[quote]to use a ANY ELECTRONIC OR DIGITAL DEVICE and use any obscene, lewd or profane language or suggest any lewd or lascivious act[/quote]
Wait, they're making it illegal to swear online? I support making actual online harassment illegal, as it's pretty much as bad as regular harassment, but 'profane' language? Fuck that shit.
[quote][I][B]and use any obscene, lewd or profane language or suggest any lewd or lascivious act[/B][/I][/quote]
Um.
Are they really trying to make swearing illegal?
Please tell me they aren't?
If this passes internet population reaches a thousand and prison population reaches record high with over 90% of all internet users.
This has GOT to be unconstitutional in some way.
Either way, the entire population of Arizona doesn't need to be in prison for something as stupid as this. Waste of money.
"We can't have our citizens harassing each other online, we need them out harassing minorities in the real world!"
Good luck with that.
[quote]It is unlawful for any person, with [b]intent to terrify...[/b][/quote]
Sorry your honour I didn't mean to say I'd firebomb his house it was just dark humour.
This law is broken as fuck... so if you use your iPhone to say something annoying to someone, you could be sued. Genius.
[quote]
"It is unlawful for any person, with intent to... annoy or offend, to use a ANY ELECTRONIC OR DIGITAL DEVICE and use any obscene, lewd or profane language or suggest any lewd or lascivious act, or threaten to inflict physical harm to the person or property of any person."[/quote]
Last time I checked saying "fuck you" to someone in real life isn't a felony, why should it be on the internet?
[QUOTE=desever;35410423]I hate my state.[/QUOTE]
yeah it seems like all the politicians here are suffering from heat-stroke
[QUOTE=Zezibesh;35410067]You can easily block people, or you can turn off your PC. This is not possible in real life. Besides, how are they going to enforce this? The most it'll do is limit facebook bullying a bit.
It's good to have a place to vent. If that was completely taken away emotions will bottle up again.[/QUOTE]
i think you put too much power in people blocking or turning off their computer. so what, they are then ignorant from the harassment? a common thing i see these days is making memes with personal attacks, which don't exactly go away when you turn off the computer and have real world consequences. these things can still be spread by other people online (picture messages, blogs, facebook groups) as well as offline. blocking someone or turning off your computer won't merely stop the harassment.
and "venting" to remove emotions has been proven to be ineffective, it's just an old freudian idea. outbursts are actually worse for those emotions and creates more of them. bottling of emotions is not harmful, and the "pressure pipe" idea that they will eventually explode is a rather poor, draconian analogy.
God intentions, but not enforceable in any legal way.
[QUOTE=Twistshock;35409887]So wait, would this make teabagging illegal?[/QUOTE]
not if they like it
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;35409716]It's already illegal in the physical world, don't see any reason not to make it illegal online.[/QUOTE]
you're ugly
real world - you're mean :(
internet - SHIT JUST HIT THE FAN, TIME TO SUE
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;35409716]It's already illegal in the physical world, don't see any reason not to make it illegal online.[/QUOTE]
Because you can't as easily get away from someone in the physical world as you can block them online.
[QUOTE=Omali;35414070]Because you can't as easily get away from someone in the physical world as you can block them online.[/QUOTE]
Except even online it's not that simple.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;35410133]If you need to vent your frustrations by being a complete and utter asshole, you've got issues.[/QUOTE]
I say, let people who they want to be, if they want to be an asshole so be it. Deal with it, what are you going to do about it.
I'd rather have someone vent on others on the internet then one of those shitheads that do it by harassing people in real life.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;35409716]It's already illegal in the physical world, don't see any reason not to make it illegal online.[/QUOTE]
Not near the extent that this bill goes, it's not.
Bold is not illegal in the US:
"It is unlawful for any person, with intent to [B]terrify[/B], [B]intimidate[/B], threaten, harass, [B]annoy[/B] or [B]offend[/B], to use a ANY ELECTRONIC OR DIGITAL DEVICE and use any [B]obscene, lewd or profane language[/B] or [B]suggest any lewd or lascivious act[/B], or threaten to inflict physical harm to the person or property of any person."
None of that is illegal in reality, excluding public use of "obscene, lewd, or profane language" over public airwaves or in public in a way that creates a disturbance or leads to harassment. Terrifying is not a crime, and it's clearly separate from threatening and harassing. Intimidation depends on if there's threatening, and if there's immediate danger. Annoyance and offense are clearly protected speech, as per [I]Terminiello v Chicago[/I] and [I]Chaplinsky v New Hampshire[/I].
The only things clearly illegal in that statement there are threaten, harass (and even then, there's alot of leeway on what harassment is in public communication), and threaten to inflict physical harm to the person or property of any person (and again, not necessarily illegal. I can legally say "If you touch my wife again, I'm going to fuck you up." I can't say "I'm going to stab you because you're stupid.")
I can't possibly see this surviving the Supreme Court if it ever gets there.
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];35415062']Not near the extent that this bill goes, it's not.
Bold is not illegal in the US:
"It is unlawful for any person, with intent to [B]terrify[/B], [B]intimidate[/B], threaten, harass, [B]annoy[/B] or [B]offend[/B], to use a ANY ELECTRONIC OR DIGITAL DEVICE and use any [B]obscene, lewd or profane language[/B] or [B]suggest any lewd or lascivious act[/B], or threaten to inflict physical harm to the person or property of any person."
None of that is illegal in reality, excluding public use of "obscene, lewd, or profane language" over public airwaves or in public in a way that creates a disturbance or leads to harassment. Terrifying is not a crime, and it's clearly separate from threatening and harassing. Intimidation depends on if there's threatening, and if there's immediate danger. Annoyance and offense are clearly protected speech, as per [I]Terminiello v Chicago[/I] and [I]Chaplinsky v New Hampshire[/I].
The only things clearly illegal in that statement there are threaten, harass (and even then, there's alot of leeway on what harassment is in public communication), and threaten to inflict physical harm to the person or property of any person (and again, not necessarily illegal. I can legally say "If you touch my wife again, I'm going to fuck you up." I can't say "I'm going to stab you because you're stupid.")
I can't possibly see this surviving the Supreme Court if it ever gets there.[/QUOTE]
I'm no law expert but doesn't at least terrify fall under harassment to some degree?
[QUOTE=JustGman;35409852]cyber bullying is a serious threat to american youth![/QUOTE]
Yeah no one has ever killed themselves over it or anything.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;35415080]I'm no law expert but doesn't at least terrify fall under harassment to some degree?[/QUOTE]
It can be. Depends on the meaning. For instance, terrify could be used int he case of someone becoming frightened that their computer will explode, or that a clown statue will get them, because of a chain letter or convincing scary story. Clearly not illegal. On the other hand, it could mean harassment or threat based on fear of immediate injury or damage, but because it's separated from both of those, I take it to mean the former, and not the latter.
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];35415157']It can be. Depends on the meaning. For instance, terrify could be used int he case of someone becoming frightened that their computer will explode, or that a clown statue will get them, because of a chain letter or convincing scary story. Clearly not illegal. On the other hand, it could mean harassment or threat based on fear of immediate injury or damage, but because it's separated from both of those, I take it to mean the former, and not the latter.[/QUOTE]
Don't you just love multiple forms of one thing?
Guys it's just so it's in the books so if someone ACTUALLY is able to identify it they can. And isn't this more towards cyber-bullying like on Facebook? Yeah those kids were able to be suspended but since it was virtual it didn't stick as a crime, since it wasn't in person. I think this is more targeted towards bullying, and believe it or not, Arizona was one of the first states to have laws making it illegal to bully. I know that I'm grateful for that law, even though people said kids still wouldn't speak up and they'd still be bullied. I spoke up and it worked for me, I'm sure this will be the same, even if it's only on blatantly obvious places like email or Facebook.
[I]"I can finally arrest all of the trolls who made fun of my videos"[/I]
This is fucking retarded. It's insanely easy to block and remove any unwanted person from your life online. But if commenting "Wow this is a dumb status" on Facebook can result in a fine, what's the point of using the internet?
The internet now truly is,
serious business
So if you troll or otherwise harass someone in Arizona but do not live in Arizona yourself, what happens? Do you become a wanted criminal in Arizona?
[media]http://youtube.com/watch?v=PTTeLmwm_EE[/media]
This anti-SOPA video is very much fitting with this bill.
What's great is that MPAA and RIAA are also opposing this bill. Not just (obviously) Anonymous.
Woot lets all go to jail
Don't they realise how easy it is to make evidence for this sort of thing?
[QUOTE=Funion;35413758]yeah it seems like all the politicians here are suffering from heat-stroke[/QUOTE]
The Phoenix heat makes people go wacky I think.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.