Unlawful labelling of an MP3 is "terrorism", OREGON'S SENATE Bill Options

[tacitus10]

Oregon says unlawful labelling of an MP3 is "terrorism"

Violators to be imprisoned for life


By N. Alex Rupp: Tuesday 20 May 2003, 08:01

OREGON'S SENATE Bill 742, section 19, chapter 666 (http://pub.das.state.or.us/LEG_BILLS/PDFs/SB742.pdf) defines the "unlawful labeling of a sound recording" as terrorism and would make it punishable by a minimum life sentence of 25 years in prison without parole.
After 25 years (if they're fortunate) the state might allow them to find "employment at a forest or work camp" or other similar "post prison supervision".

Other acts described as terrorism include (but are not limited to):

* Blocking traffic
* School walkouts
* Computer crime
* Accepting a bribe
* Theft and Burglary
* Unauthorized use of a vehicle
* Unlawful labeling of a videotape
* Unlawful recording of a live performance
* Negotiating a bad check
* Dogfighting
* Delivery of an imitation controlled substance
* Producing fake IDs
* Using another's driver's license
* Drunk driving
* Selling cigarettes to a minor

And the state only has to come up with two "witnesses". Now might be the time for citizens of Oregon to call their Senators. µ

Source: www.theinquirer.org

[atici]

[SARCASM]
Yeah we want perfectly ripped and tagged files! Please rip them according to Rex or PiMP restrictions, replaygain and name them carefully before you consider sharing.
[/SARCASM]

This post has been edited by atici: May 21 2003, 05:50

[untitled90]

this is 100% off topic, sorry, that is just so screwed uP!!! it is also illegal to pump your own gas in the *fine* state of oregon. maybe they are all just on crack.

[boojum]

I live in Oregon. Not for a long time, but I am a little familiar with the bill. It is a reaction to the demonstrations in Portland at the begining of the year. They were hijacked by some jerks who were far from peaceful protesters. So some jerk in the Senate came up with a correspondingly stupid bill. It is pretty much opposed in the state and written against. I have not seen anyone support the bill, other than the proposer, in the media. I do not think it has a chance of passing. If it did it would be challenged, rightfully, in the courts and tied up for quite a while. I do not think there is a real cause for alarm.

What has me really concerned, though, is whether ASP is the correct string for MP3. That is more pressing. B)

[Sunhillow]

Wow! First I could not believe this is serious

Some of Senator Minnis' proposals are quite good when it concerns possession and use of weapons, bribery and so on. But most of the meaningful points should already be covered by existing laws. There is no need to declare them as "terrorism".

Looks like he wants to prepare the installation of a dictatorship

[SometimesWarrior]

The writer of the bill is obviously being facetious. At the state level, senators can still screw around a bit, especially in a liberal environment like Oregon. It's not hard to see that the senator wanted to parody some of the recent anti-terrorist legislation that's been going through the national legislature. Far from wanting to install a dictatorship, it looks like the senator is critiquing the current national administration's attempts to do so.

Not that I seriously think the Bush administration is trying to overthrow our democracy... but there's probably a good-sized collection of Oregonians (and Californians!) who do.

Edit: wouldn't this thread be better suited in the "off-topic" forum?

This post has been edited by SometimesWarrior: May 21 2003, 09:15

[Sunhillow]

It's not hard to see that the senator wanted to parody some of the recent anti-terrorist legislation that's been going through the national legislature. Far from wanting to install a dictatorship, it looks like the senator is critiquing the current national administration's attempts to do so.

I didn't see it this way, maybe he just shows some deep black humor.

btw, I never assumed such a bill would pass the legislature.

[2tabsofmescaline]

i saw this here and honestly i think the facts here are kinda dubious. i can see the activities listed here as just being generally illegal or disruptive, but the whole "chapter 666" title kinda throws me off a bit. i think now with past circumstances they're trying to redefine the term "terrorism" as it's not limited to flying airliners into buildings. i guess you could say pumping your own gas is terrorism??? if you don't know what you're doing and you could cause an explosion?? it's kinda funny, as a Canadian to hear/read/see all oft his business that's going on in the US with homeland security and the war on drugs and terrorism. we tend to be pretty liberal up here and as far as i know no one up here is on the anti-mp3 jihad.

[QHOBBES 2.0]

/me adds Senator Minnis to his "list"