Posted on 05/08/2009 9:15:56 AM PDT by Polarik
Edited on 05/08/2009 9:23:43 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
A new proposal in Congress is threatening fines and jail time for what it calls "cyberbullying" – communications that include e-mails and text messages that "cause substantial emotional distress."
The vague generalities are included in H.R. 1966 by California Democrat Linda Sanchez and about a dozen co-sponsors.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
I say, "Hope for the best but prepare for the worst," and when I say the "worst," I mean your worst government nightmare.
Another SHTF on the horizon.
“up to two years in prison for those whose electronic speech is meant to ‘coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress.’”
...GOOD LORD! Just about everything posted on the internet could fall into any of the above categories. Or easily be miscontstrued as such. A set of “living, breathing” rules that will change when convenient.
This bill is causing me emotional distress....where do i sue???
They want us to shut up and drink the Kool-Aid.
Chnage we can believe in? More like change you won’t effin believe.
And don’t think that the dumasses won’t go for it either. The word “bully” is used in public schools to describe looking at someone cross-eyed and parents eat it up. Same with this “zero-tolerance” BS. Bring an aspirin into school and parents will agree that “rules is rules” blah, blah. Kid gets suspended for 3 days.
Wonder if Oklahoma or Texas will be impervious to any of this horse squeeze?
This bill is blatantly unconstitutional enough that it won’t withstand a legal challenge, regardless of the makeup of the court.
That’s why I’m so glad I was home schooled ... had to attend some classes at the local HS ... was always looked upon as being weird ... and always ace’d them at test time ...
Public schools are a disaster! They should be called thought control training.....
Damn the Constitutional, full speed ahead.
Who gets to deccide what is hostile? That is the question.
They have a human rights commission in Canada which levies heavy fines against people who say things that upset homosexuals, but as far as I know they don't impose prison time for that...so the US is poised to leapfrog the Canadian stance.
Well, since the entire contents of the HuffPuff and DailyKook and DU cause me distress, they clearly MUST be shut down immediately, and their owners jailed.
Being a dreamer is one thing, but to remain anive with the education you’ve acquired is ridiculous. The Constitution is what the liberalized court determines it to say. Recall the convolutions passed from the court’s butts to create Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton.
Can I put his ass in jail or something?
“up to two years in prison for those whose electronic speech is meant to ‘coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress.’”
Hmmmmm buh-bye .... Perez Hilton. He/she certainly sleazes through the above criteria.
The article didn't mention anything about "intent", which is usually a condition required in the commission of a crime. Without intent, it is usually a lesser crime, if at all. The article also mentions that this law would apply to blogs and websites, so not just to direct communication, like email or texts.
So this, of course, would mean that any Leftie Nutbag, could read a post on FR, declare emotional distress, and have the poster locked up.
This is who the political Left is. American has been conquered.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.