Texans may now legally own six dildos

[Centexfarmer]

This is great!! First I'm allowed to butt-fuck now I can butt-fuck if I have to go home alone!!

Party at fuckbait69's house!

 

[TheTalkingAsshole]

Yes, we Texans refer to the law prohibiting promotion of obscene devices as "the six dildo law," and people actually got prosecuted under it. It's disconcerting and embarrassing, and sometimes people get taken by it by surprise. But those days are over now. Now Texans may have the quiet enjoyment of six dildos.

They must not be using them correctly.

I can just imagine the Storm Troopers breaking int Joe Blows house and counting his 7 dildoes and then shackling him in handcuffs and leg irons and dragging him out to the paddy wagon in front of all his shocked neigbors.

Well, if his name is "Joe Blows" then I'll bet the cops were showing up at his house for other reasons

 

[White Eagle]

Right off I 37
woooweee

 

[construct]

It might be fun to take a look at the six dildo law which was struck down. Here are the relevant provisions from the Texas Penal Code.

(c) A person commits an offense if, knowing its content and
character, he:
(1) promotes or possesses with intent to promote any
obscene material or obscene device; or
(2) produces, presents, or directs an obscene
performance or participates in a portion thereof that is obscene or
that contributes to its obscenity.
(d) Except as provided by Subsection (h), an offense under
Subsection (c) is a Class A misdemeanor.
(e) A person who promotes or wholesale promotes obscene
material or an obscene device or possesses the same with intent to
promote or wholesale promote it in the course of his business is
presumed to do so with knowledge of its content and character.
(f) A person who possesses six or more obscene devices or
identical or similar obscene articles is presumed to possess them
with intent to promote the same.

Texas Penal Code § 43.23(c)-(f).

For the definition of "promote" and "obscene device," we have to turn to the definitions section.

§ 43.21. DEFINITIONS. (a) In this subchapter:
(5) "Promote" means to manufacture, issue, sell, give,
provide, lend, mail, deliver, transfer, transmit, publish,
distribute, circulate, disseminate, present, exhibit, or
advertise, or to offer or agree to do the same.
(7) "Obscene device" means a device including a dildo
or artificial vagina, designed or marketed as useful primarily for
the stimulation of human genital organs.

For the punishment of class A misdemeanors, we turn to Texas Penal Code § 12.21.

§ 12.21. CLASS A MISDEMEANOR. An individual adjudged
guilty of a Class A misdemeanor shall be punished by:
(1) a fine not to exceed $4,000;
(2) confinement in jail for a term not to exceed one
year; or
(3) both such fine and confinement.

 

[iman]

As I recall, Texas amended their concealed firearm law to allow carrying concealed firearms to church. Does this extend to dildos also? If so, is one limited to carrying six dildos to church and must they be concealed? Can they just be holstered?

I'm planning a trip to Texas and don't want to run afoul of the local laws and customs.

 

[White Eagle]

You kidding me..

There's laws regarding sex toys???

Oh my god.. i've read it all now!

Hahahahaha!

You have probably heard some of us Texans talking about Molly Evans. Here is a link to a video she did on this subject.
It is a must see. However I do not know how to add a video to this forum so you need to go to the link.

Have fun!!!!

Oh yeah, maybe it would help to add the link:

http://digg.com/lbv.php?id=4780251&ord=1

 

[Negasta]

Guns and Dildos?! Woo Heee!!! I think I'm moving to Texas!

 

[White Eagle]

Oh God!!!'

I can't believe I misspelled Molly's name. It is Ivins.

 

[construct]

I've looked over the opinion. The Fifth Circuit panel specifically held that "the Texas statute cannot define sexual devices themselves as obscene and prohibit their sale. . . . Whatever one might think or believe about the use of these devices, government interference with their personal and private use violates the Constitution." They specfically declined to rule as to advertising because the issue was not ripe.

The case is Reliable Consultants v. Abbott, No. 06-51067 (5th Cir. Feb. 12, 2008 ). A .pdf of the opinion can be downloaded here.

 

[TheTalkingAsshole]

Oh God!!!'

I can't believe I misspelled Molly's name. It is Ivins.

I doubt if she'll mind.

 

[White Eagle]

No, she'll come to haunt me.

 

[construct]

You have probably heard some of us Texans talking about Molly Ivins. Here is a link to a video she did on this subject.
It is a must see.http://digg.com/lbv.php?id=4780251&ord=1

This video is terrific. I particularly enjoyed the clip of Rep. Debra Danberg questioning Rep. Warren Chisom on the floor of the Texas House of Representatives. She was having a lot of fun with that one.

 

[Txgoodoldboy]

Thanks for posting this. I saw the news in the paper, this morning. "Happy days are here again!" Free at last!

It is fun to think that this applies to owning "six dildos", but I think this law has been used to stop the selling of dildos. It has been used to stop internet sales to Texas. A year, or so, ago, there was a case involving a "tupperware-like" party, that was selling erotic items. It seems like, that case went to the Supreme Court, but I could be wrong. Or this might be that case.

The question is, "Will the Republicans fight this ruling?" They are more concerned about sex, than people's rights.

 

[Centexfarmer]

This is a clear example of why Texas needs a constitutional amendment prohibiting the ownership of more than six dildos.

Without a constitutional amendment, just look at how liberal judges take it upon themselves to write their own laws!

I would be surprised with that bunch in Austin.

This video is terrific. I particularly enjoyed the clip of Rep. Debra Danberg questioning Rep. Warren Chisom on the floor of the Texas House of Representatives. She was having a lot of fun with that one.

And Texas State Representative Warren Chisum would be just the guy to introduce such legislation.

He's about as Anti-Gay as they come.

 

[Raincoat Massacre]

Exactly!! I know of no other country that ensures the citizens' God given right to own more dildos than they have places to put them. (And if you want to argue that you can use them all at one time, I don't want to hear it. There are plenty of freaky forums further down the page where that sort of thing will be appreciated.)

 

[construct]

Thanks for posting this. I saw the news in the paper, this morning. "Happy days are here again!" Free at last!

It is fun to think that this applies to owning "six dildos", but I think this law has been used to stop the selling of dildos. It has been used to stop internet sales to Texas. A year, or so, ago, there was a case involving a "tupperware-like" party, that was selling erotic items. It seems like, that case went to the Supreme Court, but I could be wrong. Or this might be that case.

This case has two plaintiffs. One is a retail store in Texas. The other is a mail-order business. It is a suit for declaratory judgment.

I remember the case of the woman who was arrested under this law a year or two ago for offering to sell dildos. She held these tupperware-like parties. Her principle job was with the Chamber of Commerce of one of the small towns close to Fort Worth--either Crowley or Burleson. I forget which. An undercover cop called her and insisted that she bring examples of the products to her office so that the cop could come by and decide what to order. After initial resistance, the woman agreed to do that. The cop came by, heard the pitch, and arrested the woman right there at the Chamber of Commerce. I don't recall the outcome of the case. It really wasn't a completely clean case. There were local political undertones to it. Apparently there was some rivalry between the accused (a politically ambitious new-comer to the city) and a politically dominant family (who were members of a socially conservative church).

The question is, "Will the Republicans fight this ruling?" They are more concerned about sex, than people's rights.

It is quite possible that the Attorney General might ask the Fifth Circuit to hear the case en banc. At the time of the article I linked, he had not decided whether he would do that.

 

[White Eagle]

I doubt if she'll mind.

You don't fuck with Molly. Just ask boy george.

 

[Patience]

There's laws regarding sex toys???

Harmless sex toys are more important than real crime.

 

[White Eagle]

Thanks for posting this. I saw the news in the paper, this morning. "Happy days are here again!" Free at last!

It is fun to think that this applies to owning "six dildos", but I think this law has been used to stop the selling of dildos. It has been used to stop internet sales to Texas. A year, or so, ago, there was a case involving a "tupperware-like" party, that was selling erotic items. It seems like, that case went to the Supreme Court, but I could be wrong. Or this might be that case.

The question is, "Will the Republicans fight this ruling?" They are more concerned about sex, than people's rights.

Don't tell anyone, but I ordered a dildo last year thru the internet. I had no problem getting it.

Oh yeah, I have only 1 unless you consider a vibrator a dildo then I have 2.

I cannot believe that Firefox thinks you shouldn't own dildoes. Its spell check questions the spelling of dildo And the suggested spelling should be dido or didoes. What does dido mean?