221
>the definition of obscenity changes when a child views an image
It does though. Like this >>153498118 case is dealing with something obscene but is clearly not as bad as giving a kid grendal. Whether or not a kid is involved is pretty important

>>153498253
>Whether or not a kid is involved is pretty important
It's not really because both people were arrested on obscenity charges.
And chances are the OP woman will be acquitted just like this Alabama woman was.

>>153497980
She made a mistake and the wrong Karen got involved. I don’t think she deserves to lose the money but it was her mistake entirely. All she had to do was stick to giving out big two comics, but she just had to clear house with a book she didn’t vet and is paying the price for that lack of awareness of her own inventory

>>153498253
>It does though
Where are you getting this idea from? The definition of obscenity in the USA has already been posted in this thread and it says nothing about the definition changing based on the individual viewer.

>>153498366
She should have given out manga, the Karen would have taken one look at the artstyle and assumed it was safe for kiddies and been none the wiser.

File: IMG_8464.jpg (182 KB, 1000x763)

182 KB JPG

>>153498418
But you forget that that Japanimation crap is the devil

>>153498061
The felony upgrade if done in front of a minor was very recent

Post more Grendal gore I'm almost there

>/co/ defending censorship and obscenity laws

File: 1777149839518.png (2.06 MB, 960x1200)

2.06 MB PNG

>>153489189
>defiles christ the light bringer
>gets criminally charged

>>153498871
see this:
>>153494008
>That would potentially make depictions of Jesus and the (events leading up to the) crucifixion illegal. Since he was whipped and tortured in other ways, while carrying the cross and mounted upon it.

>>153498366
isnt there some pretty fucked up stuff from the big 2? Like in imprints?

>>153499734
Vertigo and MAX are the two imprints that have mature stuff that kids shouldn't read. But unless its a character known for darker subjects like Punisher or Swamp Thing 80% of big two comics arent going to have subject matter deemed inappropriate for children. And even than comics still put stuff like mature readers only or not for children on the cover if it is going to be darker than normal.

>>153501319
the authority got pretty wild but they werent always part of DC

>>153497980
Tumblr and pol

>>153502270
Yeah the authority started when Wildstorm was still part of Image and when DC bought them they let Wildstorm do its own thing partially because they didnt want the talent that Jim Lee accumulated like Warren Ellis and Alan Moore to run off to quickly. So Wildstorm was treated like another mature imprint like Vertigo but with editorial independence from DC so the Authority and other titles under Wildstorm were allowed to get away with more stuff which is why Millar got to write the crazy shit he did during his tenure on the series.

File: 1585634577337.jpg (12 KB, 418x418)

12 KB JPG

>>153489189
its fucked to give a kid that comic, yeah, but anything more than a stern warning is retarded. clearly she didnt know better, and given most comic places ive been to nowadays are run by normies who just bulk buy big two with obilgatory niche shit in the corners, im not surprised that this happened. if anything im surprised shit like this doesnt happen more, but probably because the parent sperged out so hard as why it made news. i live in nc, and i didnt even hear about it. miserable state anyway, ABC stores and ID verification for porn are gay as fuck

>>153489201
Why are you talking about Grendel like he's an obscure character? The series is relatively popular.