Oh Dear... If this passes, it will not end well...

[English Mobster]

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-1966

HR 1966 IH


111th CONGRESS


1st Session


H. R. 1966


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



IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES


April 2, 2009


Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California (for herself, Ms. KAPTUR, Mr. YARMUTH, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, Mrs. CAPPS, Mr. BISHOP of New York, Mr. BRALEY of Iowa, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. HARE, Mr. HIGGINS, Mr. CLAY, Mr. SARBANES, Mr. DAVIS of Illinois, Mr. COURTNEY, and Mr. KIRK) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary



A BILL


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

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,



SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act’.



SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:

(1) Four out of five of United States children aged 2 to 17 live in a home where either they or their parents access the Internet.


(2) Youth who create Internet content and use social networking sites are more likely to be targets of cyberbullying.


(3) Electronic communications provide anonymity to the perpetrator and the potential for widespread public distribution, potentially making them severely dangerous and cruel to youth.


(4) Online victimizations are associated with emotional distress and other psychological problems, including depression.


(5) Cyberbullying can cause psychological harm, including depression; negatively impact academic performance, safety, and the well-being of children in school; force children to change schools; and in some cases lead to extreme violent behavior, including murder and suicide.


(6) Sixty percent of mental health professionals who responded to the Survey of Internet Mental Health Issues report having treated at least one patient with a problematic Internet experience in the previous five years; 54 percent of these clients were 18 years of age or younger.




SEC. 3. CYBERBULLYING.

(a) In General- Chapter 41 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:



‘Sec. 881. Cyberbullying

‘(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.’.



(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 41 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

‘881. Cyberbullying.’.
In English:
They are trying to pass an amendment to U.S. code which outlaws anything deemed as "cyberbullying".

There are 2 ways they can enforce this:


Dispatch FBI agents to every damn site in the internet (hah)
Use a "Report" system, possibly a government-run website which would probably walk you through the steps of obtaining the IP of the person who is "Bullying" you.

The latter is, in effect, like crying out "Sexual Harassment!", and now means that ANY kind of move which someone thinks can be considered "cyberbullying" can now get your ass in jail.
So that means if you start a flame war, and someone reports you to the government, they will come down on your ass. While that may seem a bit extreme, remember, all a girl has to do is cry, "rape!" and the FBI is all over the thing. Now imagine you hurt someone's feelings over the internet. They can simply cry out "cyberbullying!", and suddenly the FBI is spying on you.
Spying?

Pay special attention to this little tidbit:

‘(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.’.This means, if they suspect you of cyberbullying, Uncle Sam has every right to spy on any pings sent from your IP, effectively spying on you.

Oh, and it also kinda-legalizes Bush's infamous "Spying on people's telephones" move a while back.

The potential this bill has for abuse is mind-boggling. While the bill itself states that cyberbullying is "using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior", it does not state how "severe" the behavior must be.
OK, so the FBI coming down on you for starting a flame war is pushing it a bit. But what about sites which pick on celebrities, like "I hate Hannah Montana"? Wouldn't those be considered "cyberbullying"? They ARE "using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior", after all. The blogs ARE "Electronic communications [which] provide anonymity... and the potential for widespread public distribution, potentially making them severely dangerous and cruel to youth." So you can't even have a fucking blog hating on a celebrity. Or, in fact, even a blog which talks about the mean bully who took your lunch money and is a general asshole. DON'T SAY IT OR HE'LL REPORT YOU.
Doesn't that infringe on our free speech?
Suddenly, the things we say on the internet can land us in jail?
Oh, wait, that's nothing new (http://news.cnet.com/Create-an-e-annoyance,-go-to-jail/2010-1028_3-6022491.html).



http://blessedarethecheesemakers.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/hippie1.jpg
It's the MAN, man, he's trying to limit our RIGHTS, man. Every American has the right to say what they FEEL about someone, man.


This bill, effectively, gives the right for you to be fined or IMPRISONED if someone takes something the wrong way and cuts themselves over it, even through IMs or texts. If we say something which didn't come out right (a big problem on the internet, where sarcasm isn't always apparent), the FBI vans will be at your door.

Maybe I'm blowing things out of proportion. Maybe the government will actually be responsible with this bill. Hah.
But, exaggeration or not, this bill DOES limit the freedom of speech on the internet, and, just like sexual harassment laws, there is a major potential for abuse.
Unless you really think the FBI is going to watch every damn transmission on the internet, PLUS all the texts which go back and forth. This IS going to be a user-reported system. As such, it can and will be abused. If the FBI is smart enough to catch that is anyone's call.

Those are my thoughts on the issue. Feel free to analyze it yourself, maybe I'm just becoming another Dane.

[Alwin Roth]

Well Fuck me Sideways...

[English Mobster]

A side note: This could also fuck up people on sites like 4chan BIG time, even if the comments they make are jokes.
In fact, it was probably the things 4chan itself is infamous for which caused this bill to be written.

[Needles]

I don't think it will pass, well I hope it doesn't.

But..if it did, who would go through the trouble of finding someone online and actually trying to get them impressioned?

[sdavis117]

Well look at the bright side, this will be the death of /b/.

[Needles]

Well look at the bright side, this will be the death of /b/.

But...I like my internet memes :(

[English Mobster]

I don't think it will pass, well I hope it doesn't.

But..if it did, who would go through the trouble of finding someone online and actually trying to get them impressioned?
First, the FBI will have an online cyberbullying center. There, they may or may not walk people through how to obtain a cyberbully's IP. If they don't walk them through it, a simple link to a bully's profile on a website will allow the FBI to find out anyway.
Then, there are people whose JOB it is to look at everything this person they've marked as a "bully" does. They already have it in place for people who they think are a national security threat (http://www.cracked.com/blog/?p=10424). So they sit at work all day, listening to your calls, reading your IMs and texts, and trying to figure out if you're a bully OR doing any other things they might consider "illegal".

So if you're on one of their watchlists and you say to your friend, "Let's smoke some weed" or "Let's plan a coup to bring down the government", suddenly, the FBI as at your doorstep, arresting you for doing drugs/being a "terrorist".

[Arteen]

HR 1966 IH


111th CONGRESS


1st Session


H. R. 1966


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



IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES


April 2, 2009


Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California (for herself, Ms. KAPTUR, Mr. YARMUTH, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, Mrs. CAPPS, Mr. BISHOP of New York, Mr. BRALEY of Iowa, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. HARE, Mr. HIGGINS, Mr. CLAY, Mr. SARBANES, Mr. DAVIS of Illinois, Mr. COURTNEY, and Mr. KIRK) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary



A BILL


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

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,



SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act’.



SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:

(1) Four Five out of five of United States children aged 2 to 17 live in a home where either they or their parents access the Internet the real world.


(2) Youth who create Internet content go outside and use social networking sites talk to people are more likely to be targets of cyberbullying.


(3) Electronic communications Rumors provide anonymity to the perpetrator and the potential for widespread public distribution, potentially making them severely dangerous and cruel to youth.


(4) Online victimizations are Life is associated with emotional distress and other psychological problems, including depression.


(5) Cyberbullying can cause psychological harm, including depression; negatively impact academic performance, safety, and the well-being of children in school; force children to change schools; and in some cases lead to extreme violent behavior, including murder and suicide.


(6) Sixty percent of Probably all mental health professionals who responded to the Survey of Internet Mental Health Issues report having treated at least one every patient with a problematic Internet life experience in the previous five years; 54 percent of these clients were 18 years of age or younger.
How silly.

[PwN Lone]

Off-topic: For some reason I thought this topic was related to the rumoured passing of the Blasphemy law over here. I guess not.

On-topic: Well, it looks like sites like ED and 4chan are gonna be going down the shitter if this goes through.

@Arteen: Nice edit of the original.

[Kalub]

Free Speech, press.


I can do what ever I want on the internetz you butt-hurt fags, so please, kindly eat a dick.

[flibitijibibo]

Anyone remember DON'T MESS WITH (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jake_Brahm) FOOTBALL (http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Jake_Brahm)? It seems this law is just for petty stuff, which is unnecessary.

[FRain]

If passed, this will fail horribly. I can already see riots and shit coming up if it does get passed.

[TVTyrant]

Wont pass.

[MetKiller Joe]

Free Speech, press.


I can do what ever I want on the internetz you butt-hurt fags, so please, kindly eat a dick.

Yeah.. I have to agree. I have the freedom of speech in this country. I'm sorry if people can't take a joke anymore. That isn't my problem.

[Warsaw]

Leave it to California to introduce shit like this. No offence to anyone who lives in CA, but that state seriously needs to get over itself.

[SnaFuBAR]

it's official, my e-peen has become too large, and the gov't hates me for it :ohdear:

[kid908]

Well this kills pretty much a whole lot of the Bill of Rights. They no longer need a warrant to tap anything anymore. they just need 1 guy (it can be their own guy) to report someone and bam!, you're officially being monitored without a warrant.

You DO NOT have to right to remain silent, anything you type will be used against you.

[Warsaw]

Even if this does get passed, someone will eventually take it to the Supreme Court, and they generally find stuff like this unconstitutional. Bam, end of law. Sure, not a fool-proof check, but the likelihood is high.

[Disaster]

The gov't shouldn't even have the power to pass something like this because face it, the way humanity is going now, fucktards are going to get elected and eventually pass shit like this.

If it gets passed, the gov't now has the power to deprive us of our constitutional rights :smith:

[Warsaw]

Pitchforks, rawr!

[Disaster]

Where is a riot emote when you need one

[DrunkenSamus]

Leave it to California to introduce shit like this. No offence to anyone who lives in CA, but that state seriously needs to get over itself.

California sucks in terms of politics. In terms of life, it's awesome. I'm going to go surfing in the ocean and then night snowboarding on the mountains. :v:

[Warsaw]

Well, you can get the surfing done in Florida just as easy. Snowboarding, not so easy. Also, 8% taxes suck.

=|

[ultama121]

This better not pass. This is nothing short of fucking ridiculous...

[OmegaDragon]

Government: The Biggest Newfags on teh net

Seriously though, I hope this doesn't pass.

[mR_r0b0to]

it's a good thing im a p cool guy on my internet

[Heathen]

what ultama said

[sdavis117]

Obviously Congressmen are butthurt over people trolling them using contact info from their campaign sites.

[Syuusuke]

looks like somebody was cyberbullied

[cheezdue]

Pitchforks, rawr!

WE SHALL SHARPEN OUR PITCHFORKS!!!

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/03/20/article-1163328-03F75F34000005DC-808_468x327.jpg

[thehoodedsmack]

Lol. What jurisdiction do they have when someone is cyberbullied by say, a Canadian? Or someone from the UK? Australia perhaps? I think they forgot that the internet isn't an Americans-only party. Best of luck, guys. I hope it doesn't pass.

[Llama Juice]

Lol. What jurisdiction do they have when someone is cyberbullied by say, a Canadian? Or someone from the UK? Australia perhaps? I think they forgot that the internet isn't an Americans-only party. Best of luck, guys. I hope it doesn't pass.

It's not?

Doesn't America own the internet and all it's series of tubes?

We're America, we can do WHATEVER THE FUCK WE WANT.:smugsome:

[kid908]

I say the World Courts has to decide on the international cyberbullyings. It's way too reddickculously gay to pass. (yes i spelled it that way on purpose).

[Dotkito92]

I hope this gets passed. I know I would benefit from it.

[Rorschach]

Who's the cocksucker who coined the term "cyberbullying" anyway? How the fuck are we supposed to take our poiliticians seriously and entrust them to run the country when they're using the schoolyard lingo of the average four-year-old?

I mean, Jesus Christ, what the fuck kind of pussy generation are we voluntarily churning out here when we have to make out the loser in a kindergarten brawl over a Flintstones telephone to be a hero? If these people feel like jumping into oncoming traffic because they are so uncomfortable with someone else not approving of what company made their shoes, I say FUCK 'EM, let 'em die. Why the hell do we feel the need to keep picking these people up?

Anyone who went through that as a kid knows that the adaptations you have to make are for everyone's good. It's the world's way of reminding you you're inadequate, so you'd better get your shit together or pack your shit for good. It's survival of the fittest, folks. Let nature take its course! The jackoff who swallows a jug of antifreeze because he gives a fuck about the fashion opinions of a twelve-year-old girl won't be popping out and bringing up future members of society with that girl; it's quite a simple premise, NATURE KNOWS BEST.

There, I said it. Guess I'll have to get locked away with the /b/ crowd.

[Agnaiel]

Isn't a bill supposed to go through the Judicial branch before it gets turned into a law so that they can check to see if it goes against any of the Amendments?

And, besides, it still has to pass.

[Cojafoji]

This was bound to happen. I'm not surprised, but I can't say that I support the bill. Anonymous stupidity is one of the hallmarks of the web.

[Dwood]

You DO NOT have to right to remain silent, anything you type will be used against you.

I don't think you understand what you're saying....

@Ag: Noooo it only goes through the judicial if there's a lawsuit.

@sdavis: LOLOLOOL Greatest comment ever.

[Donut]

lol you guys are fucked

E: ok now that i have actually read the thread / posts now, i think if it gets passed, somebody should be a martyr and set up a fight on the internet, then have a friend report them. as soon as they start to be monitored, start buying shit online, then complain later on that the fbi stole your credit card number.

if that doesnt work, then give your number to a friend and say that the government remotely fried your defenses on your computer and *somebody* was able to get in and steal your credit card number. take to court, watch as law is revoked

.... or you go to jail.

[p0lar_bear]

(2) Youth who create Internet content and use social networking sites act like morons who need to learn their place in the social chain are more likely to be targets of cyberbullying.

ftfcongress

[Heathen]

This is too unconstitutional...

[Cojafoji]

This is too unconstitutional...
how? it's the same way in real life. you harass someone, you get arrested. you punch them, you get arrested. you tell them that you're going to murder them, you get arrested.

This is merely an extension of the fact that, just because you have the right to free speech, does not mean that you can use that right to hurt others.

by lame extension: just because you can yell "FIRE OH GOD WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE" in a theater doesn't mean that you're allowed.

"The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that the United States Congress has a right to prevent. " - Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes

applicable precedent.

also see:

civil rights act: title 7.

&

Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson

[Random]

Lol, I am going to report all of you guys for shits and giggles.

And think of what SVC could do, with all the shit we gave him over a few years.

I see /b/ abusing any system the government sets in place.

[SnaFuBAR]

I'm reporting you all to the internet police!

:ohdear:

[MetKiller Joe]

how? it's the same way in real life. you harass someone, you get arrested. you punch them, you get arrested. you tell them that you're going to murder them, you get arrested.

Yet the Westboro Church doesn't get arrested for insulting people that fought for my freedom, at their funeral no less.

I'm not going to fight for their freedom, because I think it is wrong what they are doing (I'm just giving an example please don't nitpick).

I love this country because I can tell somebody my opinion of them frankly and honestly. They can then choose not to deal with me. /response to Coja

You don't have to go on the internet. You don't have to communicate with these people. Lastly, you don't have to commit suicide because somebody either just insulted the way you look or who you are. That's just insecurity.

If this bill passes, which it won't due to the constitution, but if it does, and on the flip side these are politicians, they will make like the RIAA and start screening random people. If you happen to be one of the poor bastards that gets caught, well, you did something to get in their radar.

It is a pseudo-fear tactic to make Western parents think their government that they pay taxes to can control something like 4chan, which they can't. And if they do, like they tried with PirateBay, it will be a scratch.

[Sel]

You know, this book (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_We_Suck), is turning out to be a more than worthwhile purchase -- I mean with the US government backing it up all the time.

[Jean-Luc]

God love Denis Leary :D

[Sel]

God love Denis Leary :D

Fuckin hell yes.

Gonna start a thread for that book when I get home, it's fucking incredible.

[Mass]

I wish that with every bill that comes into congress somebody was paid to jump in right at the end of the discussion and say:

"HOLD THE FUCK ON, WHAT ARE THE GOALS OF THIS LEGISLATION, WHAT CHANGES DOES IT SEEK TO PROCURE IN OUR SOCIETY?"
"Why to stop people from committing 'cyber-bullying' of course!"
"DO WE HAVE ANY REASON TO BELIEVE BASED ON RESEARCH AND LOGIC THAT THIS LAW WILL EVEN COME REMOTELY CLOSE TO FULFILLING THAT GOAL?"
"..."

Because maybe then our congresspeople could think about whether somebody who molests kids on the internet is really going to stop because the feds fuck up somebody's life a couple times a day with their insane internet enforcement powers.

Not just for this bill, but for all, I think if they looked at their goals and then at what research shows will happen with new laws on the books, I mean, fuck.

[Sanctus]

This is ludicrous. For one, you can't treat "cyberbullying" as you would real bullying. It just gives too much anonymity for one thing, and the line between free speech and bullying can be blurred when nobody is physically banging your head against a locker while they're saying how bad you look. If they're basically talking trash to you on a chat room, you have the freedom to ignore it, as you would with im's and emails. Blogs are a different story however. That should get special attention, since the reader has no control of the number of people seeing it. The people attempting to pass this bill, in my opinion, have failed to see the potential problems that could arise from this, such as the government using this amendment for other means. I have the feeling that there may be underlying alterior motives for this bill. Remember the right to carry guns in national parks in that tax bill?? If the government is willing to spend the money to dedicate the man-hours and resources to this bill, then it will become evident.

[Heathen]

how? it's the same way in real life. you harass someone, you get arrested. you punch them, you get arrested. you tell them that you're going to murder them, you get arrested.

I can tell anyone I want that I am going to murder them...
I just cant murder them.
But you cant murder or punch anyone over the net.

[rossmum]

Australians all let us rejoice, for while our laws may be fucking dumb at least they haven't tried to pull any shit like this~

[TVTyrant]

Australians all let us rejoice, for while our laws may be fucking dumb at least they haven't tried to pull any shit like this~
Except for the whole clean up the internet you and Bod were in an uproar about a couple of months ago :realsmug: I like the new quick smiley bar

[Neuro Guro]

-

[Gwunty]

:allears: my hero neuro

[Sel]

and then eating them "Cannibal Holocaust" style.


I like where this is going, especially after watching that movie just last night!

[English Mobster]

Is... Is it bad that I think that's actually a good idea?

[Disaster]

Is... Is it bad that I think that's actually a good idea?
Not at all. Seems perfectly civilized to me. :downs:

[Encoded]

This is probably the STUPIDEST idea Congress has had in a while.
There is no way in HELL that they'll be able to control the internet, even if it is on a case-by-case reporting system. There would be too much abuse.

God, I hope this doesn't get fucking passed.

[Kalub]

Damn government raping our churches and burning our women!

[p0lar_bear]

Damn government raping our churches and burning our women!

They're so back-asswards they probably would actually do just that.

[Bodzilla]

Fuckin hell yes.

Gonna start a thread for that book when I get home, it's fucking incredible.
he copied bill hicks entire act >_<

he's a fraud >_<

The friendship ended abruptly as a result.[25] At least three stand-up comedians have gone on the record stating they believe Leary stole Hicks' material as well as his persona and attitude.[26][27][28] In an interview, when Hicks was asked why he had quit smoking, he answered, "I just wanted to see if Denis would, too."[29] In another interview, Hicks famously told an interviewer: "I have a scoop for you. I stole his (Leary's) act. I camouflaged it with punchlines, and to really throw people off, I did it before he did."[30]

[Jean-Luc]

he copied bill hicks entire act >_<

he's a fraud >_<

I personally don't give a damn if he stole the material or not. What matters to me is "Does he deliver the joke well and can he make me laugh, regardless of where the joke came from." In Leary's case, yeah, he made me laugh hard. I simply give complete credit to Bill Hicks for creating the joke, and I just enjoy someone else delivering it. Do I think Leary should make money off of someone else's act? No, I don't. However, I don't think he should be crucified for simply retelling the joke.

[Bodzilla]

Australians all let us rejoice, for while our laws may be fucking dumb at least they haven't tried to pull any shit like this~
hows that bill of rights coming al....l. oh wait.

>_<

[Sel]

he copied bill hicks entire act >_<

he's a fraud >_<

For all you (or I for that matter) know, it may have been him acting out of jealousy at leary making a good comedy routine.

We don't fucking know. However, Leary's newer comedic works following No Cure for Cancer (Lock'N'Load, Merry Fucking Christmas, Why We Suck) are just as funny, and show that he had, has, and still has the ability to write something of that quality.

That's why I don't give a shit if he stole it or not. He's shown he can make things just as funny as what he may or may not have stolen, and that is reason enough for me to believe that it is his work.

[Bodzilla]

hick / leary shit:
the shit with leary........... his newer comedic works is when him and bill had the fallout AND it was because of no cure for cancer when he took his persona.
I'd hate to have someone fucking steal something that made me who i was and become successfull off it.
Go back and look at hicks and you'll see what i'm talking about.


on a more related note:
http://theslackerz.com/Comics/003.jpg

[rossmum]

hows that bill of rights coming al....l. oh wait.

>_<
I know, we don't have one - but at least they aren't about to try and lock us up for trolling morons on the internet. The filter is shitty, but again, they can't do anything to us if we get around it and it's likely they'll let it die off. Even Conroy is trying to distance himself from it now.

yo bodie let's troll us some americans and laugh raucously as they report us to the internet police, but it is all to no avail!!!

[Bodzilla]

*raucous laughter*

[Sel]

*raucous laughter*

wtf

thot u didnt listen to denis leary???

[TVTyrant]

I know, we don't have one - but at least they aren't about to try and lock us up for trolling morons on the internet. The filter is shitty, but again, they can't do anything to us if we get around it and it's likely they'll let it die off. Even Conroy is trying to distance himself from it now.

yo bodie let's troll us some americans and laugh raucously as they report us to the internet police, but it is all to no avail!!!
http://www.celluloid-dreams.de/content/images/kritiken-filmbilder/team-america-world-police/team-america-world-police-1.jpg

:smug:

[ExAm]

You... You can't steal someone's persona. That's impossible.

[Warsaw]

I know, we don't have one - but at least they aren't about to try and lock us up for trolling morons on the internet. The filter is shitty, but again, they can't do anything to us if we get around it and it's likely they'll let it die off. Even Conroy is trying to distance himself from it now.

yo bodie let's troll us some americans and laugh raucously as they report us to the internet police, but it is all to no avail!!!

Except that this is still in bill stage...:realsmug:.