...Decided February 22, 1991. Michael R. Hauptman, Bruce S. Harvey, for appellant. Patrick H. Head, Solicitor, Victoria S. Aronow, Beverly M. Collins, *835 Assistant Solicitors, for appellee. CLARKE, Chief Justice. Appellant was charged with violation of OCGA § 40-1-4 in that he operated a motor vehicle knowing that it bore a bumper sticker containing the words "shit happens." Appellant's pretrial motion challenging the constitutionality of the statute was denied. He was convicted by a jury and fined $100. His motion for new trial was denied, and he appeals. We find the statute unconstitutional. OCGA § 40-1-4 provides as follows: No person owning, operating, or using a motor vehicle in this state shall knowingly affix or attach to any part of such motor vehicle any sticker, decal, emblem, or other device containing profane or lewd words describing sexual acts, excretory functions, or parts of the human body....

...Thus, "under the Equal Protection Clause, not to mention the First Amendment itself," [quoting from Police Dept. of Chicago v. Mosley, 408 U. S. 92, 96 (1972)] even a traffic regulation cannot discriminate on the basis of content unless there are clear reasons for the distinctions. 422 U. S. at 215. Not only is OCGA § 40-1-4 overbroad, its overbreadth results in a vagueness which prevents the citizen's conforming his conduct to the requirement of the law....

...prohibits distribution and display of obscene materials. A bumper sticker exhibiting obscene material would be prohibited by this statute, and we will not strain to construe a second statute to prohibit the same conduct. [1] Since we have found OCGA § 40-1-4 unconstitutional, we need not reach the appellant's enumeration of error concerning the sufficiency of the evidence in his conviction....

...J., Weltner and Bell, JJ., who concur specially; Hunt, J., concurs in the judgment only. WELTNER, Justice, concurring specially. I agree that the conviction and sentence must be set aside, but would invalidate these on statutory rather than constitutional grounds. 1. OCGA § 40-1-4 provides: No person owning, operating, or using a motor vehicle in this state shall knowingly affix or attach to any part of such motor vehicle any sticker, decal, emblem, or other device containing profane or lewd words describing sexual acts, excretory functions, or parts of the human body....

...1968) defines [the word "lewd"] as including "obscene." [ Collins v. State, 160 Ga. App. 680, 681 (288 SE2d 43) (1981).] [3] 2. Because the words in question are neither "profane" (i.e., "sacrilegious") nor "lewd" (i.e., "obscene"), they do not come within the proscription of OCGA § 40-1-4....

...The holding of the court removes the state's ability to proscribe the bumper sticker involved under the statute in question. This brings to mind the statement of Benjamin Franklin: "Everything one has a right to do is not best to be done." Although the state may not impose criminal sanctions under OCGA § 40-1-4, this does not mean the exhibitor of such a bumper sticker stands blameless among his fellows....

...the listener, and spoken with intent to please or amuse. McKenzie, 279 Ga. at 267. McKenzie is not controlling here, given that OCGA § 16-11-34.1 (f) and (g) are content-neutral in their impact on protected expression. In Cunningham, we held OCGA § 40-1-4, which prohibits bumper stickers containing profane or lewd words describing sexual acts, excretory functions, or parts of the human body, reaches a substantial amount of constitutionally protected speech and is unconstitutionally overbroad...