Arizona Politicians Scramble To Adjust Internet Censorship Bill After The Internet Mocks Them For Being Clueless
from the this-won't-end-well dept
You know what's a bad sign? When you're a state legislature, and you pass what's clearly an unconstitutional law that criminalizes using technology to "annoy or offend" others -- and then you have to scramble after-the-fact to amend the bill you already passed. Yes, thanks to a rather loud public mocking of Arizona politicians for ignoring the First Amendment in its internet censorship bill, the Arizona legislature is trying to amend the bill quickly.Here's a thought, though: if you passed a bill so bad that people around the globe are mocking you, perhaps it suggests you don't know what you're doing. At that point, shouldn't you back away from mucking with the internet, and leave that to the professionals who actually understand technology? Somehow, diving back in and pretending that this time you'll get it right doesn't inspire confidence. And, in fact, the details suggest that any amendments considered at this point will almost certainly still be First Amendment violations.
“Even so narrowed, the statute is unconstitutional. You simply cannot prohibit emails that are said to be intended to offend. That violates the First Amendment flat out,” said University of Chicago Law School professor Geoffrey Stone, who specializes in constitutional law. “You can prohibit email if the recipient has requested you to stop sending them. That’s different -- but that’s not what this says.”Still, I think the most ridiculous words of all come from Rep. Steve Farley from Phoenix whose statement on the bill is really quite stunning:
"I know people are focusing on unintended consequences of the bill, but I don’t think that's realistic," Farley said. "I think this is a wakeup call that we should be civil online and in society in general. I don’t think it's right we should ever be able to threaten violence against each other online."I love how he doesn't explain why the unintended consequences aren't "realistic." He just insists that's the case. Of course, anyone who's actually been around policymaking (especially when it comes to technology) knows that there are always unintended consequences. And it's not hard to find unintended consequences of a bill like this that broadly outlaws "annoying" people with electronic devices.
But even more ridiculous is that second half. You don't legislate civility. We don't make a law saying you have to say "please" and "thank you." Look, some people are obnoxious jerks out there. That's not a legislative problem. Finally, his claim that people shouldn't be able to threaten violence against each other might have some weight if the bill was actually limited to people threatening violence. But it's not.
How do people like this get elected?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: arizona, censorship, cyberbullying
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Linkage: http://rt.com/usa/news/arizona-bill-conception-abortion-387/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Guess it makes sense now
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Guess it makes sense now
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That is so mind boggling stupid it may cause a aneurism trying to wrap your mind around it.
Does that mean a women can start a paternity suit against a man who she hasn't even had sex with yet???
Does that mean.....*zzzzzttbam* (head explodes)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Do 'Unborn Victims of Crime' style laws now apply to any woman not on her period at the time the crime is committed?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2012/03/birth-control-viagra-vasectomy-laws
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
from a purely technical viewpoint, a woman IS pregnant between 1-3 weeks before conception.
everything is set up and waiting for the sperm to enter the field. if they don't show for whatever reason, the womans body will abort what it set up, flushing everything down the vagina . thats called a period.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
What, exactly, is "technical" about that statement?
What sort of "scientist" are you claiming to be?
Do you agree with the premise of sperm person-hood?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Obviously your claim of being a "scientist" is either wrong or your field is something other than biology. (Maybe basket weaving?) My guess is that you are no scientist. I have my doubts that anyone well versed in science would use the term "period" to refer to menstruation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ummmm
They make sure they are in tight with as many of the local churches as possible and they state how they will uphold and fight for morality when elected. They promise a return to family values and anything else the congregation wants imposed on all the sinners and evil doers. Remember that faith doesn't require rationality (but rather abhors it).
Then that highly energized and motivated group goes out and votes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ummmm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ummmm
politicians, you know.
(here abouts, they instead have blatantly corrupt opinion polls run as news as if they were fact to discourage their opponent's supporters from voting while offering unsuportable tax cuts... heck, the current lot won the election that put them in power by promising Not to carry out their unpopular policies (that were pretty much inevitably going to happen eventually due to being fundamental to their 'more money in our pockets' ideology) which is stupid because they only promised not to do that for One term, and if you get a first term you're pretty much garanteed a second due to the weird nature of the electorate here unless you screw up most royally. a combination of that fact and the blatant propaganda campaign pretending to be reporting on the elections (those corrupt polls and onesided reports again) got them in a second time despite This time making the single most hated thing in NZ politics (government selling vital infrastructure and revenue streams to foreign interests, for the short version) the most visable part of their campaign platform. squeeked in with EXACTLY 50%+1 seats after adding in the one seat the only party willing to form a coalition with them in light of the poison that is that platform managed to get. had they got even one seat less we might have seen the, otherwise insane sounding and highly unlikely, outcome of EVERY other party forming a coalition to keep them out. ... it was that unpopular. 1/4th of the eligable voters did not vote, incidentally, so any claim that they have a mandate for such activity dies quickly)
gah, WAY off topic there. sorry. (not sorry enough to eliminate it, but still..)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Three Stages of Political Thinking
2. To Colleagues: "We'll find out what's in the bill after we've passed it."
3. To Public: "We certainly didn't intend the bill to be used for that!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Three Stages of Political Thinking
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Three Stages of Political Thinking
*panics*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Steve Farley
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Steve Farley
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Steve Farley
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Everyone else who was crazy enough to want the job had already been committed to the psych ward.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"How do people like this get elected?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "How do people like this get elected?"
Banning of political ads and public financing of campaigns.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well as long as they didn't do it online and in Arizona that's fine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Suppressing Freedom of Speech is "Annoying"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Welcome to Arizona!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
By grandstanding exactly like this. They'll say "This is a problem and I did something when no-one else would!", get reelected, then later comes the benchslap. Same as with all the laws passed against violent video games and then struck down by the courts.
The scary thing is that one of these days some legislators will go further and start complaining about how all their good deeds keep getting undone by pesky judges and that pesky First Amendment and introduce the Fortieth Amendment to repeal free speech...calling it the Protect America from Bullying, Violence, and Cyberterror Act or whatever.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You need to get 2/3rds of BOTH Houses of Congress, plus 3/4ths of the States to agree.
Just because Arizona is so stupid doesn't mean every state is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They wave a 'Magic Book'.
That's all it takes to convince the stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's Irony.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yay! The end to electronic annoyance!
Now I can sue all those telemarketers who use the electronics of the phone system to call me. And I can sue all those companies who spam me. An I can sue all those politicians who captured my name from petitions or donation forms and are spamming me.
And I can sue all of the companies who advertise on TV, because they are using electronics to show me things I find offensive, like crappy McDonald's food and diamonds and beer buddies. And I can sue advertisers on websites, because I find their ads offensive when their graphics slow down my browsing.
I'm going to be rich!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technology is not the only thing they don't understand
It sounds those aren't the only professionals they need. It's obvious they don't know the basics of how the constitution and laws work in real life...
Is it sad that those who are our supposedly "professional" politicians, don't know how government and politics work at all?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wow.
Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, is my guess. Enough voters in AZ are victims of mommies drinking the fetus into a stupor that they elect these Drunken Fetus Babies into office.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think its perfectly acceptable in a sitution where a government or corporation has become so complacent that, when they ask you to jump, they expect us to say, how high.
I dont see a free and open FUTURE with that kind of mentality, and as much as i feel violence should never be used, in some cases its the only path thats been left, as seen by some of the uprisings these past months
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
innernet
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Its a great bill!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Arizona
It boggles my mind at what's coming next from that state.
I can't imagine going there for a vacation anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
civility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]