Feed the Trolls (They Might Need the Extra Money for Bail)

Arizona, you never cease to amaze me with your idiocy.

From the land of racial profiling where you can get pulled over just for having a super deep tan, we bring you...


Anti-Trolling Legislation, via Arizona House Bill 2549:

“It is unlawful for any person, with intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend, to use ANY ELECTRONIC OR DIGITAL DEVICE and use any obscene, lewd or profane language or suggest any lewd or lascivious act, or threaten to inflict physical harm to the person or property of any person.”

This has passed both the House and the Senate. It's just waiting for the governor's John Hancock.


Are you....fucking...kidding me?


Hobos, hold up just a sec. I need to get some swearing out of the way on behalf of the intartronz brethren from Arizona.

Fuck, fuckity, fucknugget, cocksucking douche-canoes!

...Okay, back.

Seriously? Seriously?! You tools of the Black & Decker variety can eat me. You don't have anything better to do right now than introduce this bill? 'Cause it isn't like we're in an economic crisis or anything, right? 'Cause it isn't like your state has a huge meth problem, right? 

I understand wanting to curtail cyberbullying, I do. I'm not advocating that people should be able to terrify or threaten people, or make repeated unwanted sexual advances. But if you really feel the need to start down this slippery slope, you can make an amendment to current harassment laws already on the books to include mediums of the internet.

But "annoy or offend"? Really?!

This law is broad like 80s shoulder pads.

Here are some broads wearing shoulder pads.

People have different lines as to what will annoy or offend them. I could tell someone I don't like their shirt and that could annoy or offend them. You might annoy me with your religious beliefs; you might get annoyed with me about my lack of them.

As to profane language, are they going to put up a list? 'Cause that can be pretty open-ended as well. To some people, "goddamn" is profane. I make no judgments about what is considered profane to them, but I still have the right to say it. And they have the right to tell me to shut up. And that's to say nothing of how hard it can be to discern a person's intended tone when dealing in the written word with strangers, let alone the fact that a good deal of knuckledraggers have a lil' bit of trouble cluing into context.

"Well, blow me down! Ag-ag-ag...jail."

People are dicks to each other on the street all the time. Should they be? No. 

I don't enjoy dickery, just like I don't enjoy trolls. But being a prick isn't against the law. It shouldn't be against the law. If a person can't get arrested for saying it in person, it is ridiculous to hold the internet to a higher standard. And there is a deep howling chasm of difference between repeated harassment and an off-color comment.

In fact, isn't there a thing... Wait, it's on the tip of my tongue... Something-Stitution, that is supposed to grant freedom of speech? We can't prosecute members of NAMBLA and the KKK for their "beliefs," but you're seriously going to make the case that I can't tell an idiot that they're being an idiot?

There's a whole other angle to this as well. This is the internet, where trolls come from far and wide, so what happens when someone from another state or country breaks this fantastical law?

I'm not a lawyer - and might be wrong on this, but it seems to me that this can largely only be enforced if both parties are from Arizona. (Unless these genius legislators push for this to also be covered in the federal anti-stalking law, which includes the word "harassment" in the wording. And considering the state, I wouldn't be surprised.)

And that's not to mention the hassle to the courts, the police department, as well as the telecom companies, who will be inundated with requests.

“This guy made fun of me drinking a Cosmo on Twitter. He said, and I quote - that it was a ‘fucking girly drink.’”

“Okay, sir, fill out this information and provide a link. We will need to contact the website to get the accused's IP address if it isn’t logged, and permission of their cable service provider to give us their name and address.”

“But he annoyed me todaaaaaaaaaaaaay.”

“Sir, you’re annoying me right now.”

Not to mention the issue of intent, because either you're allowed to state that you did not intend to annoy or offend, or it becomes completely subjective and left to the judge to decide what was going on in your head.

I feel like this is some sort of cosmic Orwellian joke, but laws which infringe on civil liberties have been stacking up like IHOP pancakes. 

"You seriously expect me to choke this down?"

And much like those pancakes, too much isn't a good thing, and the syrup gets all over you, the table, and whatever girl you end up getting to second with in the parking lot. 

With ooey gooey faux sweet intentions, America is taking yet another backward step. 

....But if anyone from Arizona asks, I didn't say that. 

(Time magazine article on this topic.)