Virginia GOP introduces anti human trafficking act, liberal ACLU says "This sounds like The Onion"

[Falsedawn]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...ove-porn-filter-new-devices-article-1.3790252

House Bill 1592, aka the Human Trafficking Prevention Act, would require retailers in Old Dominion to make sure that "any product that makes content accessible on the internet" features a "digital content blocking capability that renders obscene content, including obscene items, obscene performances or obscene exhibitions, inaccessible."
...
In turn, a fund would be established so that all the proceeds would go to support victims of human trafficking as well as prosecute human trafficking cases.
...
In a statement provided to the Daily News, ACLU Virginia expressed its opposition and confusion over the “convoluted” bill.
...
“Really, this reads like something from The Onion.”

http://wric.com/2018/01/29/proposed...quire-fee-to-access-obscene-internet-content/

RICHMOND, Va. (WRIC) — Supporters of House Bill 1592, also known as the Human Trafficking Prevention Act, are looking to reduce trafficking by making pornography less accessible on the internet.
...
Jessica Neely, who is a human trafficking survivor, is in favor of the proposed bill.

“By public education, the next generation is very well informed that exploitation has consequences,” Neely said. “Endorsing this bill, getting behind it and making sure it passes, your state — Virginia — makes the choice that girls like myself can choose recovery.”

The truth is that liberals hate everything Trump, and are supporters of human trafficking. Here is a bill that seeks to eradicate human trafficking at it's core, setting up a fund to help fight the victimization of the most vulnerable populations we have, and liberal morons can't do anything but obstruct because they lost the election. This is why Trump won, and i'm glad for it.

Spoiler

If you're reading this spoiler (or frankly, know my MO), then you know that the entire premise of this thread is bullshit. The Breitbart style headline is absolutely intentional.

But why frame the story in such a duplicitous way? Well, it's factually correct. We do have a bill that purports to combat human trafficking, and the ACLU did indeed say that it sounded like it was fom The Onion. However, to distill it down to the title fundamentally obfuscates the origin of the animus regarding a bill of this nature. We're literally talking about blocking "obscene" content and forcing a smut fee (plus identification) to remove it from the device. Anyone who has a brain can agree that it's a shit idea, but when presented like the title, it's a factually accurate presentation of a shit bill (with a laughable name at that).

This is how Breitbart (and other alternative "media" sources) get their clicks, and perpetuate false information. Take a story that should have widespread denunciation, editorialize the information, add a slant, and post to great acclaim (and explosive comment sections). This is how we can have a bill like the PATRIOT Act pass with rousing acclaim, because who here isn't a patriot amirite? This is how trends can be attributed to one person in particular despite the trend existing for literal decades. This is why sources like this (Breitbart, Huffpo, Shareblue, Fox News, etc...) are scoffed at by rational people. You might be correct in useless details, you're just ignoring the whole of the pertinent information in order to be right. This is what "fake news" actually looks like.

Please remember that the next time you read a source and get outraged. I'm tired of posting memes for shit stories.

 

[The ScorpioN]

Senator Black, Dick is co-sponsoring this one.

 

[Gregolian]

How will Stormy Daniels pay for her political career now though?

 

[Trotsky]

Itt: liberals support human trafficking

 

[Falsedawn]

Itt: liberals support human trafficking

The Virginia GOP is extra virtuous. I don't see how you can't support them here, shame on liberals.

 

[jefferz]

So how do they plan on implementing and enforcing the fee?
Edit: didn’t the uk do this?

 

[oldshadow]

Sounds stupid as hell.

 

[MeatheadMike]

 

[cooks1]

It does seem rather bizarre, and also a bit of a non starter.

Who gets to decide what obscene is ?????????????????????

They could pass the bill today and spend the next 10 years arguing over that.

 

[lfd0311]

This is how we can have a bill like the PATRIOT Act pass with rousing acclaim, because who here isn't a patriot amirite?

That was really more a product of the emotion of the time in which that came out of than anyting else, and once it was passed it was passed and they were never going to do away with it.

 

[The ScorpioN]

So how do they plan on implementing and enforcing the fee?
Edit: didn’t the uk do this?

Yes

 

[Falsedawn]

That was really more a product of the emotion of the time in which that came out of than anyting else, and once it was passed it was passed and they were never going to do away with it.

We can expand that to any number of laws that prime you with names.

DOMA- Defense of Marriage Act, did the exact opposite.

Restoring Internet Freedom Act- The order that repealed Net Neutrality

SOPA- Stop Online Piracy Act, basically a grab of internet rights by the RIAA.

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act - Code for bailing out bankers.

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - Not very affordable eh?

They prime you with the name and then accuse you of not supporting the name, regardless of the content of the bill. Hence a "Patriot Act" that amounts to limitless surveillance and a "Human Trafficking Act" that basically amounts to a porn registry.

You can definitely point to the historical circumstances that made the Patriot Act what it was, but they obfuscated the name for a distinct reason, because it works.

This is that, but on a media level, and it works.

 

[CO68]

'Give us money to watch free porn while we pretend to care about human trafficking' bill