HomeFairfax General ForumArrest/Ticket SearchWiki newPictures/VideosChatArticlesLinksAbout
Fairfax County General :  Fairfax Underground fairfax underground logo
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Bi*ch Please: Democrat's Bill Would Punish Curse Word With Jail
Posted by: Zerohedge ()
Date: October 23, 2019 08:31AM

Democrat Daniel J. Hunt (whose last name was surely a playground favorite) introduced "An Act regarding the use of offensive words," which would fine individuals $150 for a first offense, while repeat offenders would face a $200 fine, up to six months' imprisonment, or both.

Section 53 of chapter 272 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2016 Official Edition, is hereby amended by adding the following subsection:-

(c) A person who uses the word “bitch” directed at another person to accost, annoy, degrade or demean the other person shall be considered to be a disorderly person in violation of this section, and shall be subject to the penalties provided in subsections (a) and (b). A violation of this subsection may be reported by the person to whom the offensive language was directed at or by any witness to such incident.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/bich-please-democrats-bill-would-punish-curse-word-jail

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Bi*ch Please: Democrat's Bill Would Punish Curse Word With Jail
Posted by: Pointer outer of things ()
Date: October 23, 2019 01:39PM

Conn. has laws that say you can't call people niggers or faggots or you'll get a fine or get thrown in jail. They arrested 2 students in Conn. over it, recently. Apparently, it's the first time anybody's tried to enforce the law, so mobody's tried to get the court to throw it out.

Eventually, the court will have to throw it out.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Bi*ch Please: Democrat's Bill Would Punish Curse Word With Jail
Date: October 25, 2019 01:54AM

Supreme Court already ruled on this kind of law,
years ago. It will be thrown out.


That CT law is weird. They have attempted to enforce
it many times, and it's not a new law. Also, it is
about ADVERTISEMENTS, notjust people saying things.
And the recent arrest has nothing to do with advertisements.
So the case will be dismissed because they were not
advertising in any sense, so cannot be charged under this law.
But eventually some other case -- involving advertising --
will come up. Then the law will be thrown out because of
the Supreme Court ruling.

You can make certain kinds of laws against "fighting words"
but not a law proscribing pffensive words such as are on
the books in some places,or as is being proposed here.

Options: ReplyQuote


Your Name: 
Your Email (Optional): 
Subject: 
Attach a file
  • No file can be larger than 75 MB
  • All files together cannot be larger than 300 MB
  • 30 more file(s) can be attached to this message
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
  ******    **        ********   **      **  **    ** 
 **    **   **        **     **  **  **  **  **   **  
 **         **        **     **  **  **  **  **  **   
 **   ****  **        ********   **  **  **  *****    
 **    **   **        **     **  **  **  **  **  **   
 **    **   **        **     **  **  **  **  **   **  
  ******    ********  ********    ***  ***   **    ** 
This forum powered by Phorum.