Orme, a Singing Bard wrote:
Tarot wrote:
But being a prick on the internet shouldn't result in jail. I wouldn't argue with a good ass kicking for some though.
I guess this all falls into "slippery slope" arguments.
The link you posted had references to various threats. One of them said people threatened to rape a girl. I think that's pretty clear-cut against the law - not sure why you need a "cyber bullying" law for that.
Exactly, there are criminal laws which currently exist for 'terrorist threats'...such as threatening to rape someone. People have been prosecuted for stuff like that before. There was a case about 10 years ago now in San Diego where a man was convicted of threatening rape via email to someone on the east coast. We're not talking 'I'd rape you lolz' or 'I hope you get raped' but very specific and threatening e-mails. No special law was needed it fell under existing laws when you go out of your way to terrorize someone like that.
Quote:
Where it gets more complicated is something I saw on TV. There were like 4-5 girls who teamed up on another, created a fake boy on the internet, and went on to publicly humiliate the girl, and the girl killed herself. One of the girl's MOTHER was involved in the scheme. I am not sure how I feel about that.
That's pretty much Megan's law. Jist was...2 girls were friends then they drifted apart and were even at diff. schools. Girl A (or her mom or both) hears rumors that Girl 2 (Megan) was talking shit about Girl A. The mother then, with her daughter and her 18 year old personal assistant creates a cute boy page on MySpace to lure in Megan to see what if anything she has to say about Girl A. The account is used to romance Megan up, then it turned on her. It culiminated with 'Josh' saying the world would be better off without her no one loved her go kill herself type shit.
Mom of Girl A also knew Megan had been under a doctor's care for years for clinical depression and had been on medication (and was so because of suicidal idealation). The assistant apparently sent the message which caused Megan to take her life.
Since no specific threats were made against Megan, but merely meanness and harassment, there wasn't really anything that could be done about it. Some existing laws were greatly stretched to cover it. And Megan's Law put into place.
Quote:
At what point does freedom of speech end and people start being protected? Jr. High and High School can be nasty if you're a little different or don't fit in.
There's already bullying laws in place because of children so badly tormented at school that they've suffered physically as a result, attempted to kill themselves and sometimes even others. We (as a society) saw a need to protect kids where it was taken to an extreme. You don't have freedom to harass people at school. Students on campus really don't have free speech anyway, there are dress codes, etc.
But sure you're not going to end all teasing, nor is it really designed to. The school should have punishments for it, and when they fail there are laws holding them accountable too.
Quote:
I personally think a line has to be drawn, but I am not sure where. I guess at a point where the activity becomes predatory in nature. Of course, now I have to define that.
I do think there should be laws to prevent specific harassment, such as what happened to Megan. If you look at some of the 4chan shit as well, their harassment 'for the lulz' has also at times gone too far. Mob mentality can be a terrible thing. There are also school gossip sites where people can anonymous post terrible things about other people. I've never viewed them myself but the articles I've seen paste an ugly picture. Yet, IMO, the site is only part of the problem...if people didn't look, well it would soon die off.
I'm not unhappy with the concept of accountability, but it goes both ways.
And I do agree with you, while it's easy to point at shit way over the line (what happened to Megan IMO), the closer you get to the line the fuzzier it gets. Much of internet dickery is shitty...but shouldnt be a crime per se. It would result in the person suffering consequences IRL generally though if they weren't anonymous. And I'd argue one of the reasons communities like ours did so well is there were other forms of consequence, such as in-game, guild, and shunning.