Stupid Redundant Laws

I think one of the biggest problems these days is we call our political representation “Lawmakers”. It implies that their job is not to represent their districts, states, and countries, but to MAKE LAWS. Our law books are BLOATED with laws, and statutes, and many of them are redundant. In Massachusetts it is illegal to text on a cellphone while driving. Decent law, but also redundant, as it was already illegal to operate a motor vehicle while being distracted away from said operation. You can’t read a newspaper, play with a child, attempt to restrain a pet, or apply makeup in a car already. Texting somebody is the same, but we somehow needed a NEW law for that.

I see that as the same here:

Internet trolls could face up to two years in jail under new laws, Justice Secretary Chris Grayling has said.

He told the Mail on Sunday quadrupling the current maximum six-month term showed his determination to “take a stand against a baying cyber-mob”.

The plan was announced days after TV presenter Chloe Madeley suffered online abuse, which Mr Grayling described as “crude and degrading”.

…Miss Madeley received threats after defending her mother Judy Finnigan’s comments on a rape committed by footballer Ched Evans, which she said was “non-violent” and did not cause “bodily harm”.

Richard Madeley has said “prosecution awaits” those who sent “sick rape threats” to his daughter.

First up, rape threats are physical threats. Second the law shouldn’t be any different if I send a rape threat via the internet, post mail, over the phone, or in a direct conversation.

Either this law will be 100% redundant, OR will be abused as an anti-free-speech law. Either way, I see no reason why it should have been passed.

BLNN Logo

This entry was posted in Blogging, Freedom, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Stupid Redundant Laws

  1. Allen says:

    It will be interesting, to see what they do if the *threat* is traced to the *victim*,
    My guess is nothing.

  2. McThag says:

    I sometimes wonder if it’s jurisprudence and stare decisis that causes it.

    Are the original laws effectively rendered null by successful defenses?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.