What if you drove 67 in a 65 mph speed zone, got pulled over, got issued a warning, continued to drive 67, got pulled over, got issued a ticket, didn’t pay the ticket, and ignored many repeated warnings to pay the ticket and appear in court? What should be done to you then?
The arrest described in the OP was a last resort, or at least that’s certainly the impression I get. He wasn’t arrested for an overdue book; he was arrested for repeatedly ignoring many attempts to get him to return or pay for the book, so that other people could use it.
Yes, and if they consistently **enforced **that law, people wouldn’t speed, or everyone would bitch righteously and the law would be changed.
Do you even KNOW how much money libraries lose because of lost or damaged books each year? Do you even KNOW how libraries are (badly) funded?
It sucks to have a public service, available to all, for nothing more than a bit of identifying info (that we can’t even confirm is correct) and have someone walk in, take between $20 and $2000 (yes, all of those zeroes are supposed to be there) and NEVER BRING IT BACK. And we often have absolutely no recourse. We’re just expected to eat it.
Fuck that. Go library. I hope they get more of their materials back, and that people learn not to abuse community services.
If the guy had “borrowed” a few pots and pans from the local Meals on Wheels, and not brought them back after many attempts to contact him, and many months, the community would want his head on a pike. There’s no difference between that and the library.
I take it the lady in question had not bathed for a while?
The arrested person did not abscond with $2000 worth of materials. He checked out ONE book, that probably cost $20 new.
Get a grip. I know child molestors that the cops won’t arrest. I’d rather pay for a few extra books for my local library than have this garbage going on.
Okay, it’s settled: From now on, whenever anyone refuses to return a library book, just send the bill to AnaMen.
I can’t cover everyone, but I would not have hesitated to give up $20 to keep the guy from being arrested.
I used to donate a sufficient amount to my local library that “my portion” of such losses would be well-covered. Since they’ve tossed out most of the books and no longer cap fines at a book’s value, I no longer consider my town to actually have a library, so I avoid the place now.
Too bad he didn’t share that sentiment - it would have saved him a lot of trouble.
Libraries are not struggling due to a lack of people checking out their books. Libraries are certainly not struggling due to a lack of people stealing their books.
Jory Enck apparently didn’t feel the same way, or he could have paid the replacement fee for the book himself at some point in the past three years. Or, if he couldn’t afford that, he could have just returned the book – a book he did still have and was able to produce pretty quickly after being released from jail. The news story isn’t totally clear on this point, but it also sounds like Mr. Enck was only arrested for the overdue book because he came to the police’s attention for some other reason (e.g. a traffic stop). So it seems like he had plenty of opportunity to avoid arrest, but that an arrest was what it took to get his attention.
Are you guys seriously suggesting it should be common practice to arrest people who owe the library money? How ridiculous.
I’ve been on line behind an affluent white lady who basically made a big enough stink that the librarian said, “Forget about it.” What do you want to bet that only the poor patrons are going to be tripped up by this?
If you don’t return a book, you don’t get to take any more books out and the library can put you in collection. The end. Libraries are in trouble because of lack of public funding, not because of missing GED study books.
Libraries are struggling because of public funding shortfalls. Since my local library has rendered itself useless to me and others in my position, I’d personally vote against any additional money being thrown their way.
If they start arresting people, I’d actively attempt to convince others to support yanking their funds.
And I am someone who loves books and is highly in favor of social programs. It’s taken a lot for the library to turn me against it, but these policies do not serve the community.
I don’t care if he was jaywalking, flipping off babies, and eating a panda sandwich, while using the library book as a place to store his unpaid parking tickets and ignored jury summons collection. Procrastination of returning a book to the library should not be grounds for arrest.
In contrast to you, my library lets me borrow all kinds of books I want to read in a convenient and pleasant environment and has never threatened me with arrest. I vote for all possible funding for them. If I knew that I could be arrested if I lost a library book and they couldn’t contact me, I probably wouldn’t bother.
My library does not arrest people, as far as I know, but they no longer cap fines at the price of the book, making borrowing a book a dangerous proposition.
They sell off their books for no rational reason. It’s not to make money, as they go for 25 cents a bag, and it’s not because they are out of space, as the shelving units have the bottom 3 shelves completely vacant.
They are open extremely limited hours and are noisy, with patrons and librarians alike making no effort to keep their voices down.
Dumber still, I tried to pay a very high fine my mother had incurred, and they refused to take my $90, citing “privacy concerns.”
Since you seem to be ignoring this, I’ll repeat something someone else posted. This guy was not arrested for an overdue library book. He was arrested because he stole a library book. Petty theft is still petty theft whether the book in question was stolen from the library or Barnes & Noble.
And I’ve got news for you, because an overdue book is considered theft in many jurisdictions, you don’t even need a special law to throw someone in the slammer. A family in my local system borrowed hundreds of books and DVDs and was eventually arrested. As they should be because it is theft.
What library is this? These policies are extremely odd and go against the common practices of nearly every public library I’ve ever dealt with/worked at.
Libraries often must remove materials for reasons that non-librarians wouldn’t agree with, but which are nevertheless quite rational. I assume from your description that this is a public library. A public library cannot afford to be an archive. If materials are not being used, they will be discarded. If those materials that need to be discarded might still be of interest or use to someone, they’ll be saved from the recycling bin by being sent to a book sale.
Library privacy laws* aren’t dumb. They’re there to protect, among others, battered spouses, people being stalked, people in acrimonious divorces, and identity theft victims.
*I saw laws because in the two states I’ve lived in, they are, in fact, state laws and are treated very seriously by library administration. Breaking those laws can result in losing your job, losing your certification (i.e., never working as a public librarian in that state again), and jail.
The library isn’t arresting anyone. The police arrested Enck for violating a city ordinance. According to the article, this ordinance was passed because it was costing the local library “a tremendous amount of money” to replace stolen materials. Cutting funding to the library would only make it more important for them to recover these stolen items.
As a librarian, you don’t see a difference between a family borrowing hundreds of books and DVDs with no intention of returning them and arresting a man for a single GED prep book? Also, as a librarian, I have to ask you, do you support arresting people over a single book? Because it’s insane.
If they just wanted the book back, why not send the officers over to knock on his door and say, “Listen, dude, you either hand over the book or I’m hauling your ass to the pokey.”
Same result, less paperwork.
If that doesn’t work, hell, send over the SWAT team. They need all the training they can get.
Damn right I support it. If you can’t follow the rules you deserve to be bitchslapped by the law arm of the law. For the record, the rules include:
[ul]
[li]A printed slip showing the due date[/li][li]An email reminder three days before the due date.[/li][li]An email reminder/automated phone stating that an item is overdue after a week.[/li][li]A second email/automated phone reminder stating that an item is overdue after two weeks.[/li][li]A third email/automated phone reminder stating that an item is overdue after a month.[/li][li]A fourth email/automated phone reminder stating that an item is lost and you are being charge for the item after a month.[/li][li]If the item is being requested by another patron, a personal phone call is placed asking to return the item after a month.[/li][li]After three months, the patron is turn over to the collection agency and they run through a series of calls of letters.[/li][li]After all that, then an arrest might be made.[/li][/ul]
So yes, I think the rules are plenty fair.
Ok, fair enough. I personally think it’s stupid to arrest someone over a $15 or $20 fine. If someone (like the family in your example) steals hundreds of dollars worth of library materials, send the po-po. If you catch someone selling library materials online, send in the fuzz. Someone doesn’t return one book they borrowed in good faith (but kept in bad faith), send their ass to collections and don’t let them borrow anymore stuff. (And I have to question the wisdom of your library system’s regulations that they let the family accrue hundreds of items–maybe they had 10 kids.)
Justin, have you ever let someone out of a fine because they swore on a stack of Bibles that they returned a book? And what about when the library makes a mistake? It raises the stakes unnecessarily when you throw the police into the mix.