Give the Man a Cigar, Oops… Wrong President!

Bobbie…why do you find it necessary to disrespect our President?

Bobbie…

…first off let me say how proud I am to have the opportunity to be the first (and probably the only) comment regarding your blog.

You sure are disrespectful to our President.

State Electronic Harassment or "Cyberstalking" Laws

Law enforcement agencies estimate that electronic communications are a factor in from 20 percent to 40 percent of all stalking cases. Forty-six states now have laws that explicitly include electronic forms of communication within stalking or harassment laws. State laws that do not include specific references to electronic communication may still apply to those who threaten or harass others online, but specific language may make the laws easier to enforce. Two reports from the U.S. Department of Justice provide detailed information on cyberstalking: Stalking and Domestic Violence: Report to Congress and Cyberstalking: A New Challenge for Law Enforcement and Industry. Other related NCSL resources: Enacted Cyberbullying Legislation.

Last update: March 12, 2009

STATE

CITE

Alabama

Ala. Code § 13A-11-8

Alaska

Alaska Stat. §§ 11.41.260, 11.41.270 , § 11.61.120

Arizona

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-2921

Arkansas

Ark. Code §§ 5-41-108, 5-27-306

California

Cal. Civil Code § 1708.7 Cal. Penal Code §§ 422, 646.9, 653m

Colorado

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-9-111

Connecticut

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-182b, § 53a-183

Delaware

Del. Code tit. 11 § 1311

Florida

Fla. Stat. § 817.568, § 784.048

Georgia

Georgia Code § 16-5-90

Hawaii

Hawaii Rev. Stat. § 711-1106
Idaho Idaho Statutes §§ 18-7905, 18-7906

Illinois

720 Ill. Comp. Stat. §§ 5/12-7.5, 135/1-2, 135/1-3, 135/2

Indiana

Ind. Code § 35-45-2-2

Iowa

Iowa Code § 708.7

Kansas

Kan. Stat. § 21-3438

Louisiana

La. Rev. Stat. § 14:40.2, La. Rev. Stat. § 14:40.3

Maine

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17A § 210-A

Maryland

Md. Code tit. 3 § 3-805

Massachusetts

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 265 § 43, 43A

Michigan

Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 750.411h, 750.411i, 750.411s

Minnesota

Minn. Stat. § 609.749

Mississippi

Miss. Code § 97-29-45, § 97-45-15

Missouri

Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 565.225, 565.090

Montana

Mont. Code Ann. §§ 45-8-213, 45-5-220

Nevada

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.575

New Hampshire

N.H. Rev. Stat. § 644:4

New York

New York Penal Law § 240.30

North Carolina

N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 14-196, 14-196.3

North Dakota

N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-17-07

Ohio

Ohio Rev. Code §§ 2903.211 2913.01(Y), 2917.21(A)

Oklahoma

Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 1173

Oregon

Or. Rev. Stat. §§ 163.730-.732, 166.065

Pennsylvania

Pa. Cons. Stat. tit. 18 § 2709, 2709.1

Rhode Island

R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-52-4.2, § 11-52-4.3

South Carolina

S.C. Code §§ 16-3-1700(B), -1700(C), -1700(F)

South Dakota

S.D. Cod. Laws § 22-19A-1, 49-31-31

Tennessee

Tenn. Code §§ 39-17-308, 39-17-315

Texas

Tx. Penal Code § 42.07

Utah
Utah Code § 76-5-106.5

Vermont

13 V.S.A. §§ 1027, 1061, 1062, 1063

Virginia

Va. Code §§ 18.2-60 18.2-152.7:1

Washington

Wash. Rev. Code §§ 9A.46.020, 9A.46.110, 9.61.260, 10.14.020

West Virginia

W. Va. Code §61-3C-14a

Wisconsin

Wis. Stat. § 947.0125

Wyoming

Wyo. Stat. § 6-2-506

You might want to check your state, I know mine.

btw Australia

Criminal Code Stalking Amendment Act 1999
What is unlawful Stalking: Chapter 33A-Unlawful Stalking, 359B(c)(ii)
359B. "Unlawful stalking" is conduct

1. intentionally directed at a person (the "stalked person"); and
2. engaged in on any 1 occasion if the conduct is protracted or on more than 1 occasion; and
3. consisting of 1 or more acts of the following, or a similar, type-
1. following, loitering near, watching or approaching a person;
2. contacting a person in any way, including, for example, by telephone, mail, fax, e-mail or through the use of any technology;
3. loitering near, watching, approaching or entering a place where a person lives, works or visits;
4. leaving offensive material where it will be found by, given to or brought to the attention of, a person;
5. giving offensive material to a person, directly or indirectly;
6. an intimidating, harassing or threatening act against a person, whether or not involving violence or a threat of violence;
7. an act of violence, or a threat of violence, against, or against property of, anyone, including the defendant; and
4. that-
1. would cause the stalked person apprehension or fear, reasonably arising in all the circumstances, of violence to, or against property of, the stalked person or another person; or
2. causes detriment, reasonably arising in all the circumstances, to the stalked person or another person.

Has been updated is enforceable thru IC3 Check it out!

Bobbie this may surprise you…

…but…we have free speech in Australia too. In fact, the UN Declaration on Human Rights guarantees the free speech of all people. However, domestic law in Australia has a clear and lengthy history of regarding free speech as unimpeachable…as do we Americans. Frankly Bobbie, even if you flew all the way down here and ask the Crown to act on this complaint, once you told them its because I post political comments that you disagree with on a public forum they would, quite frankly, laugh your foreigner rear right out the door. Their response, after they finished laughing, would probably be something along the line of, "look mate…go on back to your hotel, see the sights of Sydney, have a good time, then go back to the USA."

But hey Bobbie if you want to spend about $5000.00 just to find out what free speech means in both the USA and Australia…have at it mate!! Be sure and see the Sydney Harbour Bridge and the Sydney Opera House as well the Botanical Gardens just behind the Sydney Opera House…its a spectacular place…and don't forget to take a Harbour ferry to Manly beach!!

Yeah I checked mine…it says here American laws do not apply to Australia…that's interesting.

Oh also, you may want to check the precedents on the long list of laws you posted. You might be very interested in what you learn.

But hey,…good luck with that Bobbie!!

Now Bobbi…

…how many times have I read about you teabaggers ranting and raving about our Constitution, and now you think there is a legal mechanism to silence the Constitutional right to free speech? That is sad Bobbi. I can over look the fact that you clearly don't understand American, Australian, or International jurisprudence, but to blatantly attempt to intimidate me into silence in the hopes that I won't bring the counter arguments to your opinions and your loosely defined "ideals is going far beyond the pale. This kind of thinking is one of the reasons you conservatives lost not one but two massive elections in a row, and it is one of the reasons conservatives are in such disarray today with the likely prospect of loosing even more seats in the House and Senate in 2010 and 2012.