Reader reaction: Readers divided on sticker issue

A recent Project: Reader Reaction question asked about stickers on a Clovis man’s car that portray cartoon images in sexually compromising positions. Police have charged Dean Young with distribution of sexually oriented materials to minors in connection with the case.

Some responses:
“FIRST, LET ME SAY that I am not going to be a judge or jury on behalf of this individual because I would not like to infringe on his Constitutional rights. … This I believe will be settled in the courts as he is seeing about having the ACLU act on his behalf. But having the ACLU defend this individual will be putting Clovis on the map for something that it wishes wouldn’t come about.

“As a parent, I deplore this action that the individual did by putting those stickers on his car for others, especially children, to view. … He has the right to do so in his own home, but plastering them on a car window? Absolutely not.

“I believe the police officer acted accordingly and without prejudice and even gave him the opportunity to remove them. …

“What a deplorable mess he has started, not only for himself, but for his family, neighborhood and city. … Keeping it in his home, that is his right; but putting it on his vehicle … is infringing on other peoples’ rights whereby they have no alternative but to see it on the car. (Unless of course people walk around town with blinders on or don’t look at it.)

“I hope the city fights this and that the city commission members make an ordinance preventing such improprieties from happening in the future.”

— Gerald Majewski

“I FIND IT DISHEARTENING that our police force appears to have nothing better to do. … I guess now I know why it took the police over an hour to respond when my neighbor’s car was broken into. Normally I can’t stand the ACLU, but I hope they decide to take this issue.”

— David Burke

“I CERTAINLY DO NOT want my boys seeing such lewd material as described in CNJ. The owner of the car may feel that it is his God-given right (does he even believe?) to display the images. I feel that it is my right to protest and support the officer in his action. Consider this: If I put vulgar images in my front yard, I would be prosecuted in short order, and rightly so.”

— Frank Dalton

“WITHOUT SEEING THE STICKERS it’s hard to make an informed decision. However, on the surface it seems like an extreme overreaction to me.”

— Jeff Greene

“A REASONABLE ADULT IS certain to know when a statement (such as the bumper labels reading: “Don’t like my driving? Dial l-800-eat s—”) is likely to offend some people and is the wrong message for youngsters to see or read. So, why display controversial messages? I believe those who do have a personality disorder.”

— Harold Burris

“OUR POLICE OFFICERS SHOULD be doing something more productive than issuing a citation for a harmless sticker … For instance, issue some tickets for the boom boxes that rattle our windows at night. Write some warnings to the people who insist on parking on our sidewalks, blocking pedestrians’ rights-of-way. Get actively involved in the City Beautification Program by forcing the removal and cleanup of the many front-yard junk-car parks. These are all enforceable city ordinances or laws. In addition, many of these violations are observed by our law enforcement agents daily without action.

“Most of the violations I mentioned do not need court action or expensive treatment, they just warrant the attention of our police officers. In my opinion, the sticker is the proverbial ant.”

— Denver Jones

Coming Wednesday:
• More letters on the topic, and the Clovis News Journal weighs in with an editorial.

Below is a link to the sexually explicit image that has Clovis talking. Some readers may find it offensive:
• http://coopstuff.com/Graphics/News/twogirls.jpg