Texas cops seize lawn-sign depicting GOP elephant as sexual predator


Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/10/06/illegal-in-texas-2.html


1) Clearly, that cop in question has never seen actual porn.

2) I don’t see how having it removed is not a violation of this woman’s first amendment rights.

3) I am now inspired to improve upon her rudimentary design.



Art, pornography, or political speech?

I mean- it’s Texas and this is about how I’d expect a Texas cop to behave, but Jesus Piss Christ, haven’t we litigated this issue to death already?


…not to mention they threatened to arrest her over speech. Of all the whining about censorship by private internet platforms by the right, this we have here is a blatant, undeniable violation of the first amendment by a government agent.

In a just world, the cops would be fired and banned from public service permanently.

In reality, at best, she might get a few thousand and attorney’s fees if she pursues it - which for all our sake I hope she does.


She lives in Hamilton, Texas, population 3000 on a good day. I respect her simply for having the guts to put any of those signs out.

I think I’ll make my own and plant it out in front of my house.


They have to try harder with the lies…what a public service, free lawn sign removal.

very true.

that would be the best outcome, if everyone in protest made these signs and put them out en masse.


This kind of blatant violation of constitutional rights should get that officer at least put immediately on unpaid leave. They’re too dangerous to have running around doing things under color of law.

This is gangster bullshit.

Just another reminder that to conservatives and ostensibly republicans: what they imagine is “offensive pornography” is much worse than real sexual abuse.


Call from the ACLU in 3…2…1…

Seriously, pornography? I hope who ever called it that isn’t paying for their porn or they are getting ripped off worse than fine art buyers.


A lot of things would be different if there were any feedback mechanism stopping cops from violating the same case law over and over again. The worst that can happen is their bosses have to pay settlement money to plaintiffs. The cops have no reason to pay attention or care.

The most obvious examples are using unnecessary force and confiscating people’s cameras, which they still do every day, but censoring political speech is hardly off the table.


“It’s a political sign… that featured a political animal taking an inappropriate position with a young child,”

Young child? How did the city manager determine the age of this cartoon? What kind of person would look at a stick figure and see child pornography?


For those on other threads questioning what actually constitutes a first amendment violation, you cannot possibly get a more clear cut, laser etched, carborubdum encased example than this. The ACLU should be able to have a bonfire with the collective testicles of this local police dept.


Well, apparently he found it sexually arousing.


I don’t think we can blithely assume that he isn’t a subject matter expert.


I’m sure all the free speech heroes bravely defending the right the scream racial epithets at students will be all over this.


furthermore, she put this on her own property, i assume… right? how can they dictate what she displays on her own property??


“I can’t define pornography, but I know it when I see it.” Well, so much for that SC precident.


Although it’s a worn out faux-libertarian saw, property rights are clearly nowhere close to absolute. At the base of it there are zoning laws, plague laws (clear debris piles off of your property), and absolutely if you erect a thirty foot high billboard showing XXX porn you will be forced to take it down, and the ACLU will not take your case.

In this case the combination of political speech, satire and subtlety make it a slam dunk first amendment issue.

Sorry, made. With Sir Richy Rapelot on the Supreme Court, all Democrat speech is now pornography.


Depends on local laws I suppose. Its not legal for me to display advertising on my property without a council permit. This rule has been used to act against activist groups in the past, by making residents take down their signs.


Anyone else curious about the porn habits of this cop? b/c he’s pretty far off the charts if he thinks that’s porn.


Let me just say as a man in this day and age: He knows exactly what porn is.

Really, many previous ages, porn has been ubiquitous and easily acquired. It is straight up bullshit. I do not think any man, just about ever could rub one out to that sign

And if somehow that is not a part of the definition of Porn, he has some explaining to do. Namely about the barn he was locked inside until he was 40.

a political animal taking an inappropriate position with a young child