Arizona is at it again.

[draco664]

Why do you hate your fellow people? Why do you think it's okay to say that kind of stuff to other people?

Bravo! An exceptional manoeuver there - A strawman, wrapped in an argumentum ad hominem, followed by an ignoratio elenchi plus a magnificent duck and cover to run away from the main point. Well done that man!

[Duelist925]

Well, if you don't verbally abuse others, then no one has a need to take away your freedom of speech.

Except those in power who seek to stifle speech that might remove even a smidgen of they're power.

Or those who want your speech squashed because they disagree with it. Like, say, some xtian fundies might want done to atheist speech.

Oh! Or how about those who don't want your voice heard because your an undesiarable? A minority, or someone who is poor, or someone who follows a "deviant" lifestyle.

Or just those who want everything stifled and shoved into smooth, easy to swallow shapes, so they are never forced to think, or come across something that might frighten them or their children?




Im glad this law was shot down. It was unnecessary, and frankly, too broad. Under this law, were we in arizona, any one of us could easily be slapped with the fine--simply because we might happen to annoy or offend one of the hundreds of people who frequent this lovely forum.

[Greenday]

I don't think you believe in freedom of speech at all.

And?

Bravo! An exceptional manoeuver there - A strawman, wrapped in an argumentum ad hominem, followed by an ignoratio elenchi plus a magnificent duck and cover to run away from the main point. Well done that man!

So saying I hate America because I don't think people should be able to say whatever they want without consequences isn't? Yea, okay.

[lordlundar]

One of the biggest issues of that bill was the wording that if the person offended lives in arizona, then Arizona can drag the one who made the site/article to their state to stand trial. To say that breaches federal laws and international treaties is an understatement.

[the_std]

So saying I hate America because I don't think people should be able to say whatever they want without consequences isn't? Yea, okay.

Except that the problem here is A) who gets to decide what the consequences are and B) what is an appropriate consequence? Cause it sure wasn't this proposed bill. Usually, the consequences for using a digital device to annoy someone with lewd language would be an eye-roll and blocking the troll. For the people who disagree with this law, we don't think the law needs to get involved at this level. As HYHBT pointed out, harrassment and stalking are already illegal and cover a broad-enough scope to help with this cyber-bullying issue. Why make another law that just has a large margin of potential abuse? Not to mention that it begins infringing on the First Amendment.

There are already consequences for the things you say. This bill did not need to take its silliness on top of what we have going now.

[Andara Bledin]

So saying I hate America because I don't think people should be able to say whatever they want without consequences isn't?

You "hate America" because you hate freedom, which is a large part of what America was founded for.

It really doesn't matter whether we need a law like this or not: This law is a pile of shit without the limits that any law needs to be worth the time it takes to read it, and no matter how contrarian you want to be, you can't change that basic fact.

^-.-^

[SongsOfDragons]

Internet trolls have already been prosecuted here in the UK. I took a screenshot of a side info box from the BBC that describes the law in question.

"The Communications Act 2003 governs the internet, email, mobile phone calls and text messaging.

Under section 127 of the act it is an offence to send messages that are "grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character".

The offence occures whether those targeted actually receive the message or not."

Quite frankly...good.

I'm British. The only free speech we have is at Hyde Park Corner. Our lack thereof has never affected me. I would rather live in a country where stuff that comes under the above can be smacked in the face rather than being forced to accept it because of some right to say what you want without consequence...and oh, I do!! I'm happy.

Different countries, different laws. And different rights and their extent. I cannot see too much wrong with something that tackles online bullying, though I agree that bill is written far too broad. Freedom of speech is going to get in the way of any legislation aimed to tackle online bullying, and as I have not been brought up to believe that the first Amendment is incontrovertible, I feel this is a bad thing. However, I can understand that people who are may see a worse evil.

[Jaden]

I would much rather receive a message of "grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene, or menacing character" than for the government to regulate such a thing and for me to have the chance to be punished for, I don't know, losing my head during a heated phone argument or text message and telling somebody to go fuck themselves.

Sorry, but I do believe that the first amendment is incontrovertible. As many people have said, there are already laws in place to combat harassment and bullying, they just need to be enforced better. No new legislation about blocking more things people say or do is going to solve that issue.

[draco664]

So saying I hate America because I don't think people should be able to say whatever they want without consequences isn't? Yea, okay.

No. I said you hated America because you didn't think people should be able to say things that you didn't want them to say.

Here, you said:

Well, if you don't verbally abuse others, then no one has a need to take away your freedom of speech.

So you say that so long as I don't say something worth restricting, then you won't restrict my right to say it.

Can I just say... Fuck that for a game of soldiers. I have no interest in totalitarianism, either living under it or advocating it.

For all the chest puffing and dick waving about what makes certain countries great, it is the Constitution of the US that puts it firmly head and shoulders above. A lot of other countries have a 'Bill of Rights' that are disasters because they state what rights people have - which often then means that courts are involved to determine which right trumps another when conflicts occur.

What makes the US Constitution and BoR great is the fact that it imposes limits on the government, not the people. Your founding fathers had exactly the right idea.

[Greenday]

No. I said you hated America because you didn't think people should be able to say things that you didn't want them to say.

What makes the US Constitution and BoR great is the fact that it imposes limits on the government, not the people. Your founding fathers had exactly the right idea.

I'm not sure how that means I hate America.

I agree that there needs to be a way of limiting the government from being fascist but at the same time, I don't think it should neuter the government from doing its job and allowing everyone to do whatever the hell they want.

[the_std]

Greenday, are you purposefully ignoring the part where the behaviour this legislation would have covered is generally already made illegal by laws that are not nearly as loosely-worded and open to abuse? So... Where are people allowed to do "whatever the hell they want"?

[ngc_7331]

I'm not sure how that means I hate America.

I agree that there needs to be a way of limiting the government from being fascist but at the same time, I don't think it should neuter the government from doing its job and allowing everyone to do whatever the hell they want.

Okay, then, I'm game. Tons of what you say annoys me. You prepared to do 6 months in jail for it?

[Greenday]

Okay, then, I'm game. Tons of what you say annoys me. You prepared to do 6 months in jail for it?

This irked me even more. Pushing a year back at you.

[Andara Bledin]

And here we have an outstanding example of why the hell this law is pure crap.

^-.-^

[Greenday]

And here we have an outstanding example of why the hell this law is pure crap.

^-.-^

It's a good example of why you shouldn't frivolously accuse someone of a crime.