Annoy Charlie Hoffman

Here’s a half baked idea from Rep. Charlie Hoffman.

HB 281/LM (BR 278) - C. Hoffman
AN ACT relating to crimes and punishments.
Amend KRS 525.080 relating to harassing communications to add communications via the internet and increase penalty for subsequent offenses to a Class A misdemeanor.

Full text of the proposed changes is below.

AN ACT relating to crimes and punishments.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky:

Section 1. KRS 525.080 is amended to read as follows:
(1) A person is guilty of harassing communications when with intent to harass, annoy or alarm another person he:
(a) Communicates with a person, anonymously or otherwise, by telephone, internet, telegraph, mail or any other form of electronic or written communication in a manner which causes annoyance or alarm and serves no purpose of legitimate communication; or
(b) Makes a telephone call, whether or not conversation ensues, with no purpose of legitimate communication.
(2) Harassing communications is a Class B misdemeanor for the first offense and a Class A misdemeanor for each subsequent offense.


Charlie wants to make harassing communications via the internet illegal. What he probably wanted to do was to limit harassing email. Not a bad idea, except that it is totally unenforceable.

How Charlie expects to prosecute someone with an anonymous email account from the Pacific Rim for a misdemeanor in Kentucky is a mystery to me.

But wait a minute; Charlie wants to make annoying communications via the Internet illegal. Maybe Charlie is really talking about criticism of politicians on the Internet.

Well I hope this qualifies.

I hope Charlie is annoyed when I point out this is a communication via the Internet and an exercise of my First Amendment Rights under the Constitution of the United States. I hope he is annoyed when I say that he or whoever drafted this piece of crap didn’t do their homework and need a few remedial civics classes.

From the Cornell Law School:

The most basic component of freedom of expression is the right of freedom of speech. The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without interference or constraint by the government. The Supreme Court requires the government to provide substantial justification for the interference with the right of free speech where it attempts to regulate the content of the speech. A less stringent test is applied for content-neutral legislation. The Supreme Court has also recognized that the government may prohibit some speech that may cause a breach of the peace or cause violence. The right to free speech includes other mediums of expression that communicates a message.