Pics of Westboro "church" members cause me emotional distress.Photos of Illiterate teepee signs frighten me. I am intimidated by pictures of all white, male only political gatherings. Get to remedying those offensive images please Governor.

Interestingly enough, before "Senate moved to substitute and conform to HB0300" the three Senators to vote against companion bill SB0487 by Ketron in the Judiciary committee were Barnes, Beavers, and Campfield

The final votes in both chambers were nearly unanimously for it.

Considering the "pretty clearly unconstitutional" nature of the law as written, I think the legislature should review what other states have done to explicitly include electronic forms of communication within more traditional stalking or harassment laws (it's not that hard) and try again before somebody's ass gets whupped with legitimate purpose.

Photo credit: Metropulse 9/29/10

.. wouldn't this imply that the photos used by most pro-life groups would now be illegal?

The...irony...it....BURNS!!!!

How would images of war and terrorism shown in magazines, newspapers and TV news channels, fit into this law? Aren't these images used as tactics to "frighten, intimidate and cause emotional distress".

Seems like this law hinges on "intent." I see a bunch of muddled court cases in our future.

That is, if this law isn't thrown out soon as unconstitutional, which it seems to me it clearly is.

and it's a criminal law, so don't expect to get rich from any civil suits.

This law reads like a threat. Blog, tweet, fb, flickr, knoxviews, etc. anything they don't like and they will have you arrested.

and who is going to be monitor? or is it complaint driven? I don't understand. This law applies to all TN residents? How about if you are driving through Tn and you heading from KY to GA, and you post a picture of something distressing...say the HUGE white metal cross on I-75 south...can you get busted?

Please help me. I'm pretty simple minded. I thought the white wing was all for FREEDOM! and the guvment getting OUT of our shit?

I have read and re-read the description on harassment... I don't see where someone can be

jailed and/or fined for sending/posting image files that are likely to "frighten, intimidate or cause emotional distress".

I see that a person who

Threatens, by telephone, in writing or by electronic communication, including, but not limited to, text messaging, facsimile transmissions, electronic mail or Internet services, to take action known to be unlawful against any person and by this action knowingly annoys or alarms the recipient;

can get in trouble.

The section that states

cause emotional distress

is under section four, which states

Communicates with another person by any method described in subdivision (a)(1), (by telephone, in writing or by electronic communication, including, but not limited to, text messaging, facsimile transmissions, electronic mail or Internet services) without legitimate purpose

The original article is misrepresents the updated Tn law (and so does the linked blog). Having worked for years as a victim's advocate in both domestic violence and rape, the updated law helps protect victims.

The updated law says nothing about posting pic on your FB account. The Volokh Conspiracy is reading WAY to far into this...and, believe me, I am into conspiracy, but this is over the top.

Like most states with a cyberbullying statute, New Jersey’s focuses on primary and high school education, found in the part of the legal code devoted to education, not criminal acts.

Do we really want to give Tennessee prosecutors authority to bring criminal charges against people for violations of terms of use agreements?

Who draws the lines?

“A good prosecutor could indict a ham sandwich.”

Scouring the interwebs for any reporting on this matter that wasn't a copy/paste hack job with a scary headline (yes, I've done plenty of those here, I know) ... deep in the comments of Mashable's facebook post, Do you think posting images -- even disturbing or offensive ones -- online should be a crime?: New State Law Makes Posting Distressing Images a Crime I found a link to a piece of actual journalism from right here at home:

influential bloggers and tweeters across the country are yet again making fun of Tennessee. The problem is, very few of them seem to have bothered to read the law.

Take that Gizmodo post, which says "an online image of anything that offends anyone is now illegal" and likely to land you in a Tennessee jail. Or Ars Technica, which writes, "for image postings, the 'emotionally distressed' individual need not be the intended recipient. Anyone who sees the image is a potential victim." Sounds like a reason to panic, right? But these comments are off base.

Deep breaths, everybody. Deeeeep breaths.

Ok, now that you're not panicking, let's start over.

Thank you, Cari Wade Gervin and Metropulse.

Governor Bill Haslam and the TN state Government spit in the face of the first Amendment.
Welcome to Tennessee. Please reset your clock to the 1800s.

In one ear and right out his a . . other ear.