WIRED Magazine has another story that the mainstream media are rolling over and playing “dead’ about. (And they wonder why newspaprs and radio are dying?)
Rep Linda Sanchez, (D-Los Angeles) with the introduction of the Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act, clearly has a great interest in censoring.
Still, the Democrat from Los Angeles makes several valid points that cyberbullying has lasting consequences on our nation’s youth. The 13-year-old Meier’s suicide is clearly a tragedy. But how she characterizes the measure is simply untrue.
“Put simply, this legislation would be used as a tool for a judge and jury to determine whether there is significant evidence to prove that a person ‘cyberbullied’ another,” she wrote in the Huffington Post. “That is: did they have the required intent, did they use electronic means of communication, and was the communication severe, hostile, and repeated? So — bloggers, e-mailers, texters, spiteful exes and those who have blogged against this bill have no fear — your words are still protected under the same American values.”
But that’s not what the proposal says. It goes way beyond youth cyberbullying. As we said the other day, the measure seemingly outlaws logging onto the internet.
But don’t take our word for it. Here’s what H.R. 1966 says:
(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 e-mail, instant messaging, blogs, websites, telephones and text messages.
This measure and Sanchez’s electronic defense of it are so emotionally distressing to us that, if adopted, perhaps Sanchez should be the first to be prosecuted under the statute.
So, let’s say that somebody takes offense to something I’ve posted on this blog. Can a prosecutor prove I meant to cause emotional distress? Well, DUH — Yeah, of course they can. I don’t post this stuff so nobody will read it. I post it so that the people I’m posting about will see it and know I don’t agree with them — which will obviously give them some amount of emotional distress, I would assume.
But I want to change people’s minds — not entice them into suicide. The statute, however, doesn’t differentiate. Which means leftists will have a blunt instrument ot bludgeon righty-tighty blogs into silence.
Or so they hope. Spread the word on H.R. 1966. Another leftoid over-reaction gone badly awry; and another great reason to throw all the incompetent idiots out in 2010.
Cross-Posted on The #TCOT Report