cross-posted from: https://ponder.cat/post/952397

114 points

Enterprising Texan pervert invents a dual-function gun-dildo that is constitutionally exempt from sex toy laws.

permalink
report
reply
47 points

Pump action shotgun dildo

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I have seen some interesting sawzalls online…

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Even better would be a pump action shot gun dildo in the shape of a cross with a beautiful carved image of Christ on the cross on top of the shot gun.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

A gun made entirely out of weed. Why hasn’t this been done before!

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Cheech and Chong were on the right track with their weed van.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points
*

Exqueeze me? The fuck? Is that real?

Edit: yes. Although it’s mired in legislative gobbledygook:

Sec. 43.23. OBSCENITY. (a) A person commits an offense if, knowing its content and character, he wholesale promotes or possesses with intent to wholesale promote any obscene material or obscene device.

(b) Except as provided by Subsection (h), an offense under Subsection (a) is a state jail felony.

© A person commits an offense if, knowing its content and character, he:

(1) promotes or possesses with intent to promote any obscene material or obscene device; or

(2) produces, presents, or directs an obscene performance or participates in a portion thereof that is obscene or that contributes to its obscenity.

(d) Except as provided by Subsection (h), an offense under Subsection © is a Class A misdemeanor.

(e) A person who promotes or wholesale promotes obscene material or an obscene device or possesses the same with intent to promote or wholesale promote it in the course of his business is presumed to do so with knowledge of its content and character.

(f) A person who possesses six or more obscene devices or identical or similar obscene articles is presumed to possess them with intent to promote the same.

So, women seem to be exempt (“he possesses with intent”) and it is a “performance”. Whatever that means. And it’s a misdemeanor.

But it’s real. Can have six dildos in a performance, but more than six? Oooh that’s a paddlin’.

permalink
report
reply
31 points

The documentary, Dildo Diaries, explores the topic in great, and sometimes hilarious detail. I happened to see this film around 2003, at a small art cinema, with Laura Barton and Judy Wilder present. So afterwards we had a Q&A. At that time one could sell/posses a ‘representative model’ for demonstrating how to put on a condom, but it was illegal if it also vibrated. And one could sell/ possess a non-anatomically correct ‘dildo’, which could legally vibrate. But one could not sell / purchase both from the same store. There were/ are literally stores that have an interior door dividing the two types. Also, if I recall correctly, there were limits on how many one could have, and categories including ‘collectors’ for those that had more than 6, I think.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0332604/plotsummary/?ref_=tt_ov_pl

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Well, I find this law to be obscene, so I guess it’s illegal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

That gives me a hell of an idea for a stage act up here in NYC

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

One mans obscenity is another man’s pleasure. I would normally say the Supreme Court will strike this down quickly, but you know where we are

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Typically in legalese like this, “he” isn’t denoting only people who use that pronoun, it’s understood to apply to all people.

The law as you posted seems to be equating owning more than six “obscene devices” with an intent to sell them, or use them as part of a business, whether that actually is the intent or not. It also notes that have multiple “devices” that are the same or similar is also an offense (so having two identical or even similar sex toys even if you have fewer than six total would also be a misdemeanor).

But you can claim they are for medical or psychiatric purpose and have as many as you need:

(g) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that the person who possesses or promotes material or a device proscribed by this section does so for a bona fide medical, psychiatric, judicial, legislative, or law enforcement purpose

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Typically in legalese like this, “he” isn’t denoting only people who use that pronoun, it’s understood to apply to all people.

Yeah but it’s an interesting defense. There are laws that only apply to women, aren’t there? And they dont’ use “he”. You’d lose, but it’d be an interesting case.

And the definitions section was too long to paste in, but you can get there from the link in the article.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

That law looks like it’s written so that they could arrest me for having 6 books they didn’t like. Obscene could mean anything here. It just screams “selective punishment”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It is defined earlier in the law but it was too long and boring to paste in. It still boils down to “obscene” items, which - yeah.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

you can legally own more guns than sex toys in the Lone Star State

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I mean, unless it’s defined elsewhere, it’s leaving an awful lot of space to interpret “obscenity”…

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It is defined earlier in the statute. You can get to it through the link in the article, it goes right there.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

texas once again proving they are one of the greatest concentrations of cowards.

permalink
report
reply
51 points

If they can outlaw a specific store from selling something, they can outlaw any store from selling anything. This isn’t just about sex toys, it’s a test to see what they can get away with.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

Tbf, the bill targets “retail stores,” not specifically Walmart.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

The point stands. There is no TBF here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I wouldn’t give them that much credit - sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and this dildo wants to ban dildoes. Because “chirren”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

Uhm, you can buy dildos at Walmart?

Why has nobody told me before now?

permalink
report
reply
12 points

Yes you can! Except they’re usually locked in a display case and you have to go and get someone to help you get one

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I always like to ask if they have anything bigger in the back.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

You must not buy feminine products or condoms/lube at Walmart then lol.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

Support small businesses, don’t get your dildos from Walmart

permalink
report
parent
reply

Not The Onion

!nottheonion@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome

We’re not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from…
  2. …credible sources, with…
  3. …their original headlines, that…
  4. …would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

Community stats

  • 7.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.1K

    Posts

  • 40K

    Comments

Community moderators