LoginCreate an account

  Username: Password:
 
Home Forum mySSnews.com Forum General Discussion Fine dining, children and parenting revisited
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: Fine dining, children and parenting revisited

Re:Fine dining, children and parenting revisited 4 years 3 months ago #13481

So.... anyone tried those new Dominoes toasted cheese sandwiches?
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re:Fine dining, children and parenting revisited 4 years 3 months ago #13485

  • sniper101
  • sniper101's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1346
  • Karma: 13
Momof2boyz wrote:
Just so you know, your cyber bullying and name calling is against the law (it's a form of harrassment) and if STG, myself or anyone else on here wanted to press the matter we could and you would be charged with a crime. It would just be a matter of having the courts subpoena the information that you used to sign up on this site. So you might want to rethink about the way you start responding to people. Just a friendly piece of advise that I thought I would share with you. TTFN.

Sheesh, going a little overboard with the threats here. You should press it and let's see how far you get with it, and please keep all the rest of us posted. I'm pretty sure that the News Telegram would kick anyone off the site if they thought that a poster was in violation of State law. From what I have read in the penal code, it would be pretty hard to convict anyone on here of harassment under Chapter 42 Sec 42.07. The newest law, Penal Code Chapter 33 Sec 33.07, deals primarily with people who use other peoples names to harass people on the internet. Both statutes I have found are posted after this.

Sec. 42.07. HARASSMENT. (a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to harass, annoy, alarm, abuse, torment, or embarrass another, he:

(1) initiates communication by telephone, in writing, or by electronic communication and in the course of the communication makes a comment, request, suggestion, or proposal that is obscene;

(2) threatens, by telephone, in writing, or by electronic communication, in a manner reasonably likely to alarm the person receiving the threat, to inflict bodily injury on the person or to commit a felony against the person, a member of his family or household, or his property;

(3) conveys, in a manner reasonably likely to alarm the person receiving the report, a false report, which is known by the conveyor to be false, that another person has suffered death or serious bodily injury;

(4) causes the telephone of another to ring repeatedly or makes repeated telephone communications anonymously or in a manner reasonably likely to harass, annoy, alarm, abuse, torment, embarrass, or offend another;

(5) makes a telephone call and intentionally fails to hang up or disengage the connection;

(6) knowingly permits a telephone under the person's control to be used by another to commit an offense under this section; or

(7) sends repeated electronic communications in a manner reasonably likely to harass, annoy, alarm, abuse, torment, embarrass, or offend another.

(b) In this section:

(1) "Electronic communication" means a transfer of signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, data, or intelligence of any nature transmitted in whole or in part by a wire, radio, electromagnetic, photoelectronic, or photo-optical system. The term includes:

(A) a communication initiated by electronic mail, instant message, network call, or facsimile machine; and

(B.) a communication made to a pager.

(2) "Family" and "household" have the meaning assigned by Chapter 71, Family Code.

(3) "Obscene" means containing a patently offensive description of or a solicitation to commit an ultimate sex act, including sexual intercourse, masturbation, cunnilingus, fellatio, or anilingus, or a description of an excretory function.

(c) An offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor, except that the offense is a Class A misdemeanor if the actor has previously been convicted under this section.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 2204, ch. 411, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1983; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 10, Sec. 1, eff. March 19, 1993; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994; Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 657, Sec. 1, eff. June 14, 1995; Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 62, Sec. 15.02(d), eff. Sept. 1, 1999; Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1222, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.

Sec. 33.07. ONLINE HARASSMENT. (a) A person commits an offense if the person uses the name or persona of another person to create a web page on or to post one or more messages on a commercial social networking site:

(1) without obtaining the other person's consent; and

(2) with the intent to harm, defraud, intimidate, or threaten any person.

(b) A person commits an offense if the person sends an electronic mail, instant message, text message, or similar communication that references a name, domain address, phone number, or other item of identifying information belonging to any person:

(1) without obtaining the other person's consent;

(2) with the intent to cause a recipient of the communication to reasonably believe that the other person authorized or transmitted the communication; and

(3) with the intent to harm or defraud any person.

(c) An offense under Subsection (a) is a felony of the third degree. An offense under Subsection (b) is a Class A misdemeanor, except that the offense is a felony of the third degree if the actor commits the offense with the intent to solicit a response by emergency personnel.

(d) If conduct that constitutes an offense under this section also constitutes an offense under any other law, the actor may be prosecuted under this section, the other law, or both.

(e) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that the actor is any of the following entities or that the actor's conduct consisted solely of action taken as an employee of any of the following entities:

(1) a commercial social networking site;

(2) an Internet service provider;

(3) an interactive computer service, as defined by 47 U.S.C. Section 230;

(4) a telecommunications provider, as defined by Section 51.002, Utilities Code; or

(5) a video service provider or cable service provider, as defined by Section 66.002, Utilities Code.

(f) In this section:

(1) "Commercial social networking site" means any business, organization, or other similar entity operating a website that permits persons to become registered users for the purpose of establishing personal relationships with other users through direct or real-time communication with other users or the creation of web pages or profiles available to the public or to other users. The term does not include an electronic mail program or a message board program.

(2) "Identifying information" has the meaning assigned by Section 32.51.

Added by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 911, Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2009.
Last Edit: 4 years 3 months ago by sniper101.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re:Fine dining, children and parenting revisited 4 years 3 months ago #13486

  • sniper101
  • sniper101's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1346
  • Karma: 13
Note: The edit was to get rid of a smiley that appeared on accident when posting statute.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re:Fine dining, children and parenting revisited 4 years 3 months ago #13490

  • Momof2boyz
  • Momof2boyz's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Posts: 12
  • Karma: -5
sniper101 wrote:
(2) with the intent to harm, defraud, intimidate, or threaten any person.

Intimidation is the only thing that has to be proven and it's not that hard to do.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re:Fine dining, children and parenting revisited 4 years 3 months ago #13492

Thanks for the info Sniper. Sounded like she thought she was able to say what she wanted and if I came back at her it was 'cyber bullying'.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re:Fine dining, children and parenting revisited 4 years 3 months ago #13493

To get back on target. If a parent is able to pull off teaching a very small child (and it can be done, but rarely, for any number of reasons, sometimes beyond the parents control) how to behave in public, I would encourage them to get him/her out there in those nice restaurants to show that kid off. And give us all some hope in the next generation. :cheer:
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re:Fine dining, children and parenting revisited 4 years 3 months ago #13510

  • heartandmind
  • heartandmind's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1170
  • Karma: 16
snipe, thanks for doing that research. i suspect that the state courts are so inundated with cases (in general) that unless the harrassment / threats or anything described in the law goes to extreme (i.e. death threats or dire circumstances) that the state attorneys won't persue it. and based on what i've read on this sight, it ain't nuttin' compared to say, topix. there's some real loons out there. even in the east TX area (check out royse city and emory for a couple nut jobs) that like to harang other posters. LOL. but i'm thinking mere "trolling" (and what's here isn't even close to that status yet) won't be prosecuted.
now, a civil case is different - anyone can file a civil case...but it'd still be up to either the judge or the jury to decide damages occur and what the victim deserves.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re:Fine dining, children and parenting revisited 4 years 3 months ago #13516

  • inkeper
  • inkeper's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 592
  • Karma: 17
SouthernBaptist wrote:
To get back on target. If a parent is able to pull off teaching a very small child (and it can be done, but rarely, for any number of reasons, sometimes beyond the parents control) how to behave in public, I would encourage them to get him/her out there in those nice restaurants to show that kid off. And give us all some hope in the next generation. :cheer:

No SB, I don't think that was it at all. I think it goes back to your first post responding to the kid's names on the windows. If you had begun your post any way other than "Oh for Heavens sake. " I don't think you would have rankled her nearly as much as you did. You may not mean it as such, but you can convey a tone in your posts that can be condescending. All she asked for was respect for her opinion, you gave it none with that opening salvo.

LOL....I pulled the wrong quote, it's been a long day, this is the one I meant to put up


SouthernBaptist Thanks for the info Sniper. Sounded like she thought she was able to say what she wanted and if I came back at her it was 'cyber bullying'.
Last Edit: 4 years 3 months ago by inkeper. Reason: I messed up
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re:Fine dining, children and parenting revisited 4 years 3 months ago #13517

Ya, your probably right. I'll make a mental note to sweeten it up a little. But, it's a public forum. Didn't know there was a prerequisite that you had to respect everyones opinions. I definately lit a fire under those two.
Just tryin' to keep the conversation lively.
Last Edit: 4 years 3 months ago by SouthernBaptist.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re:Fine dining, children and parenting revisited 4 years 3 months ago #13518

  • muu
  • muu's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 191
  • Karma: 2
SB, keep it up. Differences of opinions does keep this forum interesting. Even though we may not be participating in the discussion, we have to decide on our own opinions and to think why we feel the way we do.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re:Fine dining, children and parenting revisited 4 years 3 months ago #13519

Right on muu. And we can actually learn something too. I had to google what inkeper meant by 'opening salvo'.
I'm Thinking he was refering to (1.c) or (2.b) as opposed to (2.a).



sal·vo 1 (slv)
n. pl. sal·vos or sal·voes
1.
a. A simultaneous discharge of firearms.
b. The simultaneous release of a rack of bombs from an aircraft
c. The projectiles or bombs thus released.
2. Something resembling a release or discharge of bombs or firearms, as:
a. A sudden outburst, as of cheers or praise.
b. A forceful verbal or written assault.
Last Edit: 4 years 3 months ago by SouthernBaptist.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re:Fine dining, children and parenting revisited 4 years 3 months ago #13522

  • buckrack8
  • buckrack8's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Expert Boarder
  • Posts: 143
  • Karma: 4
It's too boring if everyone agrees
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re:Fine dining, children and parenting revisited 4 years 3 months ago #13530

  • inkeper
  • inkeper's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 592
  • Karma: 17
SouthernBaptist wrote:
Right on muu. And we can actually learn something too. I had to google what inkeper meant by 'opening salvo'.
I'm Thinking he was refering to (1.c) or (2.b) as opposed to (2.a).



sal·vo 1 (slv)
n. pl. sal·vos or sal·voes
1.
a. A simultaneous discharge of firearms.
b. The simultaneous release of a rack of bombs from an aircraft
c. The projectiles or bombs thus released.
2. Something resembling a release or discharge of bombs or firearms, as:
a. A sudden outburst, as of cheers or praise.
b. A forceful verbal or written assault.


You're right with 2b. Understand that I don't have any problem with lively exchanges at all. I've had my share of them on here as well, and have actually run off a couple of posters( In my humble opinion they needed to go ;) ).

As I have said many times on here I will not always agree with every position taken, but I respect the right of those who don't agree with me to disagree. A long time ago a lady I respected very much before she passed, once advised me that when disagreeing with someone you don't always have to be nice, but you always need to be polite.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re:Fine dining, children and parenting revisited 4 years 3 months ago #13562

  • deckofficer
  • deckofficer's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Expert Boarder
  • Posts: 92
  • Karma: 4
If my child gets out of hand at any establishment,off we go. It is frustrating for me, but sometimes has to be done.I cannot put my own pleasure above willful misbehaving. That is what part of parenting is, putting your own desires second. Yes,it would be nice to goto 3 Forks some night,but with a kiddo?HA! But in reality, Pizza Inn and Chili's are pretty much fair game for families.Outright rudeness is still not acceptable,but you do have to expect a buzz from kids along with other diners. If you really want a nice quiet evening of good food, get it to go. ;)
read my blog if you're bored.
echobasetoechoseven.blogspot.com/
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Time to create page: 0.244 seconds

mySSnews Login



User Menu