Tenn. Law Bans Posting Images That "Cause Emotional Distress"

The irony here is that politicians just outlawed posting pictures of politicians, without realizing it.
 
People like being distressed. Being distressed means that you need compensating and that you have power over the person causing your distress. Distress is a good thing now, it gives you power in politics and society.

At least this will hopefully end films with keira knightley in...
 
Wife's family is from Tenn. I've been digging my self a hole with this one (and the other's).

I know better than to apply common sense to politics, but damn, I have the hardest time not using my common sense.
 
Yeah every single last Advertisement picture on every webpage I goto while being in Tenn. causes me :mad: Stress. They sometimes really piss me off, but unfortunately I know a lot of websites have no choice of having them up to pay for the site. So looks like that law can't work for us too. :mad:
 
MacLeod said:
No its not that bad. We're not even close to California and other super left states. Our only problem out here is way to much religion going on. There's plenty of good things here tho like no state income tax. One good thing about the religious, they hate taxes almost as much as nudie bars.
Click to expand...

As a former tennessean, the religion is not the problem, it is the good ol boy bullshit political machine in Nashville. contrary to what most people think, TN has had a real issue with a plethora of far left leaning politicians mixed with a few crazy ass right wingers. Sure, there is no income tax, but TN has one of the highest sales taxes in the country plus the bring the income tax to vote almost every year it seems. The state has tried to destroy itself with entitlement programs (TenCare) and defending assinine laws (such as this one). The state legislature has a history of not giving a shit about the constitution or what thier voters want. I love TN and wish to move back there one day, but as crazy as it sounds I much prefer the Florida State government. The TN state government is as full of corruption and ineptitude as the University of TN athletic department. BTW Go Vols
 
This is one of the dumbest things that I have ever heard of. I suppose I could file suit against one of the newspapers because I don't like a picture they used. How dumb is that.
 
Someone needs to tell the Tennessee congressmen and women that "the internet" is not centrally located in Tennessee. Want to ban images? You'll have to enforce a law that requires internet providers in Tennessee to filter out offending images and web sites.

The Great Firewall of Tennessee. Yeah, good luck with pissing on the Constitution. Something tells me the Supreme Court will veto it.
 
Just cut Tennessee off from the internet right now, this will be the only way to solve this issue.
 
Azhar said:
Something tells me the Supreme Court will veto it.
Click to expand...

...and we will have wasted a bunch of money on court costs dealing with this. It's not just TN that's going to foot the bill on this, we'll be paying it to, since the government will have to get involved.
 
Wolfkin said:
What kind of lame ass law is that! Without strickt definition of what constitutes a picture that "Cause Emotional Distress", one could claim that any picture at all would be at fault, just need to be someone that claimes to be distressed by it.

The PC crowd strikes agian, the twats, and obviosly not one of them have any common sence or knowledge about creating laws.
Click to expand...

The Tennessee legisalature is 60% Republican in the Senate and 65% Republican in the House. Just so you know where to place the blame.
 
Emotional Distress? I got dis shit covered...

3833d1269633458-ken-lockwood-gorge-wambulance.jpg
 
odysseus145 said:
It was sponsored in the House by Rep. Charles Curtiss (D-Sparta, District 43) and in the Senate by Sen. Bill Ketron (R-Murfreesboro, District 13).
Click to expand...

Free speech? Forget your free speech...THIS...IS...CHARLES CURTIS D-SPARTAA!
:mad:

Ok, need to cut back on the caffeine.
 
So you can't post a distressing image online, but it's fine for the news to do so?
 
As a Tennessean, I would like to set the record straight. All this law really did was change one phrase.

"Communicates with another person" was changed to "Communicates with another person or transmits or displays an image in a manner in which there is a reasonable expectation that the image will be viewed by the victim."

The is the section in question:

(4) Communicates with another person by any method described in subdivision (a)(1), without legitimate purpose:

(A) (i) With the malicious intent to frighten, intimidate or cause emotional distress; or

(ii) In a manner the defendant knows, or reasonably should know, would frighten, intimidate or cause emotional distress to a similarly situated person of reasonable sensibilities; and

(B) As the result of the communication, the person is frightened, intimidated or emotionally distressed.

From looking at it, I don't see where this change is a big deal. Now the big question is whether the original law is good or bad. The original version already listed "by telephone, in writing or by electronic communication, including, but not limited to, text messaging, facsimile transmissions, electronic mail or Internet services. "

So if someone sent me spam, and it caused me "emotional distress", I could already get that person charged. Also, the penalty for all of this is just a misdemeanor.
 
snowcat said:
From looking at it, I don't see where this change is a big deal. <snip> Also, the penalty for all of this is just a misdemeanor.
Click to expand...

...You don't see how this is a big deal? First and foremost the law in its entirety is idiotic. There is no right to protect one from being offended. This crap needs to end, in its entirety. We are already heading the way of "thought policing" don't need this crap either.

A misdemeanor because you offended someone?

"Some of the most common misdemeanor cases are for petty theft, driving under the influence (DUI), driving without a license, trespassing, and disorderly conduct. More violent acts such as vandalism, public fighting, assault, and battery also are considered misdemeanors. "

Posting a picture that someone takes offence to is sooooo along the lines of these...:rolleyes:
 
I said I don't know why "the change" is a big deal. It is illegal in TN to harass someone using electronic communication. The change just added images as a form of that communication.

And I wrote that I was unsure whether the original law was good or bad. I can see benefits to it in cases of true harassment, and a detriment if the victim get offended by about anything.

These articles and posts make it sound like Tennessee came up with some brand new law, when it is just a tweak of an existing law. At the end of May, the governor signed quite a few bills into law, which is why we made the news twice. At least no is talking about the egg selling law that was passed ... ;)
 
snowcat said:
I said I don't know why "the change" is a big deal. It is illegal in TN to harass someone using electronic communication. The change just added images as a form of that communication.

And I wrote that I was unsure whether the original law was good or bad. I can see benefits to it in cases of true harassment, and a detriment if the victim get offended by about anything.

These articles and posts make it sound like Tennessee came up with some brand new law, when it is just a tweak of an existing law. At the end of May, the governor signed quite a few bills into law, which is why we made the news twice. At least no is talking about the egg selling law that was passed ... ;)
Click to expand...

I vote to have snowcat quartered for being responsible for this atrocious law being passed in TN. Being a [H]ard forum member, he should have hip checked this shit outta here...just my opinion! No cats were harmed in the making of this comment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top