• Welcome to RCCrawler Forums.

    It looks like you're enjoying RCCrawler's Forums but haven't created an account yet. Why not take a minute to register for your own free account now? As a member you get free access to all of our forums and posts plus the ability to post your own messages, communicate directly with other members, and much more. Register now!

    Already a member? Login at the top of this page to stop seeing this message.

Az introduces Internet trolling bill.

ctrwannabe

ctrwannabe

RCC Addict
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
1,093
Location
San Antonio, Tx
Arizona Legislature Apparently Trying to Criminalize Being Annoying on the Internet - Phoenix News - Valley Fever


Update: Anonymous advocates are sending Jan Brewer and legislators a "butthurt report form" in response to House Bill 2549.*


pluperfecter.blogspot.com
"Trolling" on the interwebs could become illegal in Arizona.
​It has been brought to our attention that there's a bill cruising through the Legislature that, according to some critics, could cause people like myself and this blog's commenters to be thrown in jail for generally being jackasses on the Internet.

We understand that there's probably a healthy amount of people who wouldn't be entirely opposed to the above-mentioned situation, but critics to House Bill 2549 say this legislation could have some pretty broad effects.

According to a Senate fact sheet, HB 2549 "[p]rohibits using any electronic or digital device, instead of a telephone, with the intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend a person."

The Senate approved this one 30 to zip last week, but more critics are coming out of the woodwork to point out some problems the bill could cause.

The Media Coalition is labeling the legislation as a "bill to censor electronic speech," saying, "...H.B. 2549 would apply to the Internet as a whole, thus criminalizing all manner of writing, cartoons, and other protected material the state finds offensive or annoying."

UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh, who runs the "Volokh Conspiracy" website, basically says being an asshole on blog comments -- which New Times generally appreciates -- could be a criminal act:

So, under the statute, posting a comment to a newspaper article -- or a blog -- saying that the article or post author is "****ing out of line" would be a crime: It's said with intent to offend, it uses an electronic or digital device, and it uses what likely will be seen as profane language (see, e.g., City of Columbia Falls v. Bennett (Mont. 1991)). Likewise if a blog poster were to post the same in response to a commenter's comment. Likewise if someone posts something in response to an e-mail on an e-mail-based discussion list, or in a chatroom, or wherever else. (Note that if "profane" is read to mean not vulgarly insulting, but instead religiously offensive, see City of Bellevue v. Lorang (Wash. 2000), then the statute would be unconstitutional as well.)

In this line of thinking, that would generally turn every comments section to a New Times post about the Hells Angels into a big bag of criminal evidence, since most of the comments are people calling each other pussies and meth-heads a few hundred times.

The Media Coalition notes several famous people who make a living doing the exact stuff mentioned in the legislation, as well as some common examples -- like sports fans talking shit to each other on the Internet, which is typically meant to annoy or offend fans of an opposing team.

The Media Coalition has sent memos to a couple of Senate committees showing a ton of examples of how possibly moronic and unconstitutional this law could be.

According to the vote history on the bill, through committees and floor votes, it hasn't seen substantial opposition anywhere.

Even Comedy Central writers have picked up on this one, writing on one of its blogs that there might be "a silver lining in this blatantly unconstitutional attempt to ban trolling."

"Though Arizona is doing its best to criminalize birth control and immigration, among other facets of the modern world, it still hasn't banned electricity," the post says. "In fact, Arizona legislators use 'digital device' to draft legislation that is often plainly intended to annoy or offend anyone with a conscience.

"When Arizona legislators outlaw trolling, only outlaws will be Arizona legislators."

Even the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund and Vladimir Putin apologists are getting testy about Arizona's proposed legislation.

You can check out the Senate-engrossed version of the bill by clicking here.
Click to expand...
 
Found the state copy of the bill and read through it. Wont be long that will be fought in court, would take much to correct the language to be about Cyber Bullying rather than being a troll.
 
who determins or defines annoying...most of us would be in jail..lol
 
Last edited:
JeremyH said:
I'm sure that your definition is MUCH more logical.....:roll:
Click to expand...
He asked whos gunna be defining it, I answered.

IMO its just another ploy of an aging population demographic trying to stay relevant in todays world. LOOK AT ME I HAVE POWER AND IM A SELF SERVING IMBECILE.
 
Mr.Slave said:
He asked whos gunna be defining it, I answered.
Click to expand...
Yeah, you did. And your sarcasm was noted...
Mr.Slave said:
IMO its just another ploy of an aging population demographic trying to stay relevant in todays world. LOOK AT ME I HAVE POWER AND IM A SELF SERVING IMBECILE.
Click to expand...
Exactly. And you would be in that same position when trying to define "annoying"....both you and that aging baby boomer are just as qualified to make that judgement....or not.
 
JeremyH said:
Yeah, you did. And your sarcasm was noted...

Exactly. And you would be in that same position when trying to define "annoying"....both you and that aging baby boomer are just as qualified to make that judgement....or not.
Click to expand...

No one is qualified to make a subjective judgement.
 
Won't ever happen. We have this federal constitution that prevents limiting our freedom of speech. Sorry Canadians.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

scatterbrains
Hmmm NRA sellout??? Think again
Replies
0
Views
1K
scatterbrains
scatterbrains
Back
Top