Bill Plans to Imprison Cyber-Bullies for up to 3 Months

[Pann]

Not that it will be possible to enforce it, but whatever.

I think abusers that believe this are going to be in for a very rude awakening - probably by the police at 5am.

[Celista]

Not sure why everyone is so surprised about this, considering that internet trolls have been imprisoned in the UK. In the US there is a line where freedom of speech ends where abuse begins in regards to non-internet conversation, and considering that online behavior can have real-life consequences for those who are bullied, I think it could be appropriate for those who bully online to also expect similar consequences.

If Kiwis disagree, I'm sure the bill will be voted down.

[starkey]

They cant even police the 3rd strike piracy bill they passed, this is a joke.

[JohnBrown1917]

I think abusers that believe this are going to be in for a very rude awakening - probably by the police at 5am.

If they are aware of this law, and have any common sense, they won't go to jail/be fined.

[Reikk]

I think this idea that the victim can stop cyber bullying by simply not going online is odd. I'm sure those photos or hateful or violent comments that people are circulating online will magically disappear if the person in the photo's doesn't go online. And it's not like those same people doing the "cyber-bullying" (probably people the person knows IRL if it is true bullying) won't make fun of them or cause emotional harm at school or elsewhere. Not to mention who may see the pictures or comments and how that may affect the relationship with the victim.

Just because the victim doesn't see the cyber bullying doesn't mean the cyber-bullying isn't having terrible effects on the victim. People DO still interact in person. I don't see a need to protect cyber-bullying.

[Sam the Wiser]

I'd be serving life if this came to pass lol.

[Theodon]

I think abusers that believe this are going to be in for a very rude awakening - probably by the police at 5am.

It would be impossible to enforce the law if it worked that way, which leads me to believe it will only apply to severe cases, such as the one mentioned in the article.

Just look at this forum for instance; there is likely hundreds of people making many personal attacks per day, and there are tens of thousands of forums out there that are much larger. You couldn't possibly make a system of law that could process that many claims, not to mention that being personally offended is very much subjective, as people may take an aggressive argument as a personal attack, which will probably double the number of claims again.

If it does try to cover simply being insulted then it will never succeed, even if the bill is passed. It will be torn apart by how arbitrary being insulted can be, and if they want to imprison people for 3 months then they will need to convert a small continent in to a prison complex to fit everyone inside.

Not sure why everyone is so surprised about this, considering that internet trolls have been imprisoned in the UK. In the US there is a line where freedom of speech ends where abuse begins in regards to non-internet conversation, and considering that online behavior can have real-life consequences for those who are bullied, I think it could be appropriate for those who bully online to also expect similar consequences.

If Kiwis disagree, I'm sure the bill will be voted down.

They were actually threatening people in some cases. Messages like "I will find you and you don’t want to know what I will do when I do, you’re pathetic, kill yourself before I do. source" arent trolling messages. There was another guy arrested who tweeted that he was going to blow an airport up as a joke too, which is just stupid.

[Deleted]

Not sure why everyone is so surprised about this, considering that internet trolls have been imprisoned in the UK. In the US there is a line where freedom of speech ends where abuse begins in regards to non-internet conversation, and considering that online behavior can have real-life consequences for those who are bullied, I think it could be appropriate for those who bully online to also expect similar consequences.

If Kiwis disagree, I'm sure the bill will be voted down.

Those cases were not "trolling". They were flat out harassment. Its just the media decided it was trolling because it had a cool name for them to use.

But OT. If this was to pass i would expect to see a massive surge in cases and convictions for actual bullying. Kids beating each other in school ect. You cannot vilify one while the other is taking place and having nothing done about it.

Maybe rather than bringing in ridiculous laws they should do something about bullying as a whole across all spectrums as this would be open to all levels of abuse atm. And who decides what's bullying. The perceived bully victim? the courts? the parents?.

[Pann]

It would be impossible to enforce the law if it worked that way, which leads me to believe it will only apply to severe cases, such as the one mentioned in the article.

Just look at this forum for instance; there is likely hundreds of people making many personal attacks per day, and there are tens of thousands of forums out there that are much larger. You couldn't possibly make a system of law that could process that many claims, not to mention that being personally offended is very much subjective, as people may take an aggressive argument as a personal attack, which will probably double the number of claims again.

If it does try to cover simply being insulted then it will never succeed, even if the bill is passed. It will be torn apart by how arbitrary being insulted can be, and if they want to imprison people for 3 months then they will need to convert a small continent in to a prison complex to fit everyone inside.

I never said that the police will be knocking on the door's of every internet troll. It seems that these laws are simply to bring the online medium in line with what would be (un)acceptable in print or verbal exchanges. However the people who believe the online interaction is license for them to behave in an abusive manner and not to adhere to the laws and standards deemed acceptable by society are going to find that they are not nearly as difficult to track down as they believe.

I do not see why people believe any law dealing with online abuse would extend further than existing laws regarding abuse.

[Jokerfiend]

I never said that the police will be knocking on the door's of every internet troll. It seems that these laws are simply to bring the online medium in line with what would be (un)acceptable in print or verbal exchanges. However the people who believe the online interaction is license for them to behave in an abusive manner and not to adhere to the laws and standards deemed acceptable by society are going to find that they are not nearly as difficult to track down as they believe.

I do not see why people believe any law dealing with online abuse would extend further than existing laws regarding abuse.

Define abuse, because that word is flung around with too much vagueness. As long as I don't threaten you or anything with violence, there is literally nothing anyone can do. You can always walk away. If you engage in anyway, then you are liable.

What laws prevent me from standing on the street corner Westboro style? While you can argue morally it's wrong, and not that I wouldn't agree with you, it's still allowed to happen.

Something something, Benjamin Franklin quote, something something.

[Dreknar20]

I agree. But they do deserve something like a fist to the face

you do realize punching someone is a crime and saying mean things that hurt your itty feelings isn't right?

[Deleted]

The only way you can oppose this is if your a cyberbully yourself. Anonimity on the internet makes people into horrible douchebags that mentally torture others because they can. Thats some f'ed up behaviour right there. If internet has the nature to make people into sociopaths, maybe they should be treated alike.

How do you define the line where it becomes an offense? Simple: It's about repetition, and a bit of logic. 1x flame, shame on me. 3 flames a day on a consecutive basis: shame on you.

A good while ago i read about some brit posting messed up shit on dead peoples Facebook pages. Stuff like "Hope you burn in hell you piece of shit" etc. He did this to over 50 people. Some guy tracked him down and he fled the camera screaming "freedom of speech".

Who thinks this is okay in the name of free speech? I'm really cuirious.

You can just turn of your computer

Should you isolate yourself from everything good on the internet, should you turn off your ways of communicating to the world because 1 or 2 people make your life hell? How can someone perceive this as a solution? Holy shit. So if someone beats you up repeatedly when you go outside your door, instead of getting him arrested you become a hermit? Where's the logic?

[IIamaKing]

Good, hope it passes and all the little cowardly shits that do stuff like this get what they deserve.

The shortsighedness is strong with this one.

The legislation would make it an offence to send or post harmful messages

Who decides what is "harmful"? EVERY ONE should be opposed to any legislation with such loose terminology.

[Zython]

Who thinks this is okay in the name of free speech? I'm really cuirious.

People who don't understand the difference between rudeness and harassment?

Who decides what is "harmful"?

Um, hello? I already volunteered for this job. Try and keep up.

[TheSerialSniper]

OP[/I]

I thought harassment laws took care of issues like this.

[JohnBrown1917]

Um, hello? I already volunteered for this job. Try and keep up.

Are you seriosly using that as an argument?

[Zython]

Are you seriosly using that as an argument?

Why not? He was clearly worried that we would not be able to find someone for the job. I gladly volunteered, which should put that fear to rest.

By the way, my starting salary will be $100K with benefits.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

It's funny how the internet folk will get up in arms about "real-life" bullying but then not seem to care about "cyber" bullying.

You can't avoid real life bullies by not reading what they post.

[Tinykong]

So, is this going to extend to in person speech, as well?

Because I see no difference between me saying "You're a fat slob" online or in person.

[Sky High]

just want we need, more people in prison for nonviolent "transgressions". can I say I don't fucking get cyber bullying? this bill is completely batshit. what's next? I can't flip an asshole off on the freeway without getting a ticket?