Arizona has just passed a law that makes it illegal to be rude on the internet.

Scarecrow von Steuben

Scarecrow von Steuben

I'm very friendly.
There's apparently a lot about this on the internet; a cursory google search turned up these:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/30/arizona-law-would-criminalize-being-annoying-on-the-internet/
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002505281
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/11387-arizona-legislature-passes-internet-censorship-bill
http://www.technobuffalo.com/internet/arizona-criminalizes-lewd-and-annoying-acts-on-the-internet/
http://www.zeropaid.com/bbs/threads/64501-Arizona-law-would-criminalize-being-lewd-or-annoying-on-the-Internet-(RawStory)


This is insane and frankly terrifying, even though I don't live in Arizona. I'm guessing (hoping) that its enforcement will be blocked due to the first amendment, but I really have no idea how this legal shit works.

Discuss.
 
Can we pass a law that makes it illegal for Arizona to be annoying in real life?
 
Screw Arizona :yoshi:

But in all seriousness, this is ridiculous. How would they enforce it anyway? There are an endless amount of rude and annoying people, and the internet is simply a place for them to gather. I could understand repeated assault, which is why there are admins, but if someone can't handle a little heckling, they shouldn't be on the internet. The internet is a rude place, and people should get used to it.

EDIT: No disrespect to Arizona meant (though this is the kind of joking around I mentioned people should be able to take).
 
Simple. We all boycott this law by being incredibly rude. They then arrest everyone. The end.

...or we can just wait for the government to screw up their own law.
 
From the bill:

It is unlawful for any person, with intent to terrify, intimidate,
threaten, harass, annoy or offend, to use a telephone 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 also unlawful to otherwise disturb by repeated
anonymous telephone calls ELECTRONIC OR DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS the peace,
quiet or right of privacy of any person at the place where the telephone call or calls COMMUNICATIONS were received.

The areas struck through are the bill as it currently exists, and the words in capital letters are the changes made by Arizona's House of Representatives.

Those curious can read the whole thing here.
 
but... we all adore Turb for being so impolite and mean

this law is unacceptable
 
So anyone can just say "I find So-and-So annoying", and poor So-and-So gets her butt thrown in jail?
 
Mario4Ever said:
From the bill:

It is unlawful for any person, with intent to terrify, intimidate,
threaten, harass, annoy or offend, to use a telephone 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 also unlawful to otherwise disturb by repeated
anonymous telephone calls ELECTRONIC OR DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS the peace,
quiet or right of privacy of any person at the place where the telephone call or calls COMMUNICATIONS were received.

The areas struck through are the bill as it currently exists, and the words in capital letters are the changes made by Arizona's House of Representatives.

Those curious can read the whole thing here.
Click to expand...
So yeah, this is more an upgrade of existing anti-harassment laws via the telephone.

It's still got a lot of problems (such as the lack of limitations to one-to-one communications as existed due to telephone laws, the vagueness of definitions making it hard to classify what would be criminalized, the issues with jurisdictions), but the underlying idea is well-meaning.

Also, Vinnie and Magikrazy, burden of proof. The accuser is the one required to back up their claims with evidence. You can't just say "So-and-So is annoying" and get them jailed, you have to provide clear evidence that So-and-So was acting in a manner illegal under the law.
 
Augie Doggie said:
But in all seriousness, this is ridiculous. How would they enforce it anyway? There are an endless amount of rude and annoying people, and the internet is simply a place for them to gather. I could understand repeated assault, which is why there are admins, but if someone can't handle a little heckling, they shouldn't be on the internet. The internet is a rude place, and people should get used to it.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing they'll utterly fail to enforce it, but it's still unsettling, especially the fact that most people had never even heard of it until it was too late.


Anyway, I don't want to be a fearmonger- this is, as Utsachao said, mostly intended to prevent harassment- but it's the ease of its abuse that scares me.
 
I know someone that's going to have loads of fun with this. (seriously, governmental policy will never succeed at stopping anything like this)
 
If this isn't a joke, it sure as hell looks like it.

I mean hell America couldn't even abolish ALCOHOL, let alone Arizona cutting off rude comments on the INTERNET(or attempting to pass a law about it).


I guess it could mean their heart is in the right place, but quite frankly, this will fail harder than previous end of the world predictions.
 
Zae said:
If this isn't a joke, it sure as hell looks like it.

I mean hell America couldn't even abolish ALCOHOL, let alone Arizona cutting off rude comments on the INTERNET(or attempting to pass a law about it).


I guess it could mean their heart is in the right place, but quite frankly, this will fail harder than previous end of the world predictions.
Click to expand...

Oh, it will fail, all right.
 
There's no way this could even be enforced.

Gambling in the home is illegal or something like that here in SC, but the police don't break into people's houses to try and arrest them. Same thing goes here.
 
Who are in charge of Arizona's governmental positions?
 
I think it's wrong for laws to be passed for something that subjective. On a similar note, in Fresno California it's illegal to annoy a lizard in a city park. (sauce)
 
GreenDisaster said:
According to Wikipedia, the Governor's Jan Brewer, and the Secretary of State is Ken Bennett.
Click to expand...

Were they responsible for passing previous stupid laws? :mad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back