Group Of Democrat Lawmakers Want To Take Away Free Speech Right & Make It A ‘Privilege’

Four New York State Senators, Jeff Klein, Diane Savino, David Carlucci and David Valesky (all Democrats btw…surprise, surprise), have all signed off on a proposal to turn your free speech right, a right that is inherent to all people by virture of their being people, into a right that can be restricted.

Proponents of a more refined First Amendment argue that this freedom should be treated not as a right but as a privilege — a special entitlement granted by the state on a conditional basis that can be revoked if it is ever abused or maltreated.

That’s right. They wish to turn this right into a privilege, like a drivers license, that can be taken away if you’re a bad boy.

What is their reasoning for doing this? It’s because of an act that has been going on since pretty much the dawn of time, bullying:

At least half of all Americans have been bullied at one point in their lives. Whether it was teasing on the playground, taunting in the school yard, or tackling in the hallways, bullying has been part of “growing up” for generations. Not often did parents, educators, or legislators think of intervening; but times have changed. And if ever you have heard that “bullying is nothing but a rite of passage to adulthood,” think again.

With the rapid development of information and communication technologies, a new form of harassment has emerged. Cell phones and social networking sites such as Facebook may have enabled people to become more closely connected and interwoven, but they have also amplified standard adolescent cruelty to a level unprecedented. From “flaming” to “happy slapping,” thousands of teenagers across the nation have experienced “cyberbullying” in one way or another – and the numbers are only rising.

In addition to causing substantial psychological harm and emotional distress, cyberbullying has been blamed for nearly a dozen teen suicides.

…Cyberbullying is a serious threat to society, and this recent string of “bullycides” only reinforces the need for action.

Such a “serious threat” they want to take away a right.

First they propose to make it a crime for a person to “intentionally, and for no legitimate purpose, engage in a course of conduct using electronic communication directed at a child under the age of twenty-one years” when the person “knows or reasonably know that such conduct … causes material harm to the mental or emotional health … of such child.” They also propose that a single electronic communication could be considered a “course of action” if the message is sent to multiple people, the “victim” not being one of them.

Eugene Volokh:

(1) A girl finds that her boyfriend has been cheating on her with her best friend. She e-mails several other friends a message condemning the best friend, who is then humiliated because all her friends know what she’s done. That, under the bill, would likely be a “course of conduct” “directed” at the former best friend (even though the best friend isn’t even a recipient), and the sender probably reasonably should have known (I assume that’s what the proposals means by “reasonably know”) that this could “cause[] material harm to the … emotional health” of the former best friend. We can’t be sure, of course, since who knows what “material harm” to “emotional health” really requires — but it’s certainly possible that a prosecutor (maybe a friend of the former best friend’s family?) will conclude that humiliation in front of one’s friends qualifies. Now the e-mailer would face a trial at which the jury decided whether she had a “legitimate purpose” for the communication; if the jury says no, the e-mailer gets convicted.

(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net…

via Group Of Democrat Lawmakers Want To Take Away Free Speech Right & Make It A ‘Privilege’.