Law bans Internet images that cause 'emotional distress' (Updated to Include Bill)

I suspect this is more political theater,

First off:

A new Tennessee law makes it a crime to post an image online that might "frighten, intimidate or cause emotional distress" to someone.

Think about it. Is not that PRECISELY the reason people go to movies and watch TV or read books? The whole idea is to be "stimulated" by what you have usually paid for (the internet in most cases is not an exception to that rule.)

The key here is I can only see this standing if it specifically requires a directly identified target .. in which case the content in question would be actionable as long as the specifically targeted reader/viewer is identified and willing to press charges.

Otherwise this is a simple direct assault on freedom of expression.

People do not have a right to NOT be offended.

Since this is all about "imagery" how long do you thin it would be before 'descriptive' imagery falls under the same litigious 'open door?'

reply to post by niceguybob


Hey lighten up on old Billy!
At least as far as we know he hasn't posted any pictures of his weiner or a fully erect boehner online.
That would be offensive to the Guv of Tennesee.
Has anyone had a chance to report someone today for internet violations?
Please get on it and report just 1 a day, we'll fix this unconstitutional law.

Can you believe He(Clinton) got mad at Wiener for bringing up Infedility again?

Like, " Dooode,they just forgot about that crap with me WAY to go."

"AND Your wife is hanging out with Hillary right now while she's preggers. I'm F***ed..
NOW Hillary is going to make me be accountable for you. ASS"

"Resign? Why? I beat resigning in the big house. Stay put! Get pics of you and the new baby and that's that"

Priceless