> Mein Kampf Let's get this straight upfront: I'm not talking about anti-Nazi laws. In Germany it is illegal to sell to lend games which glorify war or violen

> Mein Kampf Let's get this straight upfront: I'm not talking about anti-Nazi laws. In Germany it is illegal to sell to lend games which glorify war or violence to kids. Germany banned this game and there isn't a nazi or swastika in sight: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmPjsBDN9Xw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmPjsBDN9Xw Nor am I criticizing Germany for it. Germans are entitled to their values. But the point illustrated is that America isn't unique in deciding what is or isn't appropriate media for children to have access too. Germany's violent video game bans go further than any of these American book bans, actually banning the sale of these games to kids. None of the book bans in America ban the sale of these books to kids. Even libraries are not banned from lending these books, provided they can find other sources of funding. As to your question, my personal belief is your answer b). Within practical reason (expense, availability) libraries should get and lend whichever books are in demand no matter how many other people those books offend. Since money and shelf space are scarce, prioritize the books with the greatest demand, regardless of how many other people hate that book. People who want books banned from public libraries to "protect kids" are stupid; parents need merely go to the library with their children and personally supervise what their kids read. That's how I would cast my vote, but I'm not a dictator and if the rest of the community votes to defund the library instead, that is what it is. The first amendment does not guarantee funding for public libraries, funding is provided to libraries voluntarily. If libraries want funding they need to convince a sufficient majority of the population to vote for that funding. And if people don't like how a library is being run, they're well within their rights to vote against funding that library. I wouldn't have it any other way, this is a democratic society and people voting the way they feel is the entire point. My personal preference is not the law, I only get one vote just like everybody else. If you want to prevent this kind of defunding attack, I think there are several options: State or federal legislation to guarantee more funding to public libraries is one possibility; this would make libraries resistant to local defunding efforts, but of course passing such grander funding laws would perhaps be an even greater challenge. I think this is worth attempting nevertheless. Alternatively, public libraries can be funded by private donations. The 'public' in public library means that it's open to the public, necessarily that it's funded by the public. Many public libraries across America were founded and have been substantially funded by private donations.