Sacramento finally repealing its ban on selling comics to minors

The US Sun reports the Sacramento city council's finally taken official steps to repeal the 1949 ban on selling comics to minors:

A LONG-FORGOTTEN rule has just been wiped from the books, meaning comics can now be legally handed to kids.

The decades-old ban was so broad it technically put everyday comic culture on the wrong side of the law.

The change happened in Sacramento, California, after city leaders voted to scrap a 1949 ordinance.

On Tuesday, the Sacramento City Council repealed the rule at its regular meeting.

Up until Tuesday afternoon, it was illegal in the city to give a child a comic book under the old prohibition, NBC affiliate KCRA reported. [...]

The repeal passed unanimously after being placed on the council’s consent calendar for non-controversial items.

That's great, but we have to hope it's being done altruistically, as I may have noted before, because the following from a local cartoonist is eyebrow raising:

Local cartoonist Eben Burgoon led the push to get the law removed.

He told ABC10 he viewed it as a free speech issue.

“We wanted to get rid of it and then when we started to see some more freedom of speech issues occurring. Some more graphic novels lately have been become, like, the most banned book across the country,” Burgoon said.

This is fishy, because what if he's alluding to LGBT propaganda comics that were put in school libraries, no matter how mature-themes and unsuited for children they were? It's one thing to sell through a store, but a school library is an entirely different issue, parents do have the right to determine what's suitable for their children's reading, and there's a reason why the MPAA developed their ratings system in the late 1960s for films, and in the 1990s, ratings were developed for video games, and even for comics there was a rating system produced around the 2000s. What if there was a rule that comics had to be sold to children according to suitability ratings? Would that be wrong? Similar cases could surely be made for ordinary books. So then you could sell all sorts of entertainment products, just having to follow the law as to whether it's suitable for them. Is that wrong by contrast?

So I wish some advocates wouldn't just frame this all as only a free speech issue, because while selling comics to children is fine and dandy, it's not acceptable to encourage them to read stuff that's unsuitable from an adult perspective. It'll remain to be seen if this change of law in Sacramento isn't exploited by woke advocates for the sake of foisting propaganda that could have a bad influence on children ideologically. And we should certainly hope that won't be the case.