|
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
 Posted - 06/20/2011 : 12:09:29
|
It may seem so. I haven't read the whole article, but it does look kind of bad.
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
 Posted - 06/20/2011 : 18:30:04 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by the_ignored
It may seem so. I haven't read the whole article, but it does look kind of bad.
|
I read the legislation. It only ups the penalty, not add a new crime.
SB 978 only states an increase in the penalties for a public display of the offending work. Not multiple private displays. You tube, unless streammed to a Jumbotron, does not violate this provision.
And it would go after the people streaming it to the Jumbotron, not the people who uploaded it. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Youtube users to be in trouble?
