There MUST be a law against donning bumper stickers so offensive, no, I don't have pix!
I was too sick as a passenger this morning, riding along with my husband, who was taking me to the Med Express for this damned virus. I looked at it and said to my husband, "what a complete jaggoff". Were I more sharp, I would have grabbed a pen to write down the license plate number and complained… but to whom?
By the way, I couldn't tell if this was male or female in the driver's set, but they basically swerved in and out - anxious to get over to the left hand turn lane, then run the yellow to red arrow in their black SUV LandRover.
Back window decals -
Upper left - NRA Sticker (okay, I can deal with that)
Upper Right & middle left, bumper sticker was some narrative too small to entirely read basically that we've had the first "woman" president in office… Then, picture of Obama holding his head up in a less than masculine pose… WTF?
Lower Left - The clearly defined word taking up most of bumper sticker (this is what floored me) "C "Obama icon" for the letter "O" C K S U C K E R.
Okay, so should I see this shit again, is there a recourse?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Obscenity subject to regulation is pretty clearly defined in Miller v. California:
The Court, in an attempt to set such limits devised a set of three criteria which must be met in order for a work to be legitimately subject to state regulation:
1. whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards (not national standards, as some prior tests required), would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;
2. whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions[14] specifically defined by applicable state law; and
3. "whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."[15]
I suppose you could make a case on point 2, I'd call "cocksucking" a sexual conduct - but then you're still going to run afoul of #3, it may be juvenile and offensive but even I could buy that it's a serious political work. Certainly nothing described meets the Brandenburg standard ("advocacy...directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action"
, even with the special protections afforded the President with respect to advocacy of violence there's no ground there. The Larry Flynt case rules out the argument that it's offensive to call the President gay or a cocksucker - you're allowed to do that with impunity to public figures. Ummm...and I'm out of ideas for what else is unprotected. Maybe false statements/libel; AFAIK even public figures are protected from that, but it's a bit nebulous and is political speech anyway.
I like that asshats are allowed to slap their offensive ideas on bumper stickers on their SUVs - it lets us all know how idiotic they are beforehand, and more seriously by not making certain ideologies a forbidden fruit, IMO they're much less insidious and attractive. When the public attitude is just disdainful superiority instead of suppression, it's a lot less interesting to be seen as dumb than being part of an underground "rebel" organization. Or something.
this "jaggoff" .
Not sure there is much one can legally do about it but encourage everyone who believes differently to vote and help decent candidates. Of course, if right wing candidates get beat, we'll just see more hatred like this, and more of the "take my country" back crud. But, it's easier to laugh at them when their favored ignorant bigots aren't controlling the government.
...although from a quick google search, it seems its mostly fines. Still, a moral victory is better than no victory at all.
Here's a sample link: http://www.wkrn.com/story/15009792/stricter-offensive-bumper-sticker-law-takes-effect
You would need to check for your city/state, of course, but hopefully it's a good start! 
Thanks for the link. It constitutes patently offensive, if not obscene. I mean, really!
I would be positively livid if my niece were to see something like that. Do let us know if anything turns up!
No? Well here's my advice.
What's the deal with this censorship drive around here lately?
Beats the hell out of me. 
I suspect confronting them would be a mistake as the driver is probably meaner and nastier than you are. Your best response would be the typical letter to the editor, work on getting out the vote, etc.
Or you could follow the driver home and take whatever action you deem appropriate.
and sometimes potatoes get wedged up tailpipes.
I'll scan the newspaper for dumbasses shooting each other in the parking lot.
I do believe I'll remember that one! 
I don't fret over it though. Just happy they aren't my neighbors.
Deacons in Bible-thumping churches. Public humiliation is the way to go.
Maybe a nice, liberal policeman will find a good reason to ticket them.
but a myself and a few of my team members are pretty progressive, we all get along very well, conservative and liberal as we don't discuss politics while on the job.
Last edited Tue Jan 14, 2014, 05:29 PM - Edit history (1)
When I think what rotten fuckers we all were for years using terms like policeman and fireman.
btw
Yep, that's me...Mister Perfect Grammar Person!
for having anti-Bush bumperstickers on my vehicle. Police should not let their personal political beliefs determine who gets ticketed and who doesn't.
The decency of people consistently amaze me, though.
And, I say this, fully understanding that I've called Bush Crime Family members far worse. However, I cannot for the life of me see how I could sport such a bumper sticker.
True, true, true… not a thing (outside a local ordinance that would be impossible to enforce) one can do about it.
Meanwhile, we have, as you imply fair "jaggoff" warning…
I saw one a couple months ago that said "The only reason we can't kill some people is because it is illegal to." At a city hall, no less. I hope this asshole likes getting pulled over. 
Although my favorite one is one of those NOTW (Ed Hardy for Christians) bumper stickers that says "Blessed are the peacemakers" with a picture of a gigantic gun on it. Where in the Bible does Jesus shoot first and ask questions later? 
… and I would never wish to do that.
with HUGE letters across their back window:
"Money ova bitches"
Now that's class.
… the term, "dickwad"… It is bound by no gender 
but I remember when the
"How my Driving" - Call 1-800-EAT-SHIT,stickers were made illegal.
and without the free speech hysterics
It has to vary state to state, according to what I've read on this threat, but I'll check it out.
MMM
Just got through reading that statute, and sure as shit, you nailed the answer it under subsection "C".
Curmudgeoness, thank you as a fellow Pennsylvanian. It does matter from state to state WHAT is considered obscene under statute, which is what I was going for.
THIS ANSWERS THE QUESTION!
and a to YOU!!!
MMM
of "explicit sexual materials" in the statute.
I take it that you don't claim that a bumpersticker with the word "cocksucker" used in a political context is obscene under the standard for obscentity adopted by the Supreme Court.
I also take it that you agree that a bumpersticker with the word "cocksucker" dosn't fall within subsection (c)(1), which enumerates various types of visual (i.e, picture, photograph, drawing, sculpture, motion picture, videotape, etc) representations of sexual conduct, nudity, etc.
So that leaves (2), which extends the definition of "explicit sexual material" to a book, pamphlet, magazine, printed matter however reproduced that includes the matter in (1) or explicit and detailed verbal descriptions or narrative accounts of sexual excitement, sexual conduct, etc.
Obviously the bumper sticker doesn't include the visual representation as described in (1), so that leaves only the second part of (2). But a bumpersticker with a single word cannot possibly meet the test of an "explicit and detailed" (not "or" verbal "description or narrative account of sexual excitement, sexual conduct. This is particular the case where the single word is used as an epithet in a political context not in a sexual context. A bumper sticker with a visual depiction of two individuals engaged in intercourse with clear depiction of genatalia --- prohibited by the statute. A bumper sticker with the word "fucker" -- not an "explicit and detailed" description of what a "fucker" is -- not within the statutory language, not within the statutory language, especially when used as an epithet in the context of political speech not for its sexual meaning.
The fact that minors may see the word cocksucker or fuck or vagina or penis or any number of words that, if depicted in a visual represenation rather than as a single word doesn't give the state the right to ban it or impose penalties for it. As stated by Justice Frankfurter, writing fo a unanimous Supreme Court in the often overlooked but very important first amendment case, Butler v. Michigan, the government generally may not "reduce the adult population ...to reading only what is fit for children."
Finally, the reason that you don't see the word cocksucker on poltical or billboard advertisements (or in magazine advertisements either) is that the word is offensive to many and thus, while one might have the right to use it, that doesn't mean its a good idea.
when stating, "Obviously the bumper sticker doesn't include the visual representation as described in (1), so that leaves only the second part of (2). But a bumpersticker with a single word cannot possibly meet the test of an "explicit and detailed" (not "or" verbal "description or narrative account of sexual excitement, sexual conduct. "
If you are telling me that "cocksucker" doesn't meet this test, I must disagree. I think it does. And, that is EXACTLY why you don't see that work on political or billboard ads.
Of course, this word is offensive. Generally, these words are found in material that indicate should be read by adults… But, you can't control that when those words are exposed for anyone riding down the main street, USA.
It's where you display the words, not the words themselves that are regulated by the Commonwealth in this part of the law.
Response to MrMickeysMom (Original post)
Enjoy your stay!
