Arizona bill could criminalize Internet trolling

[BrAinPaiNt]

So do I.

But is pisses the goody goodies off.

Whether you agree or disagree with some of the other things they have done in Arizona.

I don't see how anyone could be too happy with this one due to the wording in it being so open that it screams for people to abuse the law in reporting someone for just being a jerk or even disagreeing with your opinion on the internet causing them to be arrested, fined or jailed.

By the wording of that law they could file a claim against you or any of us really.

The wording needs changed. Annoying or offending someone can get you fined or arrested is going to far.

There are plenty of things we agree on, there are plenty of things we disagree on...could you imagine getting fined or arrested because I found a statement you said annoying or offensive no matter how silly it is? That is just crazy.

 

[zrinkill]

I don't see how anyone could be too happy with this one due to the wording in it being so open that it screams for people to abuse the law in reporting someone for just being a jerk or even disagreeing with your opinion on the internet causing them to be arrested, fined or jailed.

By the wording of that law they could file a claim against you or any of us really.

The wording needs changed. Annoying or offending someone can get you fined or arrested is going to far.

and use any obscene, lewd or profane language or suggest any lewd or lascivious act, or threaten to inflict physical harm to the person or property of any person.

Basically its saying your online identity is the same if you said something face to face.

It would be re-worded long before it became a law.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

and use any obscene, lewd or profane language or suggest any lewd or lascivious act, or threaten to inflict physical harm to the person or property of any person.

Basically its saying your online identity is the same if you said something face to face.

It would be re-worded long before it became a law.

It is unlawful for any person, with intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend, to use ANY ELECTRONIC OR DIGITAL DEVICE and use any obscene, lewd or profane language or suggest any lewd or lascivious act, or threaten to inflict physical harm to the person or property of any person.

It is written poorly and leaves many things open as I said already.

The way the wording is set up it is breaking it down and does not speak clearly that all of it has to run together.

THAT is the only part I don't like about it.

They fix the wording and it would be much different.

As it is worded now. If someone pops off about Tony Romo wearing his hat backwards or playing golf. Then you go and say that the opinion and person saying the opinion is stupid, then you go to another thread and harp on it when that person says something else...they could decide they want to file charges against you for annoying or offending them just because you have a different opinion.

YOU could very well be targeted by anyone that finds your comments offensive or annoying.

Again...if the wording is fixed and tightened up...that is different...as of right now it screams abuse of the law, more people suing or filing charges and a waste of the judicial system's time and the taxpayers money. I know how much you love people who sue over silly stuff.

 

[zrinkill]

It is unlawful for any person, with intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend, to use ANY ELECTRONIC OR DIGITAL DEVICE and use any obscene, lewd or profane language or suggest any lewd or lascivious act, or threaten to inflict physical harm to the person or property of any person.

It is written poorly and leaves many things open as I said already.

The way the wording is set up it is breaking it down and does not speak clearly that all of it has to run together.

THAT is the only part I don't like about it.

They fix the wording and it would be much different.

As it is worded now. If someone pops off about Tony Romo wearing his hat backwards or playing golf. Then you go and say that the opinion and person saying the opinion is stupid, then you go to another thread and harp on it when that person says something else...they could decide they want to file charges against you for annoying or offending them just because you have a different opinion.

YOU could very well be targeted by anyone that finds your comments offensive or annoying.

Again...if the wording is fixed and tightened up...that is different...as of right now it screams abuse of the law, more people suing or filing charges and a waste of the judicial system's time and the taxpayers money. I know how much you love people who sue over silly stuff.

It does not bother me yet .... because I know it would never pass without being re-worded.

I think its targeting sexual predators of all kinds and I am all for that .....

But you are correct .... it is to vague in its present form.

..
.
.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

It does not bother me yet .... because I know it would never pass without being re-worded.

I think its targeting sexual predators of all kinds and I am all for that .....

Sexual Predators and crazy people out there wanting to kill ex girlfriends and the like. I like that part of the idea. In some areas these guys get too much free reign (not talking over the internet) and the law can not do nothing to them until it is too late and they have killed or raped someone.

About not worrying about it passing without getting reworded...I worry about that type of thing because there have been all kinds of laws passed in various states or federal levels with crazy wordings that wind up getting abused.

Now it does not worry me as far as being in Arizona, as I am not in Arizona and don't plan moving there...but it would worry me if I lived there.

Too many times laws get passed with questionable wording. They normally pass with the best intent and for good reasons only to later get abused due to poor wording. It is part of the problem with the judicial system and how in some cases people get away with things on technicalities and how in other times people win cases they should never win in law suits.

Just something to consider. We can no longer assume that things will be worked out like wording and so on. And we darn sure can't assume that people and the judicial system will use common sense and weed out the bad cases from ever making it to the court room.

 

[joseephuss]

Maybe I am reading it wrong, but it sounds as if they could go after someone for posting "that Senator from Arizona is stupid" or anything similar. As written, there is potential for the law to be misused and abused.

 

[YosemiteSam]

This is as bad as Texas and Text Books.

 

[The30YardSlant]

I think they are going after Cyber Bullies.

Unless this is going to be used solely for targeting stalkers and such, I still think it's dumb.

Cyber bullying is cruel and moronic but we don't need be to be wasting time and resources making laws to prevent Sally from being called a ***** on facebook. Just my opinion...

 

[Cowboys&LakersFan]

I think they are going after Cyber Bullies.

Well then that's a good thing.

 

[Hoofbite]

Waste of time.

Troll in real life like the Westboro Baptist........you're exercising a constitutional right.

Troll on the internet and you're a criminal.

 

[LeonDixson]

The part that bothers me is it includes offending someone. People don't have a right to not be offended. If fact there are many people who seem to be looking for a reason to be offended by even an innocent off-hand remark. They love the victim status.

 

[zrinkill]

Troll in real life like the Westboro Baptist........you're exercising a constitutional right.

Don't even get me started on those pieces of trash.

 

[Hoofbite]

Don't even get me started on those pieces of trash.

I wish for one day people had a constitutional right to beat the living hell out of *******s.

I imagine there wouldn't be many pickets going on that day.

 

[vta]

Waste of time.

Troll in real life like the Westboro Baptist........you're exercising a constitutional right.

Troll on the internet and you're a criminal.

:laugh2:

Brilliant.

 

[zrinkill]

I wish for one day people had a constitutional right to beat the living hell out of *******s.

I imagine there wouldn't be many pickets going on that day.

They would be gone the first time they picketed a military mans funeral if that was allowed.

I refuse to refer to them as a church ....... they are a hate cult.

 

[burmafrd]

The part that bothers me is it includes offending someone. People don't have a right to not be offended. If fact there are many people who seem to be looking for a reason to be offended by even an innocent off-hand remark. They love the victim status.

amazing how many think that offending someone is some kind of crime

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Targeting illegal aliens I get, this I do not.

I'll echo this and Cajun.

 

[Rack]

Targeting illegal aliens I get, this I do not.

I'll echo this and Cajun.

Exactly.


People annoy me in person on a daily basis, there should be a low against that before there's a low against digital annoyance.

 

[Rack]

I'll admit, this interests me.

You want to do jail time?

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

amazing how many think that offending someone is some kind of crime

Oh, burm, there are so many victims on this board. The ironic part of that is most of the victims are the worst trolls.