Reply With Quote
We should form a support group for cyberbullies. Severe, repeated and hostile speech is cons utionally protected outside the workplace...or so I thought.
"Law prof Eugene Volokh blogs about a US House of Representatives bill proposed by Rep. Linda T. Sanchez and 14 others that could make it a federal felony to use your blog, social media like MySpace and Facebook, or any other Web media 'to cause substantial emotional distress through "severe, repeated, and hostile" speech.' Rep. Sanchez and colleagues want to make it easier to prosecute any objectionable speech through a breathtakingly broad bill that would criminalize a wide range of speech protected by the First Amendment. The bill is called The Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act, and if passed into law (and if it survives cons utional challenge) it looks almost certain to be misused."
We should form a support group for cyberbullies. Severe, repeated and hostile speech is cons utionally protected outside the workplace...or so I thought.
Another solution in search of a problem.
and if passed into lawYeah, right.
But seriously, that one mom in MO who made some 14 year old enemy of her daughter's life so miserable that she killed herself deserves a .44 round to the dome. The rest of us don't need a law.
...we'd all be in jail.
Maybe not you, ElNono.
This makes about as much sense as criminalizing marijuana. Oh... wait.
Let me guess, Congresswoman Sanchez is a Democrat?
Politicians are scared less of the internet.
God bless the dude in his basement that can always come up with a way around the system for the rest of us.
I salute you sir
I think it's a safe bet all the authoritarian oriented ones who want to trample of the bill of rights are democrats.
Yes, Sanchez is a Democrat...
I thought this story (which I lifted from Slashdot, credit where it's due) is interesting in the sense that it's always good to write down and remember the name of the 'representatives' that want to trump our First Amendment rights in the name of 'protecting the children'.
I personally think that when it comes to trample any of our rights, in the name of 'protecting our children', both parties have been just as guilty.
So a few cases where some kids get hurt means we need a wide sweeping law?
talk about overreacting
This doesn't pass the smell test - political speech is protected speech
Screw that. Kids who can't handle bullying are either A) mentally unfit for the world and/or B) didn't have parents to protect them.
But seriously, that one mom in MO who made some 14 year old enemy of her daughter's life so miserable that she killed herself deserves a .44 round to the dome. The rest of us don't need a law.
Why didn't the parents do anything? Counsel their kid? Move them to a new school? etc etc.
The will to live should be extremely song in people, and those who commit suicide, to me, seem to have something wrong with their brain anatomy. Suicide is only used as an option when there seems to be no other option, and unless you're being hunted by the mob, or your family is starving and you sacrifice yourself for life insurance, I really can't see the point.
(I know, I'm harsher than most.)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
