California pornographer charged (and convicted) under Florida obscenity laws.

[Tallpine]

I went through this same sort of moral dilemma when my ex-neighbor got arrested.

From my libertarian ethical viewpoint, the stuff he was selling should not be illegal as long as all the actors/actresses were participating voluntarily.

But I had serious doubts about that, especially considering the known felons that he was hosting at his place, and the apparent attempted abduction of my teen age daughters (dogs scared them off).

In the end, he pled guilty to a conspiracy charge.  Apparently he didn't want jury members to appreciate his video artwork. 

And he is gone from this neighborhood 

[PTK]

Good. I'd hate to live next to that, myself. 

[Tallpine]

Good. I'd hate to live next to that, myself. 

You have no idea.  It was hell for a while.

Worst part was the neighbor had a legal easement across my land to get to his land :(

I still don't like the legal means used to put him away for a little while, especially considering that I suspect that he and his buddies were guilty of far worse crimes.  I would still like to get a cadaver sniffing dog to check out the place some time.

[doczinn]

(1) The COTUS & 1st Amendment was not instituted for the sake of pornographers.  Its purpose was free political speech and free practice of religion.  Anything else is gravy.  To mention pornography as the purpose displays ignorance as well as swallowing the left's propaganda.

I believe that statement was meant in a broader context; the First Amendment protects speech

that other people don't like.