Gut-check time

I had great fun yesterday teeing off on a couple of humorous and counterproductive censorship controversies of past decades. But I feel like delving into something a little darker tonight. So get ready, folks, it's gut-check time for banned book defenders. How far are you willing to go?

Suppose you had a situation in which a publisher put out a book which gave explicit instructions about how to commit a murder. Suppose that after 13,000 copies of the book had sold over a period of ten years, eventually someone bought the book, followed the instructions, and murdered three people for pay.

Should such a book be suppressed? If not suppressible, should the publisher be held liable for civil damages related to crimes committed using information found in the book?

Some of you may know what I'm talking about. This is exactly what happened in the so-called "Hit Man" case involving Paladin Press, a publisher of books such as "The Complete Guide to Lock Picking", "The Art and Science of Money Laundering", and... drum roll please .... "Hitman : a Technical Manual for Independent Contractors". And it happened twice. Subsequent to each crime, a civil case for a seven-figure amount was filed against the publisher. More detailed information is available here . Here (and here) what Paladin Press has to say for itself, here's what a sympathetic book distributor has to say (a bit out of date).Here's someone who seems thoroughly disgusted at Paladin's productions.

Discuss amongst yourselves, folks, since I'll be on the road for the next couple of days, driving to Troll Territory for a job interview in a town where the two biggest annual events appear to be the Mint Festival (with, of course, the election of the Mint Queen!) and "Pumpkins on Parade".