Missouri Book Ban Law Proposal

[bruto]

You could start here:

https://s1.sos.mo.gov/CMSImages/Libr...bStandards.pdf

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by bruto

You could start here:

https://s1.sos.mo.gov/CMSImages/Libr...bStandards.pdf

Yes, that is a good place for you to start. Feel free to detail to me the policies and procedures of all of the individual libraries, as related to age-appropriate materials. And explain what are the requirements for each library, as opposed to suggestions. You implied that all libraries have appropriate procedures in place, so provide the evidence. Or else tell me why they shouldn't be required to have such.

And then tell me what degree of oversight they are subject to.

[Stacyhs]

I've seen misrepresentation, intellectual dishonesty, projection, misdirection, deflection, strawmanning, virtue signaling, and a serious lack of self-awareness all before. But I very rarely see all of them displayed in a single person.

[arayder]

Warp, you implied that all Missouri libraries don't have appropriate procedures in place, so provide the evidence.

Please detail the policies and procedures of eachl of the individual libraries, as related to age-appropriate materials. Please explain the requirements for each library.

Please point out which libraries, in your opinion, are deficient.

And then tell us what degree of oversight they are subject to.[/quote]

You have 24 hours to do so.

Get moving.

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by arayder

Warp, you implied that all libraries don't have appropriate procedures in place, so provide the evidence.

Please detail the policies and procedures of eachl of the individual libraries, as related to age-appropriate materials. Please explain the requirements for each library.

Please point out which libraries, in your opinion, are deficient.

And then tell us what degree of oversight they are subject to.

You have 24 hours to do so.

Get hooping.

Yawn.

If you think policies and procedures are important, then why wouldn't you want a requirement for such?

In essence you are advocating for an entirely unregulated industry, but expecting a consistent result. It makes zero sense. I am not implying that, I am directly stating it.

[arayder]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Yawn.

If you think policies and procedures are important, then why wouldn't you want a requirement for such?

In essence you are advocating for an entirely unregulated industry, but expecting a consistent result. It makes zero sense. I am not implying that, I am directly stating it.

That is a bald faced lie.

The clock is ticking on your assigned task.

Get moving.

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Yes, that is a good place for you to start. Feel free to detail to me the policies and procedures of all of the individual libraries, as related to age-appropriate materials. And explain what are the requirements for each library, as opposed to suggestions. You implied that all libraries have appropriate procedures in place, so provide the evidence. Or else tell me why they shouldn't be required to have such.

And then tell me what degree of oversight they are subject to.

goalmove.jpg

The link is to an extensive PDF file of the STATE OF MISSOURI'S EXISTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.

You said no such policies and procedures exist. There they are.

I don't have to provide anything more. You said there are no such policies and procedures. There are. If you have some evidence that these policies and procedures are deficient and the libraries are not serving the public interest as they currently operate, then feel free to find such evidence.

I do not have to do so. I am operating on the assumption that, owing to the existence of policies and procedures that actually already exist, including reference to legal boundaries that actually already exist, and to the traditionally adequate performance of librarians and their managing agencies, as well as their responsibility to the municipalities whose taxes they mainly rely upon, the system is working. Evidence to the contrary is not my job.

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by bruto

Attachment 47485

I don't have to provide anything more. You said there are no such policies and procedures. There are. If you have some evidence that these policies and procedures are deficient and the libraries are not serving the public interest as they currently operate, then feel free to find such evidence.

I never said that some libraries didn't have various policies and procedures; that is an entirely false claim.

That is not a collection of required policies and procedures for the 149 taxpayer supported libraries in the state. That is a collection of suggestions. My position is that we should have an actual requirement for policies and procedures as related to age-appropriate materials, in order to receive state funding.

You have not invalidated my position in any way.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Warp12

I never said that some libraries didn't have various policies and procedures; that is an entirely false claim.

That is not a collection of required policies and procedures for the 149 taxpayer supported libraries in the state. That is a collection of suggestions. My position is that we should have an actual requirement for policies and procedures as related to age-appropriate materials, in order to receive state funding.

You have not invalidated my position in any way.

I suggest you read pg 29 from bruto's link:

Quote:

Collection Management 1. The library district has a written collection management policy that is based on the library district’s strategic plan and services. The collection management policy is board approved, based on the principles articulated in the ALA Intellectual Freedom Manual, and is available to the public for comment and suggestions. The plan should include policies and procedures for: a. Selection and weeding b. Conservation/preservation c. Procedures for handling requests for reconsideration of materials d. Procedures for handling gifts and donations e. Procedures for non-circulating items 2. The collection management policy is reviewed at least every three years.

Then read pg 31 from bruto's link:

Quote:

__4. The library district has a written policy specifying that all requests for purchase or gifts to the library must meet the library district’s selection criteria in order to be added to the collection. Standard #1

____5. Materials are selected in anticipation of, as well as in response to, requests from library users. The library district provides a mechanism for patrons to suggest items for purchase. Standards #1, #11, #16

____6. The library district has a written policy detailing procedures for responding to requests that material be withdrawn from the collection. This policy is based on the Library Bill of Rights, the ALA Freedom to Read Statement, the ALA Freedom to View Statement and on other relevant documents in the ALA Intellectual Freedom Manual. Standard #1

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

I suggest you read pg 29:


Then read pg 31 from bruto's link:

Yeah, these are not required procedures as related to age-appropriate materials. They are various recommendations. And they are not a prerequisite for state funding.

The word "should" does not indicate a requirement, obviously. None of these things are requirements. It is a guideline, which actually supports the foundation of the legislation in question....the need for procedures.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Yeah, these are not required procedures as related to age-appropriate materials. They are recommendations. And they are not a prerequisite for state funding.

The word "should" does not indicate a requirement, obviously.

Jesus H. Christ.

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Jesus H. Christ.

Not sure where your confusion lies. "Should" is a word that implies there is a choice that is recommended, "Must" is when we specify a requirement. Especially when it is tied to a condition of funding, this is clear.

As I said earlier, to another forum member:

Quote:

In essence you are advocating for an entirely unregulated industry, but expecting a consistent result. It makes zero sense. I am not implying that, I am directly stating it.

[arayder]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Jesus H. Christ.

Seeing a so-called conservative acting like a 1920's Soviet communist is too funny!

[Random]

Just gonna drop this here for no particular reason...

Motte-and-bailey fallacy^WP

[Gulliver Foyle]

Originally Posted by pgwenthold

Mushrooms.

They are the epitome of evil and need to be eradicated.

I object to exposing my kids to mushrooms or normalizing them in any way,.

If you can't see why mushrooms are evil, I can't help you. It's just my opinion, but I need the government to cooperate with my aversion and not force mushrooms down our throats.

Eta: warp agrees with me. "The specifics don't matter." So you can put anything you want in there.

Fair play to you lad*, mushrooms are the devil's food and anybody who eats even one will go straight to hell. Anybody who tells you otherwise is only lying to themselves, they truly know this godly truth.

*Used in its original culchie non-gendered meaning.

</s>

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Warp12

I never said that some libraries didn't have various policies and procedures; that is an entirely false claim.

That is not a collection of required policies and procedures for the 149 taxpayer supported libraries in the state. That is a collection of suggestions. My position is that we should have an actual requirement for policies and procedures as related to age-appropriate materials, in order to receive state funding.

You have not invalidated my position in any way.

It is a set of policies and procedures which addresses many issues, including those that appear to concern you. It is state-wide. It is not compulsory.

Your assertion is that the procedures either are not sufficiently specific, not sufficiently limiting, or have not been followed, and thus must be supplemented by a new law and a new bureaucracy that is focused on certain issues and compulsory. Lacking so far are both evidence for the need and a good argument for the effectiveness of the result, weighed against the potential for abuse, the stifling of diversity, and the added cost.

The proposed law would apply only to state funding, which is a very small portion of the funding libraries depend on.

I think the whole issue is a song and dance, designed to stir up the conservative base and sow fabricated fury over what is essentially a trivial issue if it is one at all.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by bruto

It is a set of policies and procedures which addresses many issues, including those that appear to concern you. It is state-wide. It is not compulsory.

Your assertion is that the procedures either are not sufficiently specific, not sufficiently limiting, or have not been followed, and thus must be supplemented by a new law and a new bureaucracy that is focused on certain issues and compulsory. Lacking so far are both evidence for the need and a good argument for the effectiveness of the result, weighed against the potential for abuse, the stifling of diversity, and the added cost.

The proposed law would apply only to state funding, which is a very small portion of the funding libraries depend on.

I think the whole issue is a song and dance, designed to stir up the conservative base and sow fabricated fury over what is essentially a trivial issue if it is one at all.

One of the things if it was my state I would object to is the claim that this won't cost the libraries more than $500. How on earth can the proposers know that? Especially when one considers the libraries would be forced to put in place a brand new system to record "parental wishes" in regards to issuing age appropriate books, and then the on-going cost of maintaining such a system.

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Darat

One of the things if it was my state I would object to is the claim that this won't cost the libraries more than $500. How on earth can the proposers know that? Especially when one considers the libraries would be forced to put in place a brand new system to record "parental wishes" in regards to issuing age appropriate books, and then the on-going cost of maintaining such a system.

That's a pretty common problem. Conservatives are traditionally dedicated to cutting costs when it affects the real rights, lives and health of people, but blind to costs when it affects the promotion of their own agendas.

Of course there's some truth in it too. Tyranny is, at least on its surface, cheaper than democracy. A corral is easier to manage than a prairie.

[seayakin]

Originally Posted by Darat

One of the things if it was my state I would object to is the claim that this won't cost the libraries more than $500. How on earth can the proposers know that? Especially when one considers the libraries would be forced to put in place a brand new system to record "parental wishes" in regards to issuing age appropriate books, and then the on-going cost of maintaining such a system.

I hope this isn't a derail but speaking from experience, having implemented and manged different integrated library systems the main way the systems deal with this is putting a pop up note on an individual's record such as "Johnny's mother does not want him to check out such and such a book" or block the ability of the child to check a swath of books such as all adult titles. To implement something more sophisticated and less klunky, would be a significant and expensive requiring development. I could think of one company quoting developing such a system and then charging each library $10,000 to implement it (and this would be an annual charge).

[Foster Zygote]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Yawn.

If you think policies and procedures are important, then why wouldn't you want a requirement for such?

In essence you are advocating for an entirely unregulated industry, but expecting a consistent result. It makes zero sense. I am not implying that, I am directly stating it.

The fact that you have to retreat into bald faced lies in order to pretend that your argument hasn't been a craptacular failure is rather informative.

[arayder]

Originally Posted by seayakin

I hope this isn't a derail but speaking from experience, having implemented and manged different integrated library systems the main way the systems deal with this is putting a pop up note on an individual's record such as "Johnny's mother does not want him to check out such and such a book" or block the ability of the child to check a swath of books such as all adult titles. To implement something more sophisticated and less klunky, would be a significant and expensive requiring development. I could think of one company quoting developing such a system and then charging each library $10,000 to implement it (and this would be an annual charge).

And then the Karens of the Right will move on to complain about the city orchestra playing "The Nutcracker" at Christmas time which made their strange little 9 year-old boys think Joe Biden was the nutcracker and as such is after their testicles.

This made sense to them since, not having the slightest sex education, they figured a solider crackin' their nuts with his jaws was a form of gay/liberal inspired birth control.

[Foster Zygote]

Originally Posted by Warp12

I never said that some libraries didn't have various policies and procedures; that is an entirely false claim.

When you say that people who question the need for the proposed legislation are "advocating for an entirely unregulated industry", you are clearly implying that there are not now policies and procedures in place. The "I never said that (in those exact words" defense isn't going to fool anyone.

We're not stupid, Warp - but your argument is.

[Foster Zygote]

Originally Posted by arayder

That is a bald faced lie.

The clock is ticking on your assigned task.

Get moving.

I think Warp is broken. It's like one of those old sci-fi clichés where the robot can't process something and says, "DOES NOT COMPUTE!" and then its head explodes.

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by Foster Zygote

When you say that people who question the need for the proposed legislation are "advocating for an entirely unregulated industry", you are clearly implying that there are not now policies and procedures in place.

Very poor interpretation of my argument. Probably partly due to a reluctance to recognize the difference between the concepts of recommendations and requirements.

We have already seen that some apparently do not understand the difference between procedures and recommended practices. So, none of this comes as a surprise to me.

[arayder]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Very poor interpretation of my argument.

Which is what, today?

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Very poor interpretation of my argument. Probably partly due to a reluctance to recognize the difference between the concepts of recommendations and requirements.

Please succinctly restate your argument.

[arayder]

Tic, tic, tic, tic, tic, tic, tic, tic, . . . .

[Hercules56]

Libraries are for children AND adults. Nothing wrong with having books that deal with all subject matters that are legal and tasteful, as long as they are organized appropriately by age. Homosexuality has been part of world society for thousands of years, there is no intelligent reason to hide it.

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Very poor interpretation of my argument. Probably partly due to a reluctance to recognize the difference between the concepts of recommendations and requirements.

We have already seen that some apparently do not understand the difference between procedures and recommended practices. So, none of this comes as a surprise to me.

One of those persons might be yourself. You seem to presume that a procedure must be mandatory or compulsory. This is not so. A procedure can be, exactly even, a recommended practice. Many operations have a recommended procedure. There is a procedure for many things, and often it is the only right way to do them, but there is no legal code involved. There is a right procedure for starting my lawnmower, and if you don't follow it you have trouble. But even if you wound the rope backwards you would not be arrested and fined, nor even deprived of funding. You'd just not get the lawn mowed.

There is no difficulty in recognizing the difference between recommendation and requirement. The disagreement is on whether the latter is necessary if the former is working. Not everyone is in love with the idea that for everything that ought to be done there ought to be a law.

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by bruto

One of those persons might be yourself. You seem to presume that a procedure must be mandatory or compulsory. This is not so. A procedure can be, exactly even, a recommended practice.

Recommended practices are not procedures. A procedure could be something that is based upon a recommended practice. For example, if I say, "You should change your air filter every 100 hours", that is a recommended practice. If I present you with a detailed document that explains how to change the air filter, that is a procedure.

I have never stated that a requirement for something to be labeled as a procedure is that it be mandatory. My position is that if procedures are not a requirement, there is no mandate that they exist. In this case the mandate is simply that if you want state funding, you must have these procedures and associated policies.

[arayder]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Recommended practices are not procedures. A procedure could be something that is based upon a recommended practice. For example, if I say, "You should change your air filter every 100 hours", that is a recommended practice. If I present you with a detailed document that explains how to change the air filter, that is a procedure.

I have never stated that a requirement for something to be labeled as a procedure is that it be mandatory. My position is that if procedures are not a requirement, there is no mandate that they exist. In this case the mandate is simply that if you want state funding, you must have these procedures and associated policies.

Now that you are cornered, we hear your much ado about nothing hair splitting.

This is nothing but cover fire for the standard BS from the out of control far right fear mongers.

First they tried to claim that the public schools were teaching critical race theory (CRT). When that absurdity got shot down they moved on to claiming that the trouble really was that school curricula and reading materials were secretly, subtly designed to make little white kids feel bad about being white.

This was done to keep the "they're after our kids" ruse going.

After the CRT lie started to lose its legs the right wing fear mongers moved on to the next deception. . .that our public libraries are subtly grooming our children to be gay, lesbian, transgendered little monsters by exposing them to sexually inappropriate materials.

Like the CRT lie this one doesn't stand up well to the light. it turns out libraries already have polices that prohibit handing out the Gay Kama Sutra to little kids.

I predict that far right thought police will simply move on to falsely accuse another of society's institutions of secretly trying to bespoil America's children. They are addicted to the ruse just like J. Edgar Hoover was hooked on commie hunting!

Who's next? The orchestra? The local karate school? The youth soccer league? The after school program at that local church. . .the one with the gay minister? The health clinic?

It's a target rich environment for the one-trick-ponies of the far right!

You tell us who is next, Warp.

What plays?

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Recommended practices are not procedures. A procedure could be something that is based upon a recommended practice. For example, if I say, "You should change your air filter every 100 hours", that is a recommended practice. If I present you with a detailed document that explains how to change the air filter, that is a procedure.

I have never stated that a requirement for something to be labeled as a procedure is that it be mandatory. My position is that if procedures are not a requirement, there is no mandate that they exist. In this case the mandate is simply that if you want state funding, you must have these procedures and associated policies.

Procedures and policies to address what specific problem?

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Recommended practices are not procedures. A procedure could be something that is based upon a recommended practice. For example, if I say, "You should change your air filter every 100 hours", that is a recommended practice. If I present you with a detailed document that explains how to change the air filter, that is a procedure.

I have never stated that a requirement for something to be labeled as a procedure is that it be mandatory.

You just finished lamenting that people do not understand the difference between a procedure and a recommended practice. That implies that a recommended practice cannot be a procedure. Practice is certainly common to both. A recommended practice is certainly not the same as a recommended result. It inherently specifies how that result is to be accomplished. So one must conclude that "recommended" is the sticking point. Yet what makes a procedure a procedure is that it is systematic or specific, not that it is compulsory. It's possible, I suppose, for a recommended practice to be so vague or so variable that it fails as a procedure, though it would require some semantic hairsplitting to do so. But it is certain that a procedure can be a recommended practice. The specific right way to do something is both.

Quote:

My position is that if procedures are not a requirement, there is no mandate that they exist. In this case the mandate is simply that if you want state funding, you must have these procedures and associated policies.

Are you now trying to find an operative difference between "mandatory" and "required?"

I continue to disagree on purely semantic grounds. A procedure is a defined practice. If there is a particular way in which you are supposed to change your air filter, and if you do it the way it is specified, you have performed the procedure as specified, whether or not there was a law that told you you must. The procedure might of course be the only right way to do it, and thus mandatory with respect to correct results, but not with respect to an extraneous authority, and it might just be the easiest and most effective way to do a job and not mandatory even for the job at hand.

And so what if there is no mandate that a procedure exist, if it's already there?

Your argument continues to be that whatever procedures and practices are now in place are not working. And yet, instead of finding evidence that they are not working, you quibble about the definition of procedures and practices.

[mgidm86]

Originally Posted by Warp12

All of this has already been addressed, further back in the thread.


Sounds legit.

You know, maybe we need procedures in place at ISF to weed out people who argue in bad faith. We have nothing!

Anyways, movies are okay, no regulations needed.
Libraries are bad and need new laws.
Got it.

I see one woman in 2014 tried to sue a theater over her minor child seeing a movie. I don't see a big list of these lawsuits. Why doesn't anyone care about movies? It's the lawless wild west all over again! Kids can walk right in!

Put me in the category of "libraries need not age restrict any materials whatsoever". I don't even care if they have policies at all for it. That is the side I would rather err on.

Why? Well who else has such laws?
Netflix? No.
TV? No.
Book stores? Nope.
The entire internet? No.

They provide content and let us decide how to deal with it. Nothing keeps kids from seeing anything they want on the internet, well nothing except parents.

However, there are procedures already in place for libraries (of all places). Libraries are ahead of the game. Yet libraries are the target of conservative ire? I wonder whyyyyyy.......

Libraries are somewhat state funded. That is the only reason they are being targeted with proposed legislation. I guess? I mean geez talk about a lame target to fight smut over!

We are supposed to provide reasons why this law should not exist. It already doesn't exist so it is your job to provide evidence in its favor. You have not and will not because you apparently can not.

Now get back in your cage. I was wrong to entertain this.

ETA:
"Let's see Jebediah, who should we target to protect kids from smut? Porn on the internet, violence and sex in movies, or....."

Jeb: "LIBRARIES!!!!!"

LOL. It'd be cute if it wasn't so scary.

[thaiboxerken]

Those laws intent is not to protect children from porn, violence, or sex. It's to "protect" them from liberal ideas.

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by bruto

Your argument continues to be that whatever procedures and practices are now in place are not working.

My argument is that such procedures should be a requirement in this case, not an option.

It is pretty simple. And nobody has come forth with a reasonable justification as to why procedures should not be required...even though they imply that such procedures already exist and are a good thing.

That's pretty much where the debate ends. Of course the fact that some don't feel there should be any measures to determine and restrict age-appropriate materials, that is just icing on the cake. Really showing clearly why this legislation is needed.

I hope the legislation passes, that is all I can say. And I will be supportive of similar legislation in the future.

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by thaiboxerken

Those laws intent is not to protect children from porn, violence, or sex. It's to "protect" them from liberal ideas.

That is not necessarily a bad thing, depending on the "idea".

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Warp12

My argument is that such procedures should be a requirement in this case, not an option.

It is pretty simple. And nobody has come forth with a reasonable justification as to why procedures should not be required...even though they imply that such procedures already exist and are a good thing.

That's pretty much where the debate ends. Of course the fact that some don't feel there should be any measures to determine and restrict age-appropriate materials, that is just icing on the cake. Really showing clearly why this legislation is needed.

I hope the legislation passes, that is all I can say. And I will be supportive of similar legislation in the future.

Yes we have come forth, but you just don't accept it, apparently being enamored of compulsion itself.

If a thing is done, and has been done in the past, and if there is no reason to believe it will stop being done, all without a law requiring it, then a law requiring it is redundant and unnecessary, and you don't even have to be a doctrinaire libertarian to consider unnecessary laws, which also usually include the founding of unnecessary bureaucracies and unnecessary expenses, to be burdensome.

I have no doubt that if the legislation under discussion were some liberal measure to correct some malfunction believed important by liberals, the same people who support it now would be screaming "Statist, statist!"

And once again you conflate the rejection of compulsory measures with the absence of measures at all, which have been noted over and over to exist already, unless you have managed to redefine "measures" as mandates.

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Warp12

That is not necessarily a bad thing, depending on the "idea".

It may not be a bad thing. But even if it is a good thing, it would be, in the case of the law in question, deeply and disgustingly dishonest, a Trojan horse of which any politician with integrity should be thoroughly ashamed.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Warp12

My argument is that such procedures should be a requirement in this case, not an option.

It is pretty simple. And nobody has come forth with a reasonable justification as to why procedures should not be required...even though they imply that such procedures already exist and are a good thing.

That's pretty much where the debate ends. Of course the fact that some don't feel there should be any measures to determine and restrict age-appropriate materials, that is just icing on the cake. Really showing clearly why this legislation is needed.

I hope the legislation passes, that is all I can say. And I will be supportive of similar legislation in the future.

Is that a promise?