Lawmaker Wants to Make "Lewd Photoshopping" Illegal

[elvor0]

Ptsh, get outta town, Sarah Palin had three feature length pornos made about her, and she didn't say a word to my knowledge, and you're annoyed over one badly shooped picture?

"No one has a right to make fun of anyone"

Why didnt the kids at my school get this memo?

Also i totally wouldnt mind if people took my head and glued it on p0rnstars bodies. Knock yourselves out

Have you seen Ron Jeremy.. from the waist up? Not something I would want to be associated with.

Yeah....not too nice. I don't know hows he's still in the business, I mean in his heyday sure, but now he just looks like a strung out version of Lou Albinos Mario. Mind you, I don't think he gets to pick from the A list anymore.

 

[spartan231490]

I can see how it can be seen as wrong in the sense of libel, slander, fraud etc.

If you are decent enough at it to make it seem real, then it could cause all sorts of issues when crimes are involved. Think of it in a sense where photographic evidence is used in a trial, if you are a pro at this, you could create false evidence, or false alibi's.

Although the way the man words it makes it sound like he is stamping his feet and throwing a tantrum.

But that's not what the proposed law targets. The way the current system works, you could already sue someone for liable or slander if one of these photos caused enough damage to warrant it. This law would make it illegal to make the photo, regardless of how much, or little damage was done. I would support a bill that brought these sorts of things firmly into the pervue of existing slander laws, but making them illegal in their own right is a violation of the first amendment.

It's like the "yelling fire in a movie theater" example. That is an acceptable and legal infringement of the first amendment because of the danger caused by doing that. But we didn't outlaw talking in movie theaters, we just said it was illegal to yell fire. Extending that logic to these photos, there isn't any precedent to make it illegal to make or post the photos, but if they cause harm you are accountable for the repercussions.

Then again, who am I kidding, the constitution doesn't matter anymore.

This is 'MURICA!!!! I can't hear you over the sound of my FREEDOM!!!!!
. . .

Ruby Ridge(1992)
Federal Assault weapons ban(1994)
Gun Free School Zone act(2000)
Patriot Act(2001)
HR 347(2011)
NDAA(2012)
NY SAFE ACT(2013)
CISPA(currently being discussed)
Feinstein Gun ban(upcoming)

Well shit . . .
I guess I can hear you now.

 

[Mortuorum]

No one has a right to make fun of anyone. It's not a First Amendment right.

Um, actually, yes it is. Unless the subject is a minor, and it looks like that ship sailed a long time ago. (Being a big crybaby doesn't count.)

 

[Groenteman]

Fox News.... of all things. If this story is true then surely a remotely trustworthy channel reported on it?

If it is true, than its just sad. Trying to outlow petty butthurt, come on now. People have to be paid to review that rubbish, process it through adminstration, etc etc. Waste of resources, go maintain some roads with it instead.

Also if it does pass I will, as a non-american citizen, make lots of silly pictures with his face! Mwohahah!

EDIT:

~Vid~

just gives an error.

 

[Jamous]

"They are vulgar. This is vulgar. We're becoming a nation of vulgar people."

vulgar: adj

relating to, or current among the great mass of common people, in contrast to the educated, cultured, or privileged

so... nice?

What dictionary did you get this from?

Vulgar basically means explicit language or behaviour.

It comes from the idea that the lower classes are less refined and courser than those above them. You're both right.

 

[Darks63]

Anyone Remember Flynt vs Falwell? Cause Falwell's suit to sue over something similar failed due to it being ruled that the parody in Hustler was protected under the first amendment. Now i'd imagine even if his bill got passed it would immediately get challenged by the ACLU or other such organization and defeated by the state supreme court making this a massive waste of taxpayer dollars.

 

[Otaku World Order]

So Representative Smith, now that you've got that out, I do have a question:

Yeah, I've been waiting for a chance to use that.

That being said, I get why he's pissed off. I would be too if I were him. But, how much would it cost to enforce something like this?

Still it's way more grounded then most of Leland Yee's ideas.

 

[HellbirdIV]

Smith told FoxNews.com. "No one has a right to make fun of anyone. It's not a First Amendment right."

Actually, yes it is. Freedom of speech includes parody and satire.

 

[Giyguy]

yeah, abuse of power.

 

[GamingAwesome1]

Why you just ban fun in general while you're at it? And people are allowed to make fun of you in whatever manner they see fit.

Jesus dude, grow a thicker skin, it's the internet.

 

[[REDACTED]]

SNIP

Freedom of speech isn't freedom from consequences, but it is freedom from legal consequences. There is a very big difference.

 

[FalloutJack]

All this and the war on internet porn next on...Wishful Thinking.