Posted on 05/05/2009 2:34:26 PM PDT by Munz
`(a) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
(Excerpt) Read more at thomas.loc.gov ...
They will employ the thought police to determine if you meant harm to Obama when you questioned his policies, Free Speech is over if this becomes law.
Like I’ve said before, this is what we get when people refuse to follow God’s simple laws to love one another.
The wording of this law is troublesome, but I understand why it was done. Some of the horrendous things I’ve heard about what people have done to other really IS a crime. I don’t care whether it was done on the Internet or not.
Does this cover the DEMS in the underground attacking every one else???
Does this cover the DEMS in the underground attacking every one else???
LMAO...oh hell no...you missed the entirely subjective word “intent”....
That sums up anything anyone would say that someone else disagrees with. Goodbye internet completely.
Ooh boy I’m torn on this one.
My wife was a victim of a cyberstalker several years back. Stalker didn’t make any threats so law enforcement wouldn’t touch it. The stalker would follow my wife around to various chat rooms and forums saying some pretty mean things, some of those were related to her work.
Back then the only solution was for my wife to not go to forums or chat rooms any longer. That didn’t work for forums related to her work that she didn’t have a choice about being there or not besides quitting.
After about a month my wife ended up quitting because she couldn’t handle the stress of wondering what the stalker was going to do or say next, and it was hurting her work too.
Great, stalker wins, victim loses.
The way I saw it was if it was in person, not on the internet, it would be like a stalker following you to church, work, shopping, and yelling at the top of their lungs things about you. When you talk to the pastor, boss, store manager, or authorities they till you that YOU have to leave, and that nothing can be done about the stalker. Can’t smack the stalker either no matter what, because you know you’ll get charged with something and not them.
Great, stalker wins, victim loses.
following, trolling, twittering or otherwise keeping tabs on someone would be illegal...especially for moveon & other data miners.
Quote:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-1966
Text of H.R. 1966: Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act
Show this version:
Download PDF
Full Text on THOMAS
Go to Bill Status
Compare to this version:
Show changes:
Side-by-side
Highlighted
Expand all sections
Collapse all sections
Link to this view
This version: Introduced in House. This is the original text of the bill as it was written by its sponsor and submitted to the House for consideration. This is the latest version of the bill available on this website.
HR 1966 IH
111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 1966
To amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to cyberbullying.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 2, 2009
Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California (for herself, Ms. KAPTUR, Mr. YARMUTH, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, Mrs. CAPPS, Mr. BISHOP of New York, Mr. BRALEY of Iowa, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. HARE, Mr. HIGGINS, Mr. CLAY, Mr. SARBANES, Mr. DAVIS of Illinois, Mr. COURTNEY, and Mr. KIRK) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
A BILL
To amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to cyberbullying.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) Four out of five of United States children aged 2 to 17 live in a home where either they or their parents access the Internet.
(2) Youth who create Internet content and use social networking sites are more likely to be targets of cyberbullying.
(3) Electronic communications provide anonymity to the perpetrator and the potential for widespread public distribution, potentially making them severely dangerous and cruel to youth.
(4) Online victimizations are associated with emotional distress and other psychological problems, including depression.
(5) Cyberbullying can cause psychological harm, including depression; negatively impact academic performance, safety, and the well-being of children in school; force children to change schools; and in some cases lead to extreme violent behavior, including murder and suicide.
(6) Sixty percent of mental health professionals who responded to the Survey of Internet Mental Health Issues report having treated at least one patient with a problematic Internet experience in the previous five years; 54 percent of these clients were 18 years of age or younger.
SEC. 3. CYBERBULLYING.
(a) In General- Chapter 41 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
‘Sec. 881. Cyberbullying
‘(a) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
‘(b) As used in this section—
‘(1) the term ‘communication’ means the electronic transmission, between or among points specified by the user, of information of the user’s choosing, without change in the form or content of the information as sent and received; and
‘(2) the term ‘electronic means’ means any equipment dependent on electrical power to access an information service, including email, instant messaging, blogs, websites, telephones, and text messages.’.
(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 41 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:
‘881. Cyberbullying.’.
Quote:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1966
H.R. 1966:
111th Congress
2009-2010
Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act
To amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to cyberbullying.
Navigation
> Overview
- Full Text
- Committee Assignments
- Related Legislation
Track H.R. 1966
The feed for this bill includes all major activity on this bill, activity on amendments, references in the Congressional Record, and relevant upcoming committee meetings.
Preview Feed
Personalize GovTrack by selecting trackers. Tracking H.R. 1966 adds relevant events as they happen to your personal Tracked Events page.
You are not logged in to an account.
Log In | Sign Up (for free)
Why sign up?
Make a widget for this tracker to display on your web page.
Put the status of this bill on your own web page using a widget.
Primary Source
See H.R. 1966 on THOMAS for the official source of information on this bill or resolution.
Overview
Sponsor:
Rep. Linda Sánchez [D-CA]hide cosponsors
Cosponsors [as of 2009-04-18]
Rep. Mark Kirk [R-IL]
Rep. Timothy Bishop [D-NY]
Rep. Raul Grijalva [D-AZ]
Rep. Bruce Braley [D-IA]
Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard [D-CA]
Rep. Joe Courtney [D-CT]
Rep. John Yarmuth [D-KY]
Rep. Phil Hare [D-IL]
Rep. Marcy Kaptur [D-OH]
Rep. William Clay [D-MO]
Rep. Danny Davis [D-IL]
Rep. John Sarbanes [D-MD]
Rep. Brian Higgins [D-NY]
Rep. Lois Capps [D-CA]
Cosponsorship information sometimes is out of date. Why?
Text:
Full Text
Status:
Introduced Apr 2, 2009
Referred to Committee View Committee Assignments
Reported by Committee ...
Voted on in House ...
Voted on in Senate ...
Signed by President ...
This bill is in the first step in the legislative process. Introduced bills and resolutions first go to committees that deliberate, investigate, and revise them before they go to general debate. The majority of bills and resolutions never make it out of committee. [Last Updated: Apr 18, 2009 7:35PM]
Last Action:
Apr 2, 2009: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Related:
See the Related Legislation page for other bills related to this one and a list of subject terms that have been applied to this bill. Sometimes the text of one bill or resolution is incorporated into another, and in those cases the original bill or resolution, as it would appear here, would seem to be abandoned.
I think I’m offended by your stance. I’ll file a complaint tonight! Look for the thought police at your front door.
The attack has begun already. People whine b/c they can’t see the Pope. Meanwhile, the persecuted church is huge - pastors in China beaten, tortured and imprisoned; in Africa, burned, tortured, and sold into slavery; in country after country, they are left to rot in prisons or have other burdens to bear and I am supposed to cry out for these folks who can’t get an audience with the Pope. Guess I’m evil.
Wonder how long until internet forum trolls try to use it to harass sites they are trolling?
The article is about the Christians in the Holy Land who might not be able to see the Pope when he visits.
I guess it has to, so now we can shut down the daily KOS for their hatred speech right?
Hey, it becomes a double edged sword if put into law.
Lets take a page from their play book. Use their rules against them.
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.