Skip to content

Kentucky Sports Radio

University of Kentucky Basketball, Football, and Recruiting news brought to you in the most ridiculous manner possible.

New legislation could fine you for posting on social media after witnessing dangerous event

tweet

There is a new bill in the works that, if passed, will prohibit you from posting on social media immediately after witnessing a dangerous event.

House Bill 170, proposed by Representative John Carney, wants you to wait one hour before tweeting or Instagramming or Snapchatting or Facebooking or MySpacing or Tindering a car wreck or similar serious event. Anyone who doesn’t wait an hour before using social media will be fined up to one hundred dollars.

Read the entire stupid, unconstitutional bill for yourself:

(1) Any individual who witnesses an event that could reasonably result in a serious physical injury as defined in KRS 500.080 shall not post any information identifying the potential victims on the Internet or other electronic media until at least one (1) hour has passed from the moment the event was first witnessed.

(2) This section shall not apply to:

(a) The injured individual;

(b) Any member of the news media; or

(c) Any emergency responder responding to the event.

(3) Any individual who violates this section shall be fined not less than twenty dollars ($20) nor more than one hundred dollars ($100) for each offense.

With all due respect to Mr. Carney, who I’m sure is a fine Representative of House District 51 in Taylor and Adair counties, this is the dumbest thing I’ve seen since the end of the Bengals game Saturday night.

Two quick questions and then I’ll go back to living my life…

My first question is, does this apply to Alex Poythress dunks? Because I’d rather pay the fine than wait one hour to tweet all of those exclamation marks.

My second question is, is this really what our state legislators need to be focused on right now?

I have no further questions.

Article written by Drew Franklin

I can recite every line from Forrest Gump, blindfolded. Follow me on Twitter: @DrewFranklinKSR

34 Comments for New legislation could fine you for posting on social media after witnessing dangerous event



  1. Sentient Third Eye
    3:46 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    I’m on the opposite side of this. The intent here is to prevent people from having to learn their loved ones just died by reading about the accident on a post on social media written by a callous jerkoff who is likely to be treating the whole thing as a subject for humor (and Twitter is obviously full of said jerkoffs). That’s a reasonable goal.



    • theWilkman
      3:52 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

      Throwing the 1st Amendment out of the window is not reasonable. Neither is trying to implement a law that is virtually impossible to enforce. Technology brings boons as well as banes, and while the speed at which we can get information has been a huge boon, there can be a flip side to the coin. If that’s too hard to handle, get off social media.



    • Sentient Third Eye
      4:04 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

      Then as an alternative, perhaps you should recruit hardcore Twitter losers to grow souls and rejoin the human race. Then such a law won’t be needed.



    • theWilkman
      4:12 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

      Or maybe just stay off twitter? Should the government also regulate what gets written on the bathrooms walls at your local truck stop? Makes as much sense



    • RogerW
      4:25 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

      I don’t have a dog in the race since I would never post pics or info of an accident. However, my problem with the law as written is that news media and emergency responders could still use social media to post things within the first hour. I think EMT’s, when responding to an accident, etc, would have more important things to do.



    • Musehobo
      4:57 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

      It never takes very long for someone to arbitrarily throw in a “violation of ___ amendment” into a conversation without actually being able to interpret it.

      Providing limits to your free speech is not the same as violating it. I feel like I’ve said this 100 times but you do know it’s illegal to yell “fire’ in a public building right?

      Think about this. News crews already practice restraint when it comes to releasing information about an injured person/death. A law like this would encourage everyday people (who now by the power of social media can be something like the press) to think twice before posting their carnage pics on Facebook where it’s possible some mother may find out her kids are dead. I do think $100 isn’t much of a deterrent, but what on earth is the downside?



    • justaguyinthebackrow
      10:55 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

      Seriously, Musehobo? You should refrain from talking about topics you don’t understand.Limiting your speech, and putting legal penalties on speech, is the exact definition of violating your freedom of speech. Yelling “fire” in a crowded theater is a property rights issue, not a speech issue. You’re not the only person who misuses that example to try to curtail freedom, but it doesn’t make it right. The downside is the government is overstepping its bounds and legislating on areas of life it should have no control over. You, and the government, don’t get to dictate what you think proper behavior or restraint is. You may prefer a benevolent master, but plenty of Kentuckians prefer the freedom that is our birthright.



  2. deWildcat
    3:50 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    I’m with Drew and I hope the voters in Delaware can him. That’s all we need is another law that the authorities can use (or not) depending on who he/she/me/you are!!!



    • Adam From Awesome Trot
      4:01 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

      This is the John Carney from Kentucky, not Delaware.



  3. Cat Fan
    3:58 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    Another piece of Legislation that will only add fuel to late night TV & make Ky the butt of many jokes. Maybe a addendum should be added to this bill that states…user fee for any late night show using said Bill KSR 500.80 or any other legislation that is this stupid, Drew is right, is this really what our state legislators need to be focused on right now?

    .



  4. ukfaningatorland
    3:58 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    Ahh politics on a sports blog, one more place we can’t escape the daily feeding of the lives of politicians, Between this and millers ramblings once proud sports KSR is being reduced from the best KY sports blog to just another place where some DA can interject politics for hits. Pathetic really.

    Seriously if we want to read about stupid legislation, or good legislation, or politics go to the Lex Looser or Looserville Courier Schmernal. Keep KSR about sports please.

    We don’t go to Drudge to read about Willie Caulie Stein or Boogies numbers, we come here, this is about as stupid as the annual Call to the NBA stories.

    Want to discuss and argue politics? Not here please…

    Keep KSR about Sports, leave the politicians to the 8 million other internet posting services and blogs.



    • Realme
      4:10 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

      You could save yourself a lot of frustration by simply scrolling past the articles that don’t interest you. I used to feel that way too (no one hates politics and politicians more than I do), but KSR is free, and they can do what they want with it. Matt’s actually having a lot of success by adding in more politics and pop culture to what he was already doing.



    • The Seer
      8:15 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

      Find me on the side of ukfaningatorland. When I see the author of a post is Jonathan Miller, I automatically skip it. I don’t have an extra 20 minutes to waste reading the incoherent ramblings of yet another politician trying to keep his/her name in the limelight via whatever means possible. Yes, KSR is free, but so is my niece’s blog about her hamsters’ bowel movements. When I seek information on rodent turds, I go there. When I seek information on politics, it’s Fox News. (fire at will) When I come to KSR, I WANT SPORTS.



    • UK Big Board Update
      9:01 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

      LOL…. Fox News………



    • UK Big Board Update
      9:02 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

      I bet if this post was about Dumbass Trump, you wouldn’t be crying about “politics on KSR”……



    • The Seer
      8:03 am January 12, 2016 Permalink

      Oh, but I would. And you are right…. Trump is a dumbass.



  5. MericaJake
    3:58 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    This is limiting freedom and a violation of 1st Amendment rights. Legislators need to have a compulsory training on the Constitution and bill of rights every term. All Government employees have required training this needs to be added to it.



  6. ukkatzfan
    4:25 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    Drew, did you wait one hour before posting this?



  7. jonthes
    4:36 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    There’s going to be four years of untrammeled stupidity. Whoever voted for Bevin or destroyed Conway’s votes (whichever was the case), congratulations. We have no problems here – that will be addressed for the duration.



  8. dstnshpp
    4:44 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    This. Is. Stupid.

    How do they plan to police this? Hire someone to search hashtags all day?

    Search this- #takethisbillandshoveit



  9. dstnshpp
    4:46 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    This puts a damper on my dating life. I only Tinder near car accidents.



  10. RogerW
    4:48 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    I think most everyone would agree that social media is not the place to find out if a loved one is seriously injured or dead. This actually happened in my family this past year. My brother was found dead. We (my wife and I) asked everyone there to not post anything til we could get home and tell our girls. By the time we got home, it was all over Facebook, Social media is not the way I preferred my girls to find out.

    As far as trampling our 1st Amendment rights. It has already been decided that there are limits to free speech.

    The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized several categories of speech that are excluded from the freedom, and it has recognized that governments may enact reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on speech.



  11. dstnshpp
    4:50 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    Rep Carney’s email – [email protected]



  12. Long Dong Silver
    4:59 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    This stupid shit is what’s wrong with this country. We try to legislate everything. And succeed at none of it. Our lawmakers need to worry about bigger things.



  13. kygolfkat51
    5:00 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    Free speech, John?



  14. Laker Cat 18
    5:09 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    Guys, this is not about posting about the event specifically…this is about posting the IDENTITY of the victims. Let’s be honest, no one wants to find out they lost their children or parents on Facebook.



    • Laker Cat 18
      5:12 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

      To add to that, it’s common courtesy to not release victim’s names on social media. It’s just the right thing to do. If folks could police themselves on this, stuff like this would never arise, but they don’t. Most of society doesn’t respect their peers anymore.



    • kvltclassic
      5:40 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

      No, it says identifying information. That could be anything, a car involved, the clothes the person was wearing. It is just sort of vague in that regard.



    • Laker Cat 18
      10:48 am January 12, 2016 Permalink

      No, it could not be “anything.” Identifying information is not necessarily a make of a car. A license plate would be identifying, there are hundreds of white Ford Mustangs, etc. A make of a car would narrow it down, but a license plate would “identify” the victim.



  15. jman3715
    5:14 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    They better start airing all of Rick Pitinos press conferences on a one hour delay then.



  16. Dtram
    5:38 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    RogerW do you realize that “limiting” free speech is denying free speech? Anyone who supports this kind of legislation does not understand the Constitution or the freedoms it guarantees. The government is trampling the Constitution every time something like this is introduced or even discussed within government groups of any kind. The State or Federal governments responsibility is to uphold the laws already established like those in the Constitution, which those in government have sworn to uphold but do not understand that oath or choose to ignore later. ANY legislation that ‘ limits ‘ any freedom guaranteed by the Constitution will only succeed in limiting that freedom.
    So who’s responsible for policing something like posting a picture or the names involved in an accident? NOT THE GOVERNMENT! It’s the website that hosts the venue, Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, and all the others. In other words, WE ARE RESPONSIBLE!
    Do you not think that police will use something like this to limit your right to video their activities that at times clearly show brutality, etc?
    Arguments that sound logical but “limit”(deny)any freedom already guaranteed are the most dangerous at succeeding in destroying our Constitution.



  17. kilgore99
    5:54 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    Another thing to consider with this topic. I have witnessed times where people are too busy trying to capture a moment on video, post it on facebook, or tweet as the event is happening. Instead, they should be rushing to the aid of the victim. Kentucky is covered by the Good Samaritan law that encourages others to aid those in danger. Some people though would rather video a person choking then rush over and perform the heimlich.



  18. Bill the Cat
    8:28 pm January 11, 2016 Permalink

    Bam probably has good intentions with his thought, just needs to iron this out to avoid infringing on 1st amendment rights. That will never happen in our broken political process. Just like this pre-filed bill won’t ever pass….as much as I believe it should.

    HB78 (BR179) – K. Imes, J. Miller
    AN ACT proposing an amendment to Section 32 of the Constitution of Kentucky relating to terms
    of members of the General Assembly.
    Propose to amend Section 32 of the Constitution of Kentucky to prevent Senators from serving more than four consecutive terms of office and Representatives from serving more than eight consecutive terms of office, whether complete or partial terms, and prevent a legislator from serving more than sixteen consecutive years in the General Assembly, regardless of the House in which he or she served, beginning in 2018; allow legislators to resume service after two years have elapsed since leaving office; provide ballot language; submit to voters for ratification or rejection.



  19. Bluebloodtoo
    2:25 pm January 12, 2016 Permalink

    We should consult with the Chinese government on these new regulations. They’ve been censoring social media for several years now. I’m sure they could help us lock it down.