It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

S.C. Senator pushing a bill to outlaw profanity; punishable by jailtime and/or hefty fines

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Came across this article. A senator is pushing for a bill to ban profane language. The notion is absolutely ridiculous...

Here is the article and the link...



State Senator Robert Ford is hoping to outlaw lewd language and is pushing for a bill that would prohibit profanity. Under the pre-filed bill, profanity could land you in jail for up to 5 years and/or cost you up to $5,000 in fines. Which words are exactly considered profane is still unclear, but the bill does have a list of qualifications for profanity including words or actions that are lewd, vulgar or indecent in nature. We spoke to Debra Gammons with the Charleston School of Law about freedom of speech. She reminds that the First Amendment is not absolute. You cannot say whatever you want whenever you want to. Courts will usually look at where the words were said and who heard them. Children are usually protected.



www.counton2.com...

Also... for anyone that wants to contact Senator Ford and let him know how you feel about this constitutional infringement.... here ya go:

Contact Address:

(H) P.O. Box 21302, Charleston, 29413

Bus. (843) 813-1777 Home (843) 852-0777

(C) 506 Gressette Bldg., Columbia, 29201

Bus. (803) 212-6124 Home (803) 798-9220

E-Mail Address: RIF@scsenate.org

[edit on 23-1-2009 by imagreenslushie]




posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by imagreenslushie



State Senator Robert Ford is hoping to outlaw lewd language and is pushing for a bill that would prohibit profanity. Under the pre-filed bill, profanity could land you in jail for up to 5 years and/or cost you up to $5,000 in fines. Which words are exactly considered profane is still unclear, but the bill does have a list of qualifications for profanity including words or actions that are lewd, vulgar or indecent in nature.



www.counton2.com...


Well, Senator Robert Ford can suck it.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Well, I guess that would mean that more than half of the ATS family would be writing from their jail cell!



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 11:30 AM
link   
I'm sure glad that we have a government that is willing to pass these laws to protect us from ourselves. Shelter the children from the cruel world, don't cuss around them, don't spank them, don't yell at them...then when they grow up criminals, we can blame the bad parenting that society has forced you into(i'm not in any way claiming that not swearing at kids will cause them to be criminals, but this type of time wasting is absolutely ludicrous). People are afraid of sharia law, but propositions such as these come from the very people elected to protect our rights. Good thing we have law schools to tell us how to reinterpret the constitution.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:02 PM
link   
Sounds to me like Warrant needs to get back into the studio and record the long awaited sequel to "Ode to Tipper Gore".

Would someone please inform the esteemed Senator that prisoner care and housing far more expensive than unemployment benefits, medical care and welfare combined and far too many states are having problems making those payments.

In other words, shut the *snip* up, dude.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:05 PM
link   
All he has to do is merge profanity/vulgarity with threatening behavior disturbing the peace which would open the door for charging everyone who swears with terrorism.

He's making it harder than it really is.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Mistakenly closed this thinking it was a duplicate of another topic.


Be easy on me... Don't taze me bros.




Thread Open.




[edit on 23-1-2009 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:31 PM
link   
I currently live in SC (will be getting out as soon as F-ing possible) and I find this to be a perfect example of idiocy in SC. There are schools closing all over the state, the States health care budget has been cut all the way down to limiting services for the mentally handicapped and some have called it a "dangerous situation" for them. SC depends heavily on tourism which took a huge hit when gas hit $4/gallon and then another hit after the economic crash. It also depends heavily on sea trade from other countries. They have recently lost the biggest client Maersk, which by the way is the largest shipping container line in the world, due to the state of SC putting heavy taxes on them. Maersk tried to negotiate and SC simply refused to adjust to help them out. More money lost.

SC is backwards to the hilt. All this crap going on and this guy is focused on this profanity bill.


SCREW YOU Senator Robert Ford!


[edit on 23/1/09 by Pfeil]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:04 PM
link   
That's ridiculous! He wants to ban sagging pants too. I don't think it's likely this bill will be made law though. I found the following information from the firstamendmentcenter.org


Both proposals are clearly unconstitutional, said David Hudson, a scholar at the First Amendment Center at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn. Anti-profanity laws are "relics of past eras." Although profanity can be prohibited in limited cases, such as in public schools or if it's part of a threat, most profane or offensive speech is protected under the First Amendment, Hudson said. "What may be profane to person A may not be profane to person B," said Keith Holzman, principal of Solutions Unlimited, a consultant and former record-label executive. "I'm against all forms of such legislation. You can't define profanity."



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Whats exactly wrong with outlawing profanity ?

Even if they do approve it what is the likelihood of anyone getting charged. Most places in the US have laws about spitting on the ground and jay walking and how many get charged with those.


The other parts of the bill are crap but I really don't see a problem with it would someone please tell me what they think is wrong with it and why.



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 08:49 AM
link   
South Carolina senator Robert Ford wants to push a bill through that would make profane language a felony both VERBAL and WRITTEN.
www.counton2.com...



Under the pre-filed bill, profanity could land you in jail for up to 5 years and/or cost you up to $5,000 in fines.



Child molesters get less time !!!

Fords reasoning skills are so simple minded, short sighted and myopic he shouldn't be working at a fast food drive through let alone be a state senator.


Which words are exactly considered profane is still unclear, but the bill does have a list of qualifications for profanity including words or actions that are lewd, vulgar or indecent in nature.

So which 1 or 2 people get to decide what we can and cannot say?
Which list will we need to memorize so we don't end up in a FEDERAL PRISON?

A state senator doesn't realize what he's proposing is violating the Constitution of The United States. That scares the hell out of me !!! oops, do I go to jail now? I just said hell. Oops, did it again. That could be a 10 year, $10,000 sentence. And of course nobody is ever going to slip. Nobody is ever going to make a mistake. Ford isn't accidently let an F bomb drop if he were to get into a car accident right?

Here's a direct link to the bill:
www.scstatehouse.gov...

Here are a few sections from his bill


"Section 16-15-370. (A) It is unlawful for a person in a public forum or place of public accommodation wilfully and knowingly to publish orally or in writing, exhibit, or otherwise make available material containing words, language, or actions of a profane, vulgar, lewd, lascivious, or indecent nature.

(B) A person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than five thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than five years, or both."



SECTION 2. Article 3, Chapter 15, Title 16 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

"Section 16-15-430. (A) It is unlawful for a person to disseminate PreviousprofanityNext to a minor if he wilfully and knowingly publishes orally or in writing, exhibits, or otherwise makes available material containing words, language, or actions of profane, vulgar, lewd, lascivious, or indecent nature.


Excellent so now schools are going to have to ban classic literature or chance being charged with a FELONY.

And what about the bible? Are bibles going to be banned everywhere in the state? No more bibles in churches, hotel rooms, swearing in's, etc. ?



SECTION 3. Section 16-15-305(A)(3) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:

"(3) publishes orally or in writing, exhibits, or otherwise makes available anything obscene to any a group or individual; or"


TO ANY GROUP !?!?!?

This bill is written under the guise of protecting minors but it's not exclusive to minors so this bill is a launching platform to charge whomever they like.


[edit on 24-1-2009 by jfj123]



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 09:00 AM
link   
The 1st Amendment of the United States


The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that expressly prohibits the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, laws that infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

en.wikipedia.org...

Freedom of Speech


Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and by many state constitutions and state and federal laws. Criticism of the government and advocacy of unpopular ideas that people may find distasteful or against public policy, such as racism, are generally permitted. There are exceptions to the general protection of speech, however, including the Miller test for obscenity, child pornography laws, and regulation of commercial speech such as advertising. Other limitations on free speech often balance rights to free speech and other rights, such as property rights for authors and inventors (copyright), interests in "fair" political campaigns (Campaign finance laws), protection from imminent or potential violence against particular persons (restrictions on Hate speech or fighting words), or the use of untruths to harm others (slander). Distinctions are often made between speech and other acts which may have symbolic significance. Efforts have been made to ban flag desecration, for example, though currently that act remains protected speech.

en.wikipedia.org...

So the African American senator is going to just ban profane language. So we can't swear anymore but he's not going to ban racist speech? He doesn't find the N word profane? I know I personally do and I'm caucasion.

I would never do the following but theoretically based on Ford's bill, I could actually take a S"]T on the American flag but couldn't actually say I did?????

I realize the 1st Amendment is not absolute but when we start banning words that people don't like for no other reason except they find those words distasteful, they are violating the 1st amendment. Ford wants to ban foul language because he finds it distasteful. Someone in his position should know better and those who are responsible for putting him in office should think VERY carefully before doing so again. This type of thinking is nothing short of Orwellian.


In my opinion, there's an even more disturbing part to this bill.

This bill includes written profanity. How Fahrenheit 451 ish of him.

Here's a few interesting quotes from an article I found.

“Local school boards may not remove books from school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books,” said the U.S. Supreme Court in Board of Education, Island Trees School District v. Pico in 1982.



“If we want to get rid of all books with inappropriate content, let’s get rid of the Bible. That’s where we’d start,” Moen said.



Moen encourages her English 250 class to face the book-banning issue by reading a novel from a list of historically banned books. Some of these books include The Great Gatsby, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, The Catcher in the Rye and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

www.byui.edu...

So now the Supreme Court would be interfering with Fords bill so is he going to take on the supreme court over this?



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by paperplanes
Well, Senator Robert Ford can suck it.


I just laughed so hard... oh man thanks, I needed that.
I have to agree with you, Senator Robert Ford can suck it.



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Well, seeing as he's a D also, he should get together with the federal congress and Prez Barry, and see if he can tack this onto the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine, seeing as it is also anti-First Amendment.



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 09:09 AM
link   
Haha, this senator is an asshole.

Sorry mods. Feel free to warn me if you like. I just had to say it.



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by GreyFoxSolid
 


well that's 5 years and/or $5000.00 for you buddy boy !

We've solved all other problems in this country so it's time to tackle harsh language and Ford's gonna start with you !

My god, is Ford a D!khed or what? Oops


If I spell the bad word wrong is it ok with ford?
Ok what if I say
RICHARD NOGGIN instead of DH?
It's a different way of saying the same thing isn't it so those 2 non-bad words all of a sudden are bad words? So do they go on THE LIST?
If they do, then the implication is that the thought behind the meaning needs to be monitored too for the bill to be effective. Excellent so we've just gone from banning the F word to creating the THOUGHT POLICE in just a few easy steps.
So now we don't need to just worry about saying the wrong word but how, what we say in general, is perceived by someone else.

I seriously hope people understand that this has more to do with then people wanting the right to say the F word.


[edit on 24-1-2009 by jfj123]



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Forgive me if it appears that i'm changing the subject , but i think this is relevent to South Carolina legislation. I was reading an article in the " SUN " newspaper that Myrtle Beach is banning the annual bike rally this spring because the towns people don't want the noise and traffic and all that money the bikers bring. The mayor wants to make it a law to wear helmets and outlaw loud pipes in the city limits. I have several questions regarding this . (1) Can a single town invoke a law making helmets mandatory when the state allows them to be optional ? (2) Are there going to be border guards to inforce these requirements ? (3) What about all the people traveling thru that haven't heard about the new laws , are they going to be heavily fined or jailed ?



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by prd1
Forgive me if it appears that i'm changing the subject , but i think this is relevent to South Carolina legislation. I was reading an article in the " SUN " newspaper that Myrtle Beach is banning the annual bike rally this spring because the towns people don't want the noise and traffic and all that money the bikers bring. The mayor wants to make it a law to wear helmets and outlaw loud pipes in the city limits. I have several questions regarding this .



(1) Can a single town invoke a law making helmets mandatory when the state allows them to be optional ?

YES. As far as I know, Local governments can do this as long as it doesn't violate state or Constitutional laws.


(2) Are there going to be border guards to inforce these requirements ?

I doubt it. It will probably fall under the responsibility of patrol officers to enforce these local statutes.


(3) What about all the people traveling thru that haven't heard about the new laws , are they going to be heavily fined or jailed ?

YEP. Haven't you heard that ignorance of the law is no excuse?
Seriously, you are responsible for finding out about all local, regional, state laws before you drive through those area's. Sounds stupid I know but that's what a judge would say.



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by jatsc
Whats exactly wrong with outlawing profanity ?

Even if they do approve it what is the likelihood of anyone getting charged. Most places in the US have laws about spitting on the ground and jay walking and how many get charged with those.


The other parts of the bill are crap but I really don't see a problem with it would someone please tell me what they think is wrong with it and why.


uhhmmm... ok...i think the word "JATSC" is profanity...so you need to be arrested and jailed...if you don't get the point...2 words...critical thinking.



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to jfj123.........Yes i'm aware of that fact. and as a rule that is the first thing i do prior to setting out an a destination. I just thought i would throw that out there because not everyone does . thankyou for your comments .



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join