https://www.yahoo.com/news/florida-senator-fights-back-over-122006203.html

It seems when I cut and pasted the new law, it did not show the additions made to the definition of cyberstalking. Book added “or indirectly” and “or pertaining to.”

But, if you think this is going to help US in any way, I wouldn’t get my hopes up if I were you. This will merely be abused by Book and other pols who want to silence critics.

CS/HB 921, signed into law on 7/6/2021 (as Chapter No. 2021-220), contains a rather vague provision to the state’s cyberstalking law:

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2021/921/Amendment/725860/PDF

(d) “Cyberstalk” means:

To engage in a course of conduct to communicate, or to cause to be communicated, directly or indirectly, words, images, or language by or through the use of electronic mail or electronic communication, directed at or pertaining to a specific person;

Seems to me you’re trying awfully hard to simp for Lauren Book. What’s your game?

TruthandScience

As my great friend Ricky Ricardo use to say “Lucy you got some splainin to do”.

All true, and I can’t help but think that some law enforcement jump so quickly on cases like these because Book is in a position to help their careers. Everyone else can wait at the back of the line apparently.

It would be interesting to learn of the chain of custody of those pictures and how they ended up in the possession of a 19 year old. Typically, young people socialize and share these types of things among peers. It would not be terribly unreasonable to even hypothesize that she shared them with someone underage, who shared them with others until they ended up with this young man. You just don’t know. As a victim, she should be willing to disclose to authorities the person to whom those pictures were shared as they are the critical link in the chain.

But, to quote one poster below, ‘those words do NOT make you win an argument. No. They don’t. And they never will.’