Should the people of Richardson be able to keep out stores like Zone d’Erotica, if they want to?
“Though the U.S. Supreme Court has held that Cities may regulate sexually oriented businesses but not totally prohibit them from operating within a city’s jurisdictional limits, we are not alone in the desire to make that decision at the local level. We will fight the Zone d’Erotica lawsuit in federal court and are pursuing opportunities to join other communities across the nation who share our desire for local control and regulation of sexually oriented businesses.” (Gary A. Slagel, Mayor of Richardson, in a April 20, 2007 letter to Richardson residents).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
"...but not totally prohibit them from operating within a city’s jurisdictional limits..."
Freedom of speech, and free enterprise should not be interfered. Although sexually based businesses may not be morally correct in many eyes of the citizens of Richardson, this cannot alter legal rights to conduct its business.
However, to work with these businesses and make laws that balance freedom of speech and enterprize with moral correctness of the community.
Example, building may not show any pornographic material.
Jake
Based on what we have learned about State and City government, I feel that the citizens of Richardson should have the right to ban XXX stores within city limits. If this is what the majority wants, why should there be any question. It is know that not only do these stores bring an undesirable element to a neighborhood, they also bring down property values. I know this first hand. We used to own an italian/ pizza restaurant on Lower Greenville. Things were great until a Condoms To Go moved right next door. It was embarassing and ruined the ambiance we had just created with an expensive remodel.
I do however think these stores do serve a purpose and should be allowed to exist, maybe outside the city limits of Richardson.
I think that the people of Richardson have every right, morally and constitutionally, to decide if these stores can operate within their city. Morally I think that the people of Richardson should be able to say that this stuff is disgusting, does not encourage citizens to live in a responsible way, can lead to other bad behavior, and is otherwise has a very negative impact on society. Constitutionally speaking,
jurisdiction over speech and the press are giving to the State Governments, not the Federal Government.
I believe the city of Richardson should be able to ban the establishment of sexually oriented stores in its city limits if the people want to. This kind of decision should be a direct city election, just like Garland did last year to allow the sale of alcohol in their borders. I believe that the federal and state governments should go hands off on this kind of industry and allow the people who will be impacted by this decision the most to make a decision. So I believe this issue should be voted on by the citizens of Richardson.
Mr. Hoes
Yes they should. The City of Richardson doing this is no different than other cities across the Metroplex that do not allow liquor or beer stores within city limits. It is the citizens of the cities choice in those cases and it should be the citizens of Richardson choice.
I believe that it is up to the City, and no further than the State, to decide about this. It sounds like a city ordinance matter, not a matter for Supreme Court judges. I can't even begin to wonder why the Supreme Court is waisting Americas time deciding such a trivial (by comparison) matter for a small (by comparison) city. Its a little city! Let them handle it! The only reason I can think of that the Supreme Court would be doing this is if they are going to use this as an opportunity to "interpret" something else and steal more power away from the people, I wouldn't be surprised. I personally don't care either way what happens to the sex store, but I do believe its up to the city.
I beleive that if the people of the city want to get rid of the stores then they should. If the majority of the people dont like porn movies then the stores wont do good in the city. Also I personally think that a city looks bad when there are xxx movie stores.
Is selling something freedom of the press? I don't think so. The issue of selling alcohol is able to be voted on by the people, so why can't the people vote on selling sexual content within city limits? Self government is where the people can live under the laws they vote on. By telling people in a city that they can't turn away a possibly hazardous business, doesn't that take away our right to govern ourselves? I personally have no issues with the store being there. Because I'm not going to enter one nor spend my time worrying about it. But I know it gives many more issues to others, and their voice should be heard.
I think that the people of Richardson should be able to keep these kind of stores out. First of all, it's their city and they should be able to decide what kind of businesses they want. Secondly, these type of stores make cities look bad. Not only that but they also attract unwanted kinds of people to the areas where they are located.
As long as the procedure is done in the correct manner, I do not see any objection. I mean that there should not be skipping steps in order to obtain the goal desired - the means does not justify the ends. The laws should be followed in order to achieve the objective that is truly desired by the people, and not the objective desired by others; in addition, the people have representatives in the legislature in order to express the opinion of the voters and their concerns too.
Ana M.
No i don't think that the city of richardson should be able to keep out stores like Zone d'Erotica because they are a business like any other business. although the founders of the Constitution did not adress freedom of the press as producing xxx rated movies, the supreme court will intepret it their own way as they've done everything else. the business is not directly harming the city so they should waste their time in court. pf
I think that the city of Richardson should have the right to ban XXX-rated movies, as long as they are thinking in the majority of the citizens in the city. These stores only hurts the society are only harming society and its morallity. If the city and the people work together to ban XXX stores, the city would be able to have a good reputation. Another positive outcome of banning these movies would be the decreasing of sexual predators, and the exploitation of children and women.
This matter should be left entirely up to the citizens of Richardson. The people who live in the area chose to reside there because the city held certain standards. I wouldn't want to raise my family in the heart of Oak Cliff because it has certain characteristics that don't create a healthy environment for children. In the same way, Richardson is trying to prevent that from happening. I feel like everything we've studied in the course points to the answer that the people should have the authority to make this decision.
Kristen T.
I believe the people of Richardson should be able to keep out stores like Zone d’Erotica, if they want to because the citizens of richardson have the right to do in its city limits, and also if other people don't want like it, they don't necessarily have to go to the store. Also it's a democracy, and the city of richardson should be able to decide. Lastly, as long as it is not harming anyone, then it is up the city to make that decision.
Post a Comment