Keep an eye on whats going on in Virginia.

[Snattlerake]

proposed

§ 18.2-152.7:1. Harassment by computer; penalty.

If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act, he shall be is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A violation of this section may be prosecuted in the jurisdiction in which the communication was made or received or in the City of Richmond if the person subjected to the act is one of the following officials or employees of the Commonwealth: the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.

 

[chuter]

So I guess you can't say the governor is a moron?

 

[dennishoddy]

So I guess you can't say the governor is a moron?

Or a worthless POS moron.

 

[PJM]

First off, no pansy commiecrat in Virginia is going tell me how talk or what think here. Second if the scum sucking bottom feeder wants to come here and get me then have at it. But remember WE are still under the Constitution of the United States, are still a free state, and can defend ourselves. IF that piece of dirt wants to show himself I will GLADLY play Hoover on him, or any other mouthpiece for the commiecrat elite, especially since they are trying to enslave us.

DSA/dnc IS the greatest enemy in the world , of the USA. Want proof, just turn your TV on.

 

[tRidiot]

"If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language"

Very very slippery slope there...

I've been telling people for 2 years, we're headed the way of Europe, where offensive speech is going to be designated as HATE speech and is no longer going to be FREE speech.

Everyone here is worried about the 2nd Amendment, and with good reason, but the 1st Amendment is going the way of the dodo exactly the same way, people.

 

[okie362]

He doesn't like guns, he doesn't like children (he wants to kill them after all), he doesn't like bacon! Maybe he should move to China. They don't like those things either. Appears he has a lot more in common with them than us.

DSA/dnc IS the greatest enemy in the world, of the USA. Want proof, just turn you TV on.

FYI...Chinese LOVE bacon. They eat huge amounts of pork. Other than that, spot on and send him anyway!

 

[DavidMcmillan]

Hasn't passed, only introduced like hundreds of others. Nothing to see here.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

proposed

§ 18.2-152.7:1. Harassment by computer; penalty.

If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act, he shall be is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A violation of this section may be prosecuted in the jurisdiction in which the communication was made or received or in the City of Richmond if the person subjected to the act is one of the following officials or employees of the Commonwealth: the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.

Umm - Eh - Who sets the standard for what comprises or rises a communication to the level of an offense with intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person with obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act? Of course, before there can be any prosecution, one must be able to prove intent and must have an adjudicate-able standardized definition of what any such act is. I see no such definition in this proposed act. Without a coded definition with set minimums as to what would rise to the level of any of the afore mentioned offenses, almost anything could be construed to be any such offense. If this legislation passes, I wouldn't even dare to post a fart emoji in any communication in Virginia.

This is how tyrants make their grand entrance.

Woody

 

[DavidMcmillan]

Reread the First Admendment...

 

[RugersGR8]

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20200127/bloomberg-bought-virginia-general-assembly-ignores-peaceful-redress-advances-more-gun-control?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ila_alert
Bloomberg-Bought Virginia General Assembly Ignores Peaceful Redress, Advances More Gun Control
MONDAY, JANUARY 27, 2020



The Senate

On Wednesday, the full senate passed “red flag” gun confiscation bill SB240 by the razor thin margin of 21-19.

The legislation would empower the government to strip an individual’s constitutional right to keep and bear arms and seize their firearms pursuant to an ex parte order. The proposed confiscation order could be issued without notice to the respondent or a hearing or other opportunity for the respondent to be heard and present evidence with the aid of counsel. Such safeguards are a requirement for adequate procedural due process.

Under the legislation, a confiscation order must be sought by either an attorney for the commonwealth or two law enforcement officers. However, the legislation provides civil immunity for these public officials if they lie or otherwise misuse the confiscation order procedure. A gun owner would have no way of seeking recompense from a wayward public official for an inappropriate or malicious use of the confiscation order procedure.

Further, the bill provides civil and criminal immunity to any law enforcement agency that seizes a person’s firearms for “any damage to or deterioration, loss, or theft of such firearm.” Under this provision, a law enforcement agency could effectively destroy the entire value of an individual’s firearms collection through its own negligent or malicious conduct without the threat of civil or criminal sanction. The agency could chop a person’s confiscated guns in half or store them at the bottom of a lake and the owner would not be able to seek damages from the agency.