Goodbye. I'll miss you.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well I aint askeerd! Nothing has stopped the telemarketers or email spammers yet. I doubt the powers that be would waste their time on little old me.
 
They can pry my mouse and keyboard from my cold, dead fingers.

I have a computer in my room. In a siege to take me away from posting (and I try to not offend anyone) I will still be able to get online. I even have a laptop, so if the power goes out....:cool:
 
"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."


The key words here are with intent

If you don't intend to annoy...you have broken no laws.

Remember the rule - what a reasonable person would believe...
 
I'd like to see that law challenged...Im a cop in NY and they changed the law for Aggravated Harrassment here recently as "annoying" someone was to subjective and not truly a fact that could be proven...you actually have to say I want to hurt or kill you in an email or phone conversation for it to be a crime
 
The key words here are with intent
Click to expand...

.gov cannot properly interpret the COTUS or BoR.

So how in hell can I be assured .gov knows how to "define" anything? I cannot.
How in the hell do I know what .gov's definition of with intent is? I don't.

Screw 'em, feed 'em fish heads and rice.

.gov, I am a 50 y/o male and I have fired my family. So you see - I do not care.
Unlike many - I have nobody but me to be concerned about. Friends? Fired many of those as well.

My TRUE friends understand my Core, My Code, Moral Law.
There are those that deserve some more years of Freedom, be it kids, or those raising them. Me- I have had a helluva run thus far.

My friggin intent?

Defend against all enemies Foreign and Domestic.

This is what drives me and keeps me driven taken some CIS/IT classes.

I know the history of the Internet. I continue to learn about TCP/IP .

Short version of history - Internet started out as a tool for Communications to preserve Freedoms in the Fight against Tyranny.
 
It reminds me of the Senator investigating p0rn and censorship in the 1970s... When the media asked him what his definition of p0rn he says I don't know how to define it but I know it when I see it.

kjeff50cal
 
Short version of history - Internet started out as a tool for Communications to preserve Freedoms in the Fight against Tyranny.
Click to expand...

Uh huh, and wasn't the internet supposed to be a free enterprise? ... once upon a time that is. But of course wherever big government (AKA DC mafiosos) can get a better hold on money and/or power over people, they will just make up more bull$%!t laws to give them just what they're seeking. These sickos constantly bend, twist, & wring out through and through constitutional amendments in order to gain more and more control.

When is this federal government ever going to stop with all the 'senseless' law making??? It's like they will never stop until they reach their final solution - communism!

QUIT MAKING NEW LAWS DAMNIT!!! ESPECIALLY RETARDED ONES!!! And enforce what's currently on the books. YOU - THE RED WHITE & BLUE UNCLE SAM, HAVE STEPPED OVER THE LINE!!! WORK ON WHAT'S IN PLACE!!! ... maybe we can even work together on eliminating a few unnecessary laws in the meantime!

Ehh, maybe not! Let's just close an eye, drink that next beer, and watch the world end together. ;)

3/4 the way to the abyss ... so many deny ... a quarter the way to go. Then it'll be over.
 
Oh come on. The ACLU and several dozen lawyers would take your case if the feds tried to punish you for annoying someone on a forum. This is yet another in a very long string of laws passed by the blue hairs in Congress that keep getting smacked down in court. Annoying people is well protected by the First Amendment.
 
V4Vendetta said:
I don't want to give in. I won't give up. They haven't broken my spirit. Within each one of us there is a inch of integrity, of hope, of will. We must NEVER lose that inch. Within it, we are free.

"Hey, I'm 53 and already don't care!"

I've still got 35 years left till then.
Click to expand...

That was where I was hoping you were coming from, V4V.

You're wiser for your age than I usually am for my age. Good for you! So let's take heart for the future, old timers!

^5, V4V!!!
 
i think taliv is crazy. he apparrently wants attention. i can put a hundred internet regulations on these threads and tell everyone that what they're doing is illegal.

first of all, how can the federal government regulate this sort of law?
do you have any idea how many people go on the internet?
do you know there are chat rooms on yahoo that are called "fight rooms" and all you do is talk crap about each other? go on there jack, it's under voice chats.

well, if this law actually worked.. it would call up yahoo and tell 'em to take that chatroom offline.
 
Last edited:
It is merely an extension of telecommunications harassment laws, the same laws that do not allow you to make harassing phone calls to your ex girlfriend. In order to prosecute they must prove that your intent was to harass or annoy the other people and you must be using an assumed name.

The latter part is standard in online communication, but the former part is going to be hard to establish except in the most clear-cut cases. Posting to a message board ostensibly to communicate with other people will not cut it, methinks. Sending an email to a certain person saying "YOU CAN'T STOP ME FROM TALKING TO YOU, SARAH!" will, but probably only after Sarah has made it very clear that she does not ever plan on taking you back and never wants to hear from you again, even after you learn how to shut off your capslock. In other words, Hardin is probably safe, and so is everyone else here.

I think we're correct to be a little leery of this, but I really don't see the Supreme Court allowing an abuse of this to stand, because it affects the 1st Amendment, which they protect to a fault as long as campaign finance is not involved.

Mike
 
It is specifically aimed at those who INTENTIONALLY harass someone else, it has nothing to do with airing valid opinions that HAPPEN to annoy someone.
Click to expand...
Looks like I'm in the clear.
*WHEW*
 
Spam

TIMC said:
Well I aint askeerd! Nothing has stopped the telemarketers or email spammers yet. I doubt the powers that be would waste their time on little old me.
Click to expand...

That's probably what the law was aimed at, since the spammers are claiming
First Amendment. It's a way around it. To prevent prosecution, the annoying party has to reveal his/her true identity. The problem is, that the law is subject to abuse by people who just have it in for somebody. The other problem is that a constitutional right can be so easily circumvented by another law. Don't have a problem findin' a way to stop the spammers, but it opens the door for more abuse of the lawmaking process.
 
Taurus 66 said:
Uh huh, and wasn't the internet supposed to be a free enterprise?
Click to expand...
Actually, not at all. In fact, commercial/enterprise type facilities weren't even allowed to connect to the Internet till the late '80s, early 90's. (I believe it was in '91 or so when the web first became self aware.)

The Internet was originally supposed to be a way for research and .gov facilities to share information.
-
 
What is really annoying is that people are relying on the press to give them an accurate breakdown of the law instead of actually researching and finding out for themselves that it has nothing to do with interative computer servic4es

It's the press, people.
The same people that have our kids running around with automatic revolver SKS assault weapons shooting tourists in Fla for driving slow in the fast lane
 
sm said:
I know the history of the Internet. I continue to learn about TCP/IP .

Short version of history - Internet started out as a tool for Communications to preserve Freedoms in the Fight against Tyranny.
Click to expand...

Quick question... I had thought the internet was setup as an intranet for
communication between scientific agencies then slowly expanded to include
various universities then the general public as a source of information.
...am I incorrect?
 
Working Man said:
Quick question... I had thought the internet was setup as an intranet for
communication between scientific agencies then slowly expanded to include
various universities then the general public as a source of information.
...am I incorrect?
Click to expand...
Yup. You basically have it right. DOD started the DARPA net project to connect all the .mil and .gov defense research sights. It slowly morphed into the Internet as University and commercial (network) research facilities were brought online.

Then, the greencard lawyers Kanter & Siegal invented SPAM on Usenet in the late '80s and things started to go all to he11 here.
-
 
I like my solution. Look at my signature. If someone does manage to track me down and come to my home adress, Texas law is very clear on the subject. As a lawyer friend has advised me to say to the cops ( if ever needed) "Officer, I was afraid for my family and my life. I now need to speak to my attorney." :neener:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JShirley
  • Locked
Goodbye to a friend
2 3
Replies
71
Views
8K
rustysragsinc
R
S
  • Locked
If you like civil asset forfeiture...
Replies
8
Views
498
oldfart
O
J
  • Locked
Sex Offender's Homes to be Searched without Warrant Whenever a Child is Missing
2 3 4 5
Replies
102
Views
3K
DRZinn
D
A
  • Locked
Shoes Are All That I'll Need
Replies
3
Views
456
modifiedbrowning
M
T
  • Locked
Congress may make ISPs snoop on you
Replies
16
Views
816
PinnedAndRecessed
P
Back
Top