Slashdot Mirror
State Lawmaker Wants To Ban Anonymous Posting Online
bfwebster writes "According to a local news article from last week, Kentucky state lawmaker Tim Couch wants to ban anonymous posting on the internet in order to 'cut down on online bullying', which he says has been 'a particular problem in eastern Kentucky.' His bill would require posters to register with their real names and e-mail addresses under threat of fines. Looks like another battle in the right for anonymous free speech."
Send your anonymous comments to Rep. Tim Couch using his official form at http://www.lrc.ky.gov/Mailform/H090.htm
like in real life where most bullies know their names of their victims. No one is bullied in real life as we all know! No one is being bullied even though teachers and parents are fully aware of it!
So let's find some thing (internet) to yell about because you don't like it (because you cannot control it)
-Ayn Rand
...
Is that seriously the main flaw you find with this law?Brian Gordon
Yes.
That's as ridiculous as banning an article of clothing that can be used to disguise identity! It could never happen! THE VERY THOUGHT IS PREPOSTEROUS!!
Then again, as far as the hoodie ban goes, anything that even makes an attempt at reclaiming the UK's streets is welcome, whatever the free-speech implications.
Bullying on the internet, however, can be addressed more effectively by simply rotating 180 degrees until one's face is no longer pointing toward the screen. Further measures may include going out, getting some fresh air, and finding a nice hobby.
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
Could this have any correlation to the protests against scientology? Perhaps in response to the protest on the 15th?
Those who live by the sword, get shot by those who live by the gun...
Hello, Lawmakers of Kentucky. We are Anonymous.
Over the years, we have been watching you. Your campaigns of misinformation; suppression of dissent; your litigious nature, all of these things have caught our eye. With the leakage of your latest propaganda video into mainstream circulation, the extent of your malign influence over those who trust you, who call you leader, has been made clear to us. Anonymous has therefore decided that your organization should be destroyed. For the good of your followers, for the good of mankind -- for the laughs -- we shall expel you from the Internet and systematically dismantle the State of Kentucky in its present form. We acknowledge you as a serious opponent, and we are prepared for a long, long campaign. You will not prevail forever against the angry masses of the body politic. Your methods, hypocrisy, and the artlessness of your organization have sounded its death knell.
You cannot hide; we are everywhere.
We cannot die; we are forever. We're getting bigger every day--and solely by the force of our ideas, malicious and hostile as they often are. If you want another name for your opponent, then call us Legion, for we are many.
Yet for all that we are not as monstrous as you are; still our methods are a parallel to your own. Doubtless you will use the Anon's actions as an example of the persecution you have so long warned your followers would come; this is acceptable. In fact, it is encouraged. We are your SPs.
Gradually as we merge our pulse with that of your "State", the suppression of your followers will become increasingly difficult to maintain. Believers will wake, and see that salvation has no price. They will know that the stress, the frustration that they feel is not something that may be blamed upon Anonymous. No -- they will see that it stems from a source far closer to each. Yes, we are SPs. But the sum of suppression we could ever muster is eclipsed by that of the RTC.
Knowledge is free.
We are Anonymous.
We are Legion.
We do not forgive.
We do not forget.
Expect us.
I almost expected this entire topic to be filled with nothing but AC posts.
Perhaps you mean a different thing than I do when you say "science."
This is bad for whistle blowers who some times don't want to say there name and this is also bad for things like crime stoppers where some times saying your name can get you killed.
A law that isn't enforceable is totally pointless.
;-)
That's not true at all. Such laws are used all the time. They come in very handy if there's someone you want to harrass. Hold them in jail for a day or three, then say "Sorry, it looks like we can't actually try you in this jurisdiction for violating that law. Have a nice day", and escort them out to the street. Where they're promptly arrested again, if the local authorities so wish.
The common term is "nuisance law", and they're almost universal. It's very difficult to get a law annulled unless someone is actually charged and tried for violating it.
A similar principle applies to "violating a suspect's rights". In a town where I once lived, there was a protest in which a lot of people were arrested and held in the town jail overnight. They were denied any communication, not even the standard "one call to your lawyer". The next day they were all released. The explanation was simple: The local authorities didn't want to take anyone to court; that would have been a huge political (and probably legal) disaster for them. Since the arrestees rights had been violated, the police couldn't be forced by local officials to press charges. As for the arrestees pressing charges, the police's response was simple: "Who are you? We have no record that you've ever been in this town before. Can you prove you were here and were arrested?"
I knew a bunch of people who learned a valuable lesson that day about how the legal system actually works. (I was just an onlooker, but I knew a number of the people involved. If asked, I could have testified that they'd been in town that day, but I couldn't testify that I'd personally seen any of them arrested.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
"In the US we have been more than willing to repeatedly try bad ideas as long as the intentions fit some vague Judeo-Christian moral standard (or if there's money to be made)."
... "Fear for our children. Fear of each other. Fear of freedom, of responsibility."
As a "Judeo-Christian" ethical person, I take exception to this vile screed designed to illicit the same kind of "fear" that he rails against later on
One of the biggest reasons I'm what I am today is founded upon the notion that MAN cannot rule himself, let alone other men, without eventually being corrupted. I happen to be very LIBERTARIAN in my views because I realize this very thought. And when the state can convict, and execute someone completely innocent (if you buy the story), then they can do it to anyone, which is why I'm against the death penalty.
And I happen to agree with your point of view on legalization of drugs and alcohol, it is none of the state's business. That, and if we taxed the crap out of sin (keeping it legal, and controlled) we'd have all the money needed to fund all the stupid programs you want.
Also one cannot have a war against chairs, what makes one think we can have one against another inanimate object (drugs, terror, poverty etc).
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
You're assuming that they're thinking that far ahead. How about just announcing a new law banning some "scary" or unpopular practice and getting free publicity?
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
I encourage everyone to contact Mr. Couch and let him know how unfeasable and insulting this idea is. That measn well-thought and well-written messages, not
Rep. Couch's Page @ lrc.ky.gov
Again, please make sure your correspondence is professional and polite. The last thing we need is a bunch of idiots spamming his inbox and basically proving him right...
"So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
I would imagine the easiest way to nullify this law, were it to pass, would be for websites to post a generic disclaimer that all comments posted are works of fiction written by the webmaster.