Arizona Bill Could Criminalize Trolling

[Tal]

Article

My first thoughts on the bill are that it is overly vague. Secondly it looks like it will be a nightmare to prove intent. What do the Lurkers think?

[Lissa]

It'll get thrown out immediately by the first person that challenges under First Amendment as States do have to follow the Bill of Rights of the US to be part of the US.

[Bolty]

1) Politician sees hot-button highly emotional political issue, e.g. "cyberbullying."
2) Politician creates law regarding hot-button issue to look pro-active.
3) Law passes because it's political suicide to go against such a law.
4) At some point, highly publicized case comes up against the law and someone is arrested for it.
5) Case goes before trial, where it is shot down for being unconstitutional.
6) Everyone loses, because the resultant trials cost the government a lot of money, which taxpayers ultimately wind up footing.

Not that I'm cynical or anything, but that's how this crap always goes.

[Jester]

Article

My first thoughts on the bill are that it is overly vague. Secondly it looks like it will be a nightmare to prove intent. What do the Lurkers think?

Poe's Law alone is enough to make this absolutely idiotic.

-Jester

[FireIceTalon]

Is the attempt to propose this bill not trolling in itself? I know it refers specifically to internet trolliing, but still. They are living in a dream world if they think this can be enforced. On second thought though....

I have to say though I got a kick out of some of the replies in the comments of that article. Didn't take long for at least one or two morons to call this bill "Communist"....rofl. Just once again shows the idiocy of the vast majority of the American populace, who still cannot differentiate between Communism (whether or not you agree with Communism is irrelevant here) and what this bill REALLY would be (Fascist), two very opposite and distinct systems that bear no similarities to one another. With this kind of ignorance, it is no wonder the State is trying to pass all these suppressive laws as of late, cause they know half the population is brain-dead.

[kandrathe]

Article

My first thoughts on the bill are that it is overly vague. Secondly it looks like it will be a nightmare to prove intent. What do the Lurkers think?

I think the internet is a new medium that doesn't have a very good legal framework, hence issue with copyrights, plagiarism, bullying, etc. We know what those things look like in the *real* world, but the existing laws fall short when applied to the virtual world. I think there does need to be some level of regulation of content to protect privacy, and especially for minors. Existing laws (copyrights, slander, threats, etc. ) where insufficient should be amended to account for new technologies.

But, I don't think our nanny state needs to go so far as to protect peoples "feelings". Nor should the law impose its interpretation on what is obscene, lewd, or lascivious -- and whether the participants are "into that sort of thing". I don't understand "sexting", but it's none of my concern what other people do with their iphones. Now, maybe randomly sending naked pictures of yourself to strangers is akin to public nudity ordinences, etc. I am frequently annoyed by e-mails I get, but I kind of view that as my problem more than my bosses.

[Sir_Die_alot]

I think Bolty goes to jail when he trolls his own forum.

[eppie]

1) Politician sees hot-button highly emotional political issue, e.g. "cyberbullying."
2) Politician creates law regarding hot-button issue to look pro-active.
3) Law passes because it's political suicide to go against such a law.
4) At some point, highly publicized case comes up against the law and someone is arrested for it.
5) Case goes before trial, where it is shot down for being unconstitutional.
6) Everyone loses, because the resultant trials cost the government a lot of money, which taxpayers ultimately wind up footing.

Not that I'm cynical or anything, but that's how this crap always goes.

Well who can blame them for trying? They know that every ridiculous privacy breaking anti-piracy laws get passed.
The only thing missing is a few big multinationals that say they loose money because of this....if they find those you will have a new law in no-time.

[kandrathe]

Well who can blame them for trying? They know that every ridiculous privacy breaking anti-piracy laws get passed.
The only thing missing is a few big multinationals that say they loose money because of this....if they find those you will have a new law in no-time.

It seems to get bi-partisan support here, and not related to money. It's like the crime bills. Who is not for stopping crime? That is the problem. They are presented in such a way as to all be "Stop XYZ Abuse and Endangerment ACT of 20XX". A vote against the bill will be crafted as a vote for "Abuse and Endangerment" at the next election cycle.

Up until the citizenry get angry because their child just got tossed in prison for calling someone a bad name, or for sending their SO a risque photo from their iphone.

Cyber-bullying is a problem, but criminalizing 90% of internet behavior is not going to resolve the issue. My bigger fear is that we have 1000's of legislators passing crappy laws in the States (let alone the Federal Congress), and the SCOTUS only has 9 shovels to dig us out. Before long you know what we'll be covered in.