Mass. residents vote for gov't to regulate what words come out of their mouth

[Dr.Drock]

What a bunch of idiots.

Town swears off swearing, passes $20 profanity fine - CSMonitor.com

The measure could raise questions about First Amendment rights, but state law does allow towns to enforce local laws that give police the power to arrest anyone who "addresses another person with profane or obscene language" in a public place.

 

[asaratis]

What a bunch of idiots.

Town swears off swearing, passes $20 profanity fine - CSMonitor.com

The measure could raise questions about First Amendment rights, but state law does allow towns to enforce local laws that give police the power to arrest anyone who "addresses another person with profane or obscene language" in a public place.

Now children, we will define the meanings of "addressing another person", "person", "profane" and "obscene" AND we will list all currently spoken languages containing words which have sounds resembling obscenities when spoken in the context of any other language. I might want to say "fox" in German...which is "fuck" in English!

Massachusetts is second only to California in the generation of obscenely ridiculous laws.

 

[Dr.Drock]

What a bunch of idiots.

Town swears off swearing, passes $20 profanity fine - CSMonitor.com

The measure could raise questions about First Amendment rights, but state law does allow towns to enforce local laws that give police the power to arrest anyone who "addresses another person with profane or obscene language" in a public place.

Now children, we will define the meanings of "addressing another person", "person", "profane" and "obscene" AND we will list all currently spoken languages containing words which have sounds resembling obscenities when spoken in the context of any other language. I might want to say "fox" in German...which is "fuck" in English!

Massachusetts is second only to California in the generation of obscenely ridiculous laws.

This law is even dumber than California's law against frisbee throwing on the beach.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I wonder how many fines a construction worker would get if a heavy piece of equipment falls on his leg, breaking it in the middle of the city.

"Well I'm in incredible agony, but I don't want to get a bunch of fines. Oh fudge my leg hurts!! Gosh darnit my bone is sticking out!!"

 

[Ernie S.]

Fuck Massachusetts!

 

[Avatar4321]

Going to play devil's advocate here for a second: How is this any different than criminally punishing people who verbally threaten others?

 

[Pho_King]

What a bunch of idiots.

Town swears off swearing, passes $20 profanity fine - CSMonitor.com

The measure could raise questions about First Amendment rights, but state law does allow towns to enforce local laws that give police the power to arrest anyone who "addresses another person with profane or obscene language" in a public place.

Now children, we will define the meanings of "addressing another person", "person", "profane" and "obscene" AND we will list all currently spoken languages containing words which have sounds resembling obscenities when spoken in the context of any other language. I might want to say "fox" in German...which is "fuck" in English!

Massachusetts is second only to California in the generation of obscenely ridiculous laws.

This law is even dumber than California's law against frisbee throwing on the beach.

Far dumber. The beach nearly always is windy here, and requires a very heavy frisbee to be accurate. I've seen a kid get knocked out cold by a 14 gram frisbee.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Going to play devil's advocate here for a second: How is this any different than criminally punishing people who verbally threaten others?

Threatening someone is a planned thing with the intention of causing someone else harm, can't say that's always the case with swearing.

 

[Katzndogz]

This law wasn't proposed to stop construction workers with broken legs from using profanity and complaining but to combat groups of teenagers who would confront people in public, surround them and scream profanities at them because it amused them to be able to do this. The teens know that no one is going to hit them, shove them out of the way, or even verbally abuse them back. As children they have special protections. Now the public has some special protections too.

 

[Dr.Drock]

This law wasn't proposed to stop construction workers with broken legs from using profanity and complaining but to combat groups of teenagers who would confront people in public, surround them and scream profanities at them because it amused them to be able to do this. The teens know that no one is going to hit them, shove them out of the way, or even verbally abuse them back. As children they have special protections. Now the public has some special protections too.

Who gives a damn what the supposed original intention was?

 

[g5000]

I was informed in the military that saying "fuck" around a female could be considered sexual harrassment. It didn't even have to be addressed to her. Just saying the word in a female's presence was all it took.

Not being able to say the F-word in the military? If that isn't a sign of the impending Apocalypse, I don't know what is.

Turns out I averaged one f-word about every 20 seconds. Talk about pressure!!!

 

[Moonglow]

you can be given a ticket here in Missouri or Arkansas for cussing,if a cop hears you.

 

[g5000]

you can be given a ticket here in Missouri or Arkansas for cussing,if a cop hears you.

Ridiculous.

 

[Katzndogz]

This law would not be necessary if any adult accosted by a kid like that was allowed to paddle them on the spot.

 

[Emma]

Who gives a damn what the supposed original intention was?

Well, a majority of those who attended the town meeting did vote to approve the proposal.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Who gives a damn what the supposed original intention was?

Well, a majority of those who attended the town meeting did vote to approve the proposal.

The original intention doesn't mean the law can't be abused in MANY ways and tickets can't be written for situations that aren't remotely similar to the original intent.

 

[Avatar4321]

Going to play devil's advocate here for a second: How is this any different than criminally punishing people who verbally threaten others?

Threatening someone is a planned thing with the intention of causing someone else harm, can't say that's always the case with swearing.

They are both just words unless something else occurs to back things up

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Going to play devil's advocate here for a second: How is this any different than criminally punishing people who verbally threaten others?

Threatening and swearing are worlds apart. Swearing has no victim save those whose chosen morality causes them to take offense to what you've said. Threatening someone is tantamount to using force to drive their actions, and on some level robbing them of their self initiative.

I gotta say, it's restored a tiny portion of my faith in humanity to read this thread. It's good to know that some of the conservative republican types out there still hold freedom as a major, even primary ideal. For the last two days I've been fuming at Republicans over this issue, as nearly every conservative or Repub on TV and the radio has been applauding this little piece of unconstitutional legislation.

So many republicans consider their party to be the party of small government and the party that's fighting to maintain the constitution against Democrats who would sell out our fundamental, guaranteed rights to satisfy their moral imperatives. Then, when given half a chance, they applaud when those rights are sold to satisfy -their- morals in stead. Every time I hear someone say, "This law is good, we need to get back to the Christian values that formed this country and made it great" I wanna kick a fuckin hole in my radio. Yes, what made this country great is the use of government force to suppress speech that Christians feel is inappropriate. Nice analysis retards.

Ahhhh. Feels good to vent.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Going to play devil's advocate here for a second: How is this any different than criminally punishing people who verbally threaten others?

Threatening someone is a planned thing with the intention of causing someone else harm, can't say that's always the case with swearing.

They are both just words unless something else occurs to back things up

It's still different to me, calling a police department and making a bomb threat is diff than making a bomb threat while playing Call of Duty.

 

[Emma]

Who gives a damn what the supposed original intention was?

Well, a majority of those who attended the town meeting did vote to approve the proposal.

The original intention doesn't mean the law can't be abused in MANY ways and tickets can't be written for situations that aren't remotely similar to the original intent.

So I guess it's just plain wrong to allow rights to be curtailed by popular vote.

(in this case the "majority" represented 0.008% of the population of the town)