Rampaging homophobic vandal takes censorship into his own hands

A suggestive picture featured on magazine cover angered a library patron, so he just ripped off the cover and took it away.

Guess it never occurred to him that

1. he could just lodge a complaint with the staff
   
2. he was breaking the law and willfully damaging public property
   
3. having done it without being caught, taking it to a reporter to raise a stink about it might not have been the wisest course of action
   
4. that there were other 'sexual' covers he could have taken, too--

or maybe those weren't infuriating because they were half-naked women, as opposed to two men of different races kissing?

Of course, his concerns of prison time seem to revolve around whether he could watch football. Sigh. I don't know the man, so I really can't make a judgement on his character. But his comments were disturbing. You have the cover, you tell a reporter you ripped it off, but there's no proof to put you away if it comes to that? That, along with the TV football comment, seems to say that either he's out of touch or just not taking it seriously. If I were on the staff, I'd go ahead a file charges on principle, although I'd say restitution would be acceptable (not to mention how galling it would be to have to buy an entirely new issue of objectionable content). I'd probably revoke his library priveleges, since it does seem obvious he can't be trusted around the materials. Gee, just imagine what he'd do to Advocate Men (their version of Playboy. The Advocate itself is a political/cultural/news magazine.) And just in case you think I'm biased, I'd do the same if he ripped off any other covers.

It's funny how people don't necessary recognise a magazine as part of a library collection. I once had a nursing student ask if she should make a copy or if she should just tear the article she needed out of the nursing journal. I very nearly pulled the magazine out of her hands for that and did in my shock say something rather sharp, like 'don't you dare do that!' (I'm afraid I rather reacted like I would to a puppy chewing a book. But then my immediate response was to hit her on the nose with the rolled-up magazine, but I didn't do that. That would be wrong. That would assault and battery.) After the initial shock, I recovered my more professional/sweet exterior and I explained that these were used by many people, then showed her how to copy the article. After she left, happy to have the info she needed, I went over to my desk and put my head down, wondering if it was because it was a magazine and thus 'throwaways' in some people's minds, or because it's a medical library, as opposed to the more familiar school or public library, or if she was just obtuse. Sigh. Does that make me a bad librarian?