Cyberbullying Prevention Act

[Smurf-Herder]

Big Brother has found his foot-in-the-door.

Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act
To amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to cyberbullying

HR 1966 IH


111th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 1966

To amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to cyberbullying

4/2/2009--Introduced.

Sec. 881. Cyberbullying

2‘(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.’.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1966/show

[MintJulep]

So, what does that mean exactly, in English?

[bluejunk44]

it means if you go out of your way to cause harm that you can be held responsible

[Binky]

It means the cyber bullying had better stop or there will be consequences. It means no more threats to anyone or harassing them from the internet or any other electronic bullying.

[MintJulep]

Yes, but that is too vague and subjective. Are people going to be locked up for causing "emotional distress" to someone by calling them a name? If so, it is an impediment to the 1st Amendment.

[kres24GT]

Another victory for those who hate free speech. If you let words on a computer screen affect you, you are better off killing yourself, your genes are too weak to be apart of the pool.

[GetAClue]

Another victory for those who hate free speech. If you let words on a computer screen affect you, you are better off killing yourself, your genes are too weak to be apart of the pool.
:lmao2: . You nailed it.

Yep, this is just another tool to use to shut down oppostion to the party in power. I can see it being used to shut down bloggers who disagree with the Messiah. Give it time. All he needs now is to replace one or two Supreme Court Justices with the likes of Sotomayor and then this law will past thru the high court.

[Binky]

Yes, but that is too vague and subjective. Are people going to be locked up for causing "emotional distress" to someone by calling them a name? If so, it is an impediment to the 1st Amendment.


I haven't a clue. I guess we'll have to wait for someone to call another a name, find out if that person is distressed over it and see what transpires from it. :confused:

[Smurf-Herder]

I haven't a clue. I guess we'll have to wait for someone to call another a name, find out if that person is distressed over it and see what transpires from it. :confused:

This looks like an opening for trial lawyers to make some extra cash on frivolous suites.

The vague way this is worded, it could very well be used against things done by people on this board.

[bluejunk44]

It's needed. You may or may not be aware, but people use the internet to damage others they know personally in their area. It's a vicious tool when people put their mind to it.

Imagine all the shit some people don't like in real life, but are too scared or shy to do anything about it. That completely goes away with the internet. Remember the greater internet dickwad theory:

normal person + anonymity = dickwad

If you need proof of that just look at this board. Do you really think some of these guys go up to strangers on the street and talk to them the way they post to strangers here? I seriously doubt it. Just look at some of the posts by SeniorChief and kres24GT. If they talk to strangers in real life the way they do here they would eventually get the shit beaten out of them or shot. They sure as hell wouldn't pull that shit if they went into an unfriendly neighborhood. They would not survive.

[kres24GT]

It's needed. You may or may not be aware, but people use the internet to damage others they know personally in their area. It's a vicious tool when people put their mind to it.

Imagine all the shit some people don't like in real life, but are too scared or shy to do anything about it. That completely goes away with the internet. Remember the greater internet dickwad theory:

normal person + anonymity = dickwad

If you need proof of that just look at this board. Do you really think some of these guys go up to strangers on the street and talk to them the way they post to strangers here? I seriously doubt it. Just look at some of the posts by SeniorChief and kres24GT. If they talk to strangers in real life the way they do here they would eventually get the shit beaten out of them or shot. They sure as hell wouldn't pull that shit if they went into an unfriendly neighborhood. They would not survive.


LMAO @ this pussy.

[MintJulep]

It's needed. You may or may not be aware, but people use the internet to damage others they know personally in their area. It's a vicious tool when people put their mind to it.

Imagine all the shit some people don't like in real life, but are too scared or shy to do anything about it. That completely goes away with the internet. Remember the greater internet dickwad theory:

normal person + anonymity = dickwad

If you need proof of that just look at this board. Do you really think some of these guys go up to strangers on the street and talk to them the way they post to strangers here? I seriously doubt it. Just look at some of the posts by SeniorChief and kres24GT. If they talk to strangers in real life the way they do here they would eventually get the shit beaten out of them or shot. They sure as hell wouldn't pull that shit if they went into an unfriendly neighborhood. They would not survive.So, you'd prefer that speech which offends you be silenced? Is that what you mean?

[doctordog]

It's needed. You may or may not be aware, but people use the internet to damage others they know personally in their area. It's a vicious tool when people put their mind to it.

Imagine all the shit some people don't like in real life, but are too scared or shy to do anything about it. That completely goes away with the internet. Remember the greater internet dickwad theory:

normal person + anonymity = dickwad

If you need proof of that just look at this board. Do you really think some of these guys go up to strangers on the street and talk to them the way they post to strangers here? I seriously doubt it. Just look at some of the posts by SeniorChief and kres24GT. If they talk to strangers in real life the way they do here they would eventually get the shit beaten out of them or shot. They sure as hell wouldn't pull that shit if they went into an unfriendly neighborhood. They would not survive.

I told a guy to Fuck off today, it is not against the law to do that.

[Cat slave]

it means if you go out of your way to cause harm that you can be held responsible

It states that if someone says something that "offends" someone.....and we know that
being offended is the favorite pass time of all too many people anymore,
and this law for the word police is an attack on our free speech rights.

Who decides what is "hate" speech? Whoever gets offended by it, thats
who.

This offends me!!!!!

[Cat slave]

So, you'd prefer that speech which offends you be silenced? Is that what you mean?

Of course!

[Cat slave]

Another victory for those who hate free speech. If you let words on a computer screen affect you, you are better off killing yourself, your genes are too weak to be apart of the pool.


Thats where evolution and survival of the fittest comes in. The shallow end
of the gene pool comes to mind too.

[Cat slave]

It's needed. You may or may not be aware, but people use the internet to damage others they know personally in their area. It's a vicious tool when people put their mind to it.

Imagine all the shit some people don't like in real life, but are too scared or shy to do anything about it. That completely goes away with the internet. Remember the greater internet dickwad theory:

normal person + anonymity = dickwad

If you need proof of that just look at this board. Do you really think some of these guys go up to strangers on the street and talk to them the way they post to strangers here? I seriously doubt it. Just look at some of the posts by SeniorChief and kres24GT. If they talk to strangers in real life the way they do here they would eventually get the shit beaten out of them or shot. They sure as hell wouldn't pull that shit if they went into an unfriendly neighborhood. They would not survive.


People dont always like other people...so what is your point?

[Moby]

This looks like an opening for trial lawyers to make some extra cash on frivolous suites.

The vague way this is worded, it could very well be used against things done by people on this board.
Isn't this what Seedy has tried to make real over and over again? I'd love to hear his comments on this. He lives for this type of shit.

[bluejunk44]

I don't think you guys at all understand what people are doing. Has nothing to do with simply being offended. Some pieces of shit people put for the effort and effectively ruin other people's lives.

My example about people on this board and dickwads in general is to illustrate the point that many people turn into assholes on the internet because they are too gutless to do it in real life. It's much easier to attack.

If you go around telling strangers to fuck off then I think you have more serious problems to worry over.


Again, think for a moment and consider the current state of the internet and things like social networking. You can do a lot of serious damage. If you did it outside of the internet you'd get in trouble as well.

[disrupter]

coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person

This is wildly broad.

It borders on restricting free speech.

I know i & probably at least half the people on this board are already guilty of this.

This would have to be reigned in to knowingly [& probably repeatedly] doing this to someone who was quite young or otherwise quite
clearly emotionally/psychologically fragile.

As worded i am quite sure this is unconstitutional.

More political cheap moves for spineless, unconstitutional, either idiot or deceitful congresspersons.

[bluejunk44]

I'm not arguing that it couldn't benefit from better wording to be more specific. Only that such a law is needed.

[disrupter]

Well i am sure it is unconstitutional according to the limited text in this thread.

Good law must be crafted with care, & some distance from the hottest of our emotions is almost without exceptions essential.

Are there bad, injurious things that happen? yes.
But we have to be very specific about what they are & not just [possibly inadvertently] thoughtlessly jump on an emotional band wagon.

We can & possibly should create a law, but practically speaking proving 'knowing' or 'reasonably expecting' that someone is psychologically/mentally fragile in completely evidenceless cyberspace is going to be quite difficult.

Understand your best efforts are mostly going to reign in only the worst & most grossly obvious cases of malicious injury.
It might be a useful adjunct to human traffickers who use cyberspace to snare people.

Again this goes into the completely subjective realm of the mind, which is about as non-objective as we can get.

One has to be careful about over-vilifying people.

The best advice is be open & available to your children so they may turn to you,
as well as very sensitive to when they are severely psychologically weak or injured.
If you intercede with delicate love, someday, probably decades from now they will forgive your intrusion.

[kres24GT]

This is wildly broad.

It borders on restricting free speech.

I know i & probably at least half the people on this board are already guilty of this.

This would have to be reigned in to knowingly [& probably repeatedly] doing this to someone who was quite young or otherwise quite
clearly emotionally/psychologically fragile.

As worded i am quite sure this is unconstitutional.

More political cheap moves for spineless, unconstitutional, either idiot or deceitful congresspersons.


A better law would be to euthanize anyone who actually got their feelings hurt from what someone said to them on the internet.

[doctordog]

I don't think you guys at all understand what people are doing. Has nothing to do with simply being offended. Some pieces of shit people put for the effort and effectively ruin other people's lives.

My example about people on this board and dickwads in general is to illustrate the point that many people turn into assholes on the internet because they are too gutless to do it in real life. It's much easier to attack.

If you go around telling strangers to fuck off then I think you have more serious problems to worry over.


Again, think for a moment and consider the current state of the internet and things like social networking. You can do a lot of serious damage. If you did it outside of the internet you'd get in trouble as well.

You sound like a weakling that can't protect himself and needs a guardian close by at all times, how sad.

[disrupter]

I presume that is a perverse facetious comment kres24GT?

Right leaning people should not be talking about killing 'unacceptable' people as a 'policy of government', yes?

I do remember the first time i saw someone flaming someone on the internet. I must say i was shocked.
Now my own flamethrower is never set lower than full raging Armageddon.

Perhaps i am now too inconsiderate, but when it comes to a large population of war criminals & their supporters in my very own nation, as a citizen i have to respond without any equivocation.

Perhaps psychologically fragile people need to become slowly acclimated to the rawness of the internet, & learn that 99.9% of it is just hot flaming air. With a slightly jaded or savvy parent or pal as companion/mentor.
The ease of lying & pure verbal deception is something everyone needs to keep aware of.

People of potentially high intellect may often be very sensitive people. They need to develop the skills of psychological/mental distancing & skepticism. Like building in a delay period before committing to belief, filtered through fact comparisons & skepticism. Hopefully still retaining that fine delicate internal imagination as their private harbor.