Tim May wrote:
At 9:42 AM -0700 11/11/97, Eric Cordian wrote:
A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied First Amendment protection to ``Hit Man: A Technical Manual for Independent Contractors,'' saying publisher Paladin Press knew it would be used by murderers.
The book was sold to James Edward Perry, who was convicted of killing Mildred Horn; her disabled 8-year-old son, Trevor; and the son's nurse, Janice Saunders, in Silver Spring, Md., in 1993. The women were shot between the eyes and the boy's respirator was unplugged.
Having skimmed the "Hit Man" book, I can tell you it conveyed no unique information about how to shoot someone between the eyes and unplug a respirator.
If I recall correctly, it suggests the back of the neck/head as the Miss Murderer proper point of entry for small projectiles. The instructions on how to build a silencer were very useful, but neglected to mention that being smart enough to follow the instructions didn't necessarily mean you were smart enough to use it properly. A word of advice...if you forget to take the steel rod used to align the silencer out of the barrel before you use it, it stings like a bitch when you shoot.
If this Paladin case is not overturned, it will mean the "death through lawsuits" of nearly all publishers of even slightly controversial material. Loompanics will go, Delta Press will go, etc. "Unintended Consequences" will be withdrawn by the publisher and the author will be sued. "The Turner Diaries" will become a contraband item.
I wonder if any kids reading the Bible have murdered big guys by using a slingshot? Sounds like a case for censorship, to me.
And why not sue other publishers and bookstores? Maybe a book on abortions helped a woman perform an illegal abortion. Maybe a book about fighting for liberty provided "abstract advocacy speech so explicit in its palpable entreaties to violent crime" (and so it is unprotected, according to the courts).
Perhaps the British could launch a class-action suit against the author of the Star-Spangled Banner, and have it banned. They could use Jimi Hendrix's Woodstock version to work the jury into an emotional frenzy against it as an anthem for drug-addicted freaks.
But in many ways, this is good news. The war is coming faster than I thought.
<muffled explosions in the background>
The judge in this case has committed a capital crime.
Better have our fearless leader, Jim Bell, convene a Melatonin People's Court, immediately. (The rest of you guys signed and returned the 'secret oath' that Jim sent last week, too, didn't you?) :: B o o t s