Banned Book Week starts Saturday

[Hellmark]

Didn't say it was impossible, just nearly. Not to mention that since that happened 15 years ago, security has been improved lessening the likelihood of something similar happening.

[Daithi]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The person banned from entering the UK was a "Michael Savage". Is that the same person?

The list of the 16 people banned from entry into the UK for "fostering extremism or hatred", and the reasons for it, you'll find here.

I meant Michael Savage -- that's what I get for working from memory. However, the point is still the same. Suppressing speech, even with good intentions, is a terrible mistake. It leads directly to suppressing political viewpoints as evidenced in the examples I provided.

[NormHart]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Perhaps you've never heard of "The Radioactive Boy Scout." The article was published in Harper's Magazine in November 1998. It's about a Boy Scout who decided to build a nuclear reactor in his mother's potting shed in order to get a Merit Badge. The story of how he obtained the necessary materials makes for fascinating reading. The Superfund cleanup after his work was discovered cost the taxpayers around $60,000. You can find the article at http://www.harpers.org/archive/1998/11/0059750.

You have to wonder how many geniuses of this type are lost to the world because our education system can not cope with or even recognize this type of genius. Nor, from the apparent neglect he is currently enjoying, are his talents being fostered or utilized even now. Such a waste.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Perhaps you've never heard of "The Radioactive Boy Scout." The article was published in Harper's Magazine in November 1998. It's about a Boy Scout who decided to build a nuclear reactor in his mother's potting shed in order to get a Merit Badge. The story of how he obtained the necessary materials makes for fascinating reading. The Superfund cleanup after his work was discovered cost the taxpayers around $60,000. You can find the article at http://www.harpers.org/archive/1998/11/0059750.

Wow! Thanks for that link!

[Sony]

I think that many students in high school are made to read VERY inappropriate books and they do not even have a choice to whether they read the book or not because it is an assignment from the teacher. They wonder why there is so much foul language in school it is because of what they read in books, watch on TV, and what they hear from their parents whenever they get mad.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by AprilHare

This is something I've considered.
The Mobileread Mein Kampf is a poor copy.
I have the tools to make a better copy and up it to Mobileread.
Should I? - I can't bring myself to; it's just going to encourage nutters and neo-Nazis, isn't it?

I wouldn't worry too much about it, Neo Nazi's are not big readers, and they're not big thinkers either. Like most people who profess the greatness and undeniable truth of a single book, they mostly haven't read the thing. If they had read Mein Kampf they'd see it's a meandering, mostly pointless hissy-fit by an inconsequential man who later, through sheer luck and socio-economic factors, became the monstrous head of a monstrous state.

[rrburton]

Originally Posted by HarryT

On the contrary, there are all sorts of laws restricting what it is and is not permissible to say or to print. You are not permitted to publish information which would compromise national security. You are not permitted to stand in a public place and yell "I'm going to kill the President!". You are not permitted to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theatre merely because you feel like doing so. All these acts will have undesirable consequences for you. No society permits completely unrestricted free speach, and for good reason.

Exactly, so let's all admit it... free speech is a farce.
What we have is CONTROLLED speech

[scottcstoness2]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

In honor of Banned Books Week -- and with apologies to Jimmy Kimmel, who in his "This Week in Unnecessary Censorship" segment offers his weekly Tribute to the FCC, in which he bleeps words and blurs images whether they need it or not -- I'd like to present you all with "This Week in Unnecessary Book Censorship."

The Babysitter's C*** by Ann Martin
Plum S****y by Janet Evanovich
The Tale of P**** Rabbit by Beatrix Potter
Valley of the D***s by Jacqueline Susann
The Lovely B**** by Alice Sebold
F*** Street by R. L. Stine
L*ving D*** in Dallas by Charlaine Harris
D*** Slayer by Christine Feehan
Crazy **** by Francis Chan
Catching **** by Suzanne Collins

OK, I've kept reading this thread because I've been interested in the various opinions on whether books should be banned, but thank you for injecting a wonderful moment of levity into the conversation!

IMO, while one can certainly make arguments for the banning of books, *any* instance of banning books that attempt to further the spread of *ideas* is *extremely* problematic, and leads to a very slippery slope: who gets to choose which ideas are banned?

I can see the point in banning certain instruction manuals (e.g. bomb-making), although as several have pointed out, the internet makes this a moot point.

Banning something like Mein Kampf, though, as reprehensible as one might find it, starts getting tricky. If a legislature or community absolutely hates an idea or book, I'd be fine with requiring that it be paired with rebuttal material so long as it is at no additional cost to the consumer. At least something like that fosters debate and at the very least makes an alternative viewpoint at least available to one who would purchase the original work. But outright banning of a book does neither individuals nor society any good. Ask the temperence movement how banning alchohol went.

ScS

[Juliette]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Perhaps you've never heard of "The Radioactive Boy Scout." The article was published in Harper's Magazine in November 1998. It's about a Boy Scout who decided to build a nuclear reactor in his mother's potting shed in order to earn a Merit Badge. The story of how he obtained the necessary materials makes for fascinating reading. The Superfund cleanup after his work was discovered cost the taxpayers around $60,000. You can find the article at http://www.harpers.org/archive/1998/11/0059750.

Thanks for the link

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Sony

I think that many students in high school are made to read VERY inappropriate books and they do not even have a choice to whether they read the book or not because it is an assignment from the teacher. They wonder why there is so much foul language in school it is because of what they read in books, watch on TV, and what they hear from their parents whenever they get mad.

If their parents, schoolmates, and media resources use that kind of language, I will present the notion that the language is "normal," not "inappropriate," however much you personally may dislike it.

[nekokami]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

Didn't say it was impossible, just nearly. Not to mention that since that happened 15 years ago, security has been improved lessening the likelihood of something similar happening.

On the contrary, with the current situation in Eastern Europe and Asia, the materials are likely easier to come by than ever, particularly for someone willing and able to pursue criminal contacts.

I'm not saying I think it's a good idea for Boy Scouts (or anyone else) to be playing with radioactive materials in their sheds. I'm just saying that attempting to suppress the information will fail. Security cannot depend on indefinite suppression of information. We'd be much safer looking for alternatives. (I favor an emphasis on social justice as a good start, but there are plenty of other approaches worth considering, I'm sure.)