Mindwraith said:
I support this entirely. It's illegal to harass people in real life, it should be illegal online too.
Read the story. As the letter to the governor says: "H.B. 2549 is not limited to a one to one conversation between two specific people. The communication does not need to be repetitive or even unwanted. There is no requirement that the recipient or subject of the speech actually feel offended, annoyed or scared." In other words, it does not target harassment.
Politicians in legislature tend to be former prosecutors. Prosecutors build careers by getting convictions, not by helping to dispense fairness or justice. And lawyers in general still believe, all too often, that actually knowing how to use those top-of-the-line computer things on their desks for show would be beneath their exalted status.
Expecting such people to know or understand, far less care about, technology and its uses is simply unrealistic. The same goes for expecting a politician, who by definition must posture to win, to understand or care about how workable a law is.
As for violating the constitution - what constitution? Between the military, a president who seems not to care about his own promises, and the current set of Corporate Supremes on the high bench, there's not much left now of the Bill of Rights, which is what those who raise constitutional objections, are really talking about.
People who think "the system" still works at state or federal levels have their heads in the sand. Of course, one can always hope for thoughtful moderation. Good luck.
