Way To Go Florida: Governor Signs Law That Accidentally Bans All Computers & Smartphones

DancingMaenid · Jul 10, 2013

One point that confuses me: it sounds like this legislation has affected internet cafes a lot, in particular. I don't expect this law to be enforced against average computer-owning citizens, but according to the linked article, internet cafes have been shut down recently.

Are internet cafes particularly well-known for gambling or something? I've always been under the impression that internet cafes are just places that offer internet access.

Mara · Jul 10, 2013

Someone should write a short story about some state passing a law like this by accident and becoming a medieval society overnight.

Yorkist · Jul 10, 2013

Chrissy said:
ETA: and I see it all the time here on P&CE. Oh yeah, those TEXANS. Oh yeah, those NEW YORKERS. Or, Oh yeah, see that bill North Carolina/South Carolina/Virginia/Georgia/South Dakota/WHOTHEFUCKEVER just passed? "Those" people? Yeah those ... insert the fucking state, and make your blanket statements about the people in it
STOP it already. Address the ISSUE. Put aside the blanket judgments about the people in those states who actually LIVE there and might possibly be having to deal with all of the bullshit.

/rant

You forgot Mississippi. ;-)

asroc · Jul 10, 2013

raburrell said:
Well said, Chrissy. Can I throw poor old Massachusetts on your list too? We up here in the People's Republic have been getting that crap for years too lol.

Cambridge is still fair game though, right?

But if this law bans any device that can be used to play a game of chance, considering Russian roulette and such, doesn't this also ban guns?

RichardGarfinkle · Jul 10, 2013

Chrissy's basically right about the over generalizations about states and people. But there is a caveat. These are actions taken by state legislatures and governors.

Living in a Republic as we do, we as its citizens bear some responsibility for the actions of those we elect to office. If a state's legislature has a majority of {fill in the blank with appropriate pejorative} then it's at least in part because that's who a majority of the people of that state elected to that legislature.

There's also the fact that the laws and customs of a state or country do contribute to whether or not one would wish to visit or live in that state or country. There are a number of beautiful countries in this world that I would not care to visit because of laws and customs.

Chrissy · Jul 10, 2013

True Richard. But I did not vote for Scott. In fact, Scott won in 2010 by a mere 1.29% of the total vote.

"Majority" is often just over half of a populace.

And we have Democrats in the House and Senate. (Bill Nelson is my Senator and Patrick Murphy is my Rep - both are Dems)

raburrell · Jul 10, 2013

asroc said:
Cambridge is still fair game though, right?

lol. I know that's a tongue in cheek poke, but Cambridge rules. I don't live there now, but I did and would go back in a heartbeat. [That is, if a place the size of the one we live in now wouldn't cost a couple of million dollars.] It's a gorgeous, walkable city filled with intelligent, active people. Uber liberal, yes, but it certainly seems to be working. Maybe it wouldn't anywhere else, but I suppose that's part of the point under discussion here

I'm sorta joking, but to Richard's point, yes, these ridiculous laws are passed by people who ostensibly are in office through the will of the voters, but I agree with Chrissy, in that they're governing for the extreme 10 or 20% of the usually-bare-half of people who voted for them. (Which comes down both to our ridiculous primary system and the apathy/disengagement of your average voter until the late stages of an election year).

Have no idea what the solution is, but I sure wish I did.

mirandashell · Jul 10, 2013

But that's the major problem with your system, I think. It works brilliantly if the populace is engaged in it. But if they are not, then there is room for the loopies and eejits. Maybe more than in other democratic systems?

RichardGarfinkle · Jul 10, 2013

mirandashell said:
But that's the major problem with your system, I think. It works brilliantly if the populace is engaged in it. But if they are not, then there is room for the loopies and eejits. Maybe more than in other democratic systems?

It's a problem that shows up in nearly every system. If we had a parliamentary system we would likely have a bunch of different parties for the extremes at all ends and more centrist major parties. But the need for coalitions might well give the smaller parties too much power (as happened in Israel for the Ultra Orthodox parties).

There are two big problems in the US system, to my mind

The first is an uninvolved electorate. There are too many people who don't see government as relevant in their lives until and unless it hits them in the face or other body parts, or in this case in their smartphones. Molly Ivins would often point out in her columns that what was happening in people's lives was the result of politics. She made it clear that the choice to vote or not and who for (even if they didn't care about politics) was a choice that led to changes that they did care about.

The second is the role of money. But that's a huge rant that can spew flames and rage all over the internet (and that's just from me).

RichardGarfinkle · Jul 10, 2013

Chrissy said:
True Richard. But I did not vote for Scott. In fact, Scott won in 2010 by a mere 1.29% of the total vote.

"Majority" is often just over half of a populace.

And we have Democrats in the House and Senate. (Bill Nelson is my Senator and Patrick Murphy is my Rep - both are Dems)

I'm not disputing any of that. But as a citizen of Florida you are having to bear some of what comes from people elected by your fellow citizens even if you personally chose otherwise.

Note as a citizen of Illinois, I have to live with the streak of convicted and jailed governors we've had. It also means watching the legislature in Springfield right now weaseling around same sex marriage and passing a concealed carry law that scares me to death.

Republic means choice by majority. It doesn't mean washing ones hands of the choice afterwards. Ideally, if the people make a bad choice, those who did not do so should be trying to convince others to do better next time. So, if I'm unhappy with current outcomes I should be working for a better result next time.

Ambrosia · Jul 10, 2013

Chrissy said:
I really find it irritating that one stupid move by a politician indicts an entire state and gives free rein to ridicule that state, and by extension, it's populace. Hello?

Seriously. Won't visit? Think we're all outlaws? Think the warm weather rots brains? Fucking fabulous. Here's an idea: Save your brain and stay in your own apparently perfect state.

Criticize the law, the act, the person or people responsible, but don't conflate it as being a "Florida" thing. That's just ignorant.

ETA: and I see it all the time here on P&CE. Oh yeah, those TEXANS. Oh yeah, those NEW YORKERS. Or, Oh yeah, see that bill North Carolina/South Carolina/Virginia/Georgia/South Dakota/WHOTHEFUCKEVER just passed? "Those" people? Yeah those ... insert the fucking state, and make your blanket statements about the people in it.

STOP it already. Address the ISSUE. Put aside the blanket judgments about the people in those states who actually LIVE there and might possibly be having to deal with all of the bullshit.

/rant

Williebee said:
Nice rant. She has a point. There are enough specific targets for the finger pointing and derision that we don't have to throw a wide net.

After all, this is the same state that inspired Hemingway and gave us Travis McGee and Serge Storm.

I was going to write privately to Willibee, but then I thought maybe it is something that others in the thread are asking too. Which is why I am replying in thread. I don't mean this to be a derail, though I know it kinda is even though it is addressing something that is already a derail, imo. I am looking to understand, not to conflagrate the issue.

I really don't understand the rant. Criticizing a state is not, imo, the same as calling the individual populace of that state anything, neither directly or, as Chrissy has asserted, by extension. But even if it is, so what? No one said Chrissy was "whatever". I get RYFW but I do not understand what looks to me like over-sensitivity and forcing a new political correctness into a discussion. This does not seem to be a RYFW issue. What am I missing?

I live in New York, but I am not New York. New York drivers may be seen as bad by out-of-state drivers, but I am a great driver. That comment does not insult me. I have been to Florida and driven a work van in Florida, and yes the drivers there suck. Far worse than New York. But not as bad as Atlanta or Houston or LA, all of which I have driven in. Politicians make stupid laws in every state from time to time. And people talk about the state where it happens. And refer to Texans, Floridians, New Yorkers, etc. but everyone knows they are not singling out everybody in the state as being mislead, stupid, bad drivers, gun whores, naive, blood thirsty, etc. ad nauseum. It is a comment about whatever stupidity has hit the news. Not an indictment of a specific person in that area.

I do not tie my self-esteem up in any area I live in, whether it is a country, state, city or cardboard box. I honestly do not get it. Now if someone said, "Chrissy, you are a stupid ass" anywhere on AW you can bet my first response would be to report the post and my second response would be to call them on it and then send a supportive message back channel to her. But this just seems over the top to me. What have I missed? I don't want to step afoul.

I can tell you if this had been New York, I would be publically laughing my proverbial ass off about it with everyone else. Cause you have to admit it is hilarious and I don't care what state it happened in.

Kylabelle · Jul 10, 2013

Ambrosia said:
I was going to write privately to Willibee, but then I thought maybe it is something that others in the thread are asking too. Which is why I am replying in thread. I don't mean this to be a derail, though I know it kinda is even though it is addressing something that is already a derail, imo. I am looking to understand, not to conflagrate the issue.

I really don't understand the rant. Criticizing a state is not, imo, the same as calling the individual populace of that state anything, neither directly or, as Chrissy has asserted, by extension. But even if it is, so what? No one said Chrissy was "whatever". I get RYFW but I do not understand what looks to me like over-sensitivity and forcing a new political correctness into a discussion. This does not seem to be a RYFW issue. What am I missing?

I live in New York, but I am not New York. New York drivers may be seen as bad by out-of-state drivers, but I am a great driver. That comment does not insult me. I have been to Florida and driven a work van in Florida, and yes the drivers there suck. Far worse than New York. But not as bad as Atlanta or Houston or LA, all of which I have driven in. Politicians make stupid laws in every state from time to time. And people talk about the state where it happens. And refer to Texans, Floridians, New Yorkers, etc. but everyone knows they are not singling out everybody in the state as being mislead, stupid, bad drivers, gun whores, naive, blood thirsty, etc. ad nauseum. It is a comment about whatever stupidity has hit the news. Not an indictment of a specific person in that area.

I do not tie my self-esteem up in any area I live in, whether it is a country, state, city or cardboard box. I honestly do not get it. Now if someone said, "Chrissy, you are a stupid ass" anywhere on AW you can bet my first response would be to report the post and my second response would be to call them on it and then send a supportive message back channel to her. But this just seems over the top to me. What have I missed? I don't want to step afoul.

I can tell you if this had been New York, I would be publically laughing my proverbial ass off about it with everyone else. Cause you have to admit it is hilarious and I don't care what state it happened in.

I agree completely.

I confess, when the state I live in and was born and raised in, North Carolina, displays some of its more egregious political lockstep stupidity, I cringe a bit more than I would if the same stupidity were being perpetrated in, say, Arizona.

But hey, name a state that doesn't have this element braying loud and long these days! And be glad, whomever you are, that you don't have to be one of that herd. (And that statement is not directed at anyone specifically but is meant generally, for all of us.)

If you live in a state where something really idiotic happens, you're performing a service by simply being there, IMO, and being smarter and kinder than that, whatever "that" happens to be.

Although I am aware there is a large internet news aggregator and community out there who plays a lot with making fun of Florida in particular, as far as I am concerned, they can go right ahead and put up a special category for North Carolina too. I'd read it and laugh. And hope it woke a few people up.

raburrell · Jul 10, 2013

I think the above two posts are basically saying the same thing Chrissy said, personally. It's just about taking care to frame the debate where the problem actually lies, IMO. Invoking a particular state as a universally bad actor on some front is a shortcut, but one that has the potential for invalid generalization. My .02 at least.

Haggis · Jul 10, 2013

Ambrosia said:
I was going to write privately to Willibee, but then I thought maybe it is something that others in the thread are asking too. Which is why I am replying in thread. I don't mean this to be a derail, though I know it kinda is even though it is addressing something that is already a derail, imo. I am looking to understand, not to conflagrate the issue.

I really don't understand the rant. Criticizing a state is not, imo, the same as calling the individual populace of that state anything, neither directly or, as Chrissy has asserted, by extension. But even if it is, so what? No one said Chrissy was "whatever". I get RYFW but I do not understand what looks to me like over-sensitivity and forcing a new political correctness into a discussion. This does not seem to be a RYFW issue. What am I missing?

I live in New York, but I am not New York. New York drivers may be seen as bad by out-of-state drivers, but I am a great driver. That comment does not insult me. I have been to Florida and driven a work van in Florida, and yes the drivers there suck. Far worse than New York. But not as bad as Atlanta or Houston or LA, all of which I have driven in. Politicians make stupid laws in every state from time to time. And people talk about the state where it happens. And refer to Texans, Floridians, New Yorkers, etc. but everyone knows they are not singling out everybody in the state as being mislead, stupid, bad drivers, gun whores, naive, blood thirsty, etc. ad nauseum. It is a comment about whatever stupidity has hit the news. Not an indictment of a specific person in that area.

I do not tie my self-esteem up in any area I live in, whether it is a country, state, city or cardboard box. I honestly do not get it. Now if someone said, "Chrissy, you are a stupid ass" anywhere on AW you can bet my first response would be to report the post and my second response would be to call them on it and then send a supportive message back channel to her. But this just seems over the top to me. What have I missed? I don't want to step afoul.

I can tell you if this had been New York, I would be publically laughing my proverbial ass off about it with everyone else. Cause you have to admit it is hilarious and I don't care what state it happened in.

New York? You mean the Land of Taxes? The state of Anthony Weiner and Elliot Spitzer?

The thing is, some states get picked on more than others--Florida, Arizona and Texas come to mind. Some cities come to mind too. Like Detroit, which is right down the road from me. And sometimes there's a fine line between mocking what some residents do and painting all residents with the same brush.

We don't allow slams against other countries. It seems to me we ought to avoid slams against other states too. On the other hand, I completely support mocking politicians of any region or party affiliation.

ap123 · Jul 10, 2013

I'm a New Yorker (Manhattan) who won't drive in NY, but that's more because of the bike delivery/messenger guys than other drivers.

Ambrosia · Jul 10, 2013

Haggis said:
New York? You mean the Land of Taxes? The state of Anthony Weiner and Elliot Spitzer?

The thing is, some states get picked on more than others--Florida, Arizona and Texas come to mind. Some cities come to mind too. Like Detroit, which is right down the road from me. And sometimes there's a fine line between mocking what some residents do and painting all residents with the same brush.

We don't allow slams against other countries. It seems to me we ought to avoid slams against other states too. On the other hand, I completely support mocking politicians of any region or party affiliation.

That makes sense, Haggis. Thank you.

ap123 said:
I'm a New Yorker (Manhattan) who won't drive in NY, but that's more because of the bike delivery/messenger guys than other drivers.

This is so funny to me. I expect to hear it from someone not from New York, but it is a bit surprising to hear it from someone who is from New York. Will you not drive in all of New York State or just in New York City? Frankly, I won't go to New York City because I don't like being around that many people in one place.

My brother and his wife are here visiting from Texas. I am showing them all the beauty of western NY and she is in awe, saying she never knew NY was so beautiful and had all these wonderful things to see. Because all she had been exposed to was NYC. So many people who have never been to New York don't know that the city by that name is not the state. I know NYC is huge, but really. The state is huge, too, and most of it is beyond beautiful. </end derail>

ap123 · Jul 10, 2013

Ambrosia said:
That makes sense, Haggis. Thank you.

This is so funny to me. I expect to hear it from someone not from New York, but it is a bit surprising to hear it from someone who is from New York. Will you not drive in all of New York State or just in New York City? Frankly, I won't go to New York City because I don't like being around that many people in one place.

My brother and his wife are here visiting from Texas. I am showing them all the beauty of western NY and she is in awe, saying she never knew NY was so beautiful and had all these wonderful things to see. Because all she had been exposed to was NYC. So many people who have never been to New York don't know that the city by that name is not the state. I know NYC is huge, but really. The state is huge, too, and most of it is beyond beautiful. </end derail>

I haven't driven at all in a long time, but expect to again, soon. I used to drive everywhere else, including Brooklyn, land of triple parking.

As for your brother and sil, it does seem unfair for NYC and NY to share the same name, such entirely different worlds.

muravyets · Jul 10, 2013

RichardGarfinkle said:
Chrissy's basically right about the over generalizations about states and people. But there is a caveat. These are actions taken by state legislatures and governors.

Living in a Republic as we do, we as its citizens bear some responsibility for the actions of those we elect to office. If a state's legislature has a majority of {fill in the blank with appropriate pejorative} then it's at least in part because that's who a majority of the people of that state elected to that legislature.

There's also the fact that the laws and customs of a state or country do contribute to whether or not one would wish to visit or live in that state or country. There are a number of beautiful countries in this world that I would not care to visit because of laws and customs.

There's also the small detail of the limitations of the English language, which require attention to context for so many things.

For example, when one is discussing a stupid action taken by a group of legislators, and one says, "they are so stupid," context makes it clear that one is talking specifically about the group of legislators in question, not generally about all the residents of a state.

James D. Macdonald · Jul 10, 2013

asroc said:
But if this law bans any device that can be used to play a game of chance, considering Russian roulette and such, doesn't this also ban guns?

Only revolvers. I've never heard of anyone playing Russian roulette with an automatic.

muravyets · Jul 10, 2013

mirandashell said:
But that's the major problem with your system, I think. It works brilliantly if the populace is engaged in it. But if they are not, then there is room for the loopies and eejits. Maybe more than in other democratic systems?

This is why, after many years of thought, I've come down in favor of mandatory voting, as they do in Australia. I take the word of Australians I've asked that it has the effect of moderating public political discourse. It's obviously no panacea. Australia has had its share of really horrible policies, I think, but no system is perfect. However, ours does require broad participation, and if people won't do it out of civic duty or out of self-interest, then they should do it because they have to.

mirandashell · Jul 10, 2013

Every country has its share of mad policies. Or possible mad policies. We've recently had the pasty tax and the granny tax. One of them didn't happen and the other is still being fought. Guess which is which?

Anyway... all politicians come up with nonsense policies. Although ours tend to do it after they've been voted in, unfortunately! They're all 'I'm sensible, me. I can lead us to a safer, more stable country. Vote for me!' when they're campaigning. But vote them in and they come up with daft ideas. But there you go.....

Xelebes · Jul 10, 2013

mirandashell said:
But that's the major problem with your system, I think. It works brilliantly if the populace is engaged in it. But if they are not, then there is room for the loopies and eejits. Maybe more than in other democratic systems?

I think in the Westminster System, the party leaders have much greater opportunity to shut the eejits and the loonies up.

Chrissy · Jul 10, 2013

Ambrosia said:
I really don't understand the rant. Criticizing a state is not, imo, the same as calling the individual populace of that state anything, neither directly or, as Chrissy has asserted, by extension. But even if it is, so what? No one said Chrissy was "whatever". I get RYFW but I do not understand what looks to me like over-sensitivity and forcing a new political correctness into a discussion. This does not seem to be a RYFW issue. What am I missing?

I don't think it was a RYFW issue at all. And I wasn't personally offended. I know no one is calling me names. I was offended by the blanket judgment of everyone who lives in the heat obviously having rotted brains (for example). Granted, it was a "joke" but it was at an entire population's expense.

I'd be offended no matter what state was being mass-targeted as stupid (or whatever). And really, by offended, I don't mean I'm all stomping around feeling slighted and mistreated. I just mean, you (editorial you) are incorrect when you make those statements. They are also rather unhelpful in making anything, anywhere, better.

RichardGarfinkle · Jul 10, 2013

Haggis said:
New York? You mean the Land of Taxes? The state of Anthony Weiner and Elliot Spitzer?

It's been going on a long time. Here's a quote from the musical 1776.

Lewis Morris: Mr. President, have you ever been present at a meeting of the New York legislature?
[Hancock shakes his head "No"]
Lewis Morris: They speak very fast and very loud, and nobody listens to anybody else, with the result that nothing ever gets done.

I first saw this musical on stage around 40 years ago in New York. This exchange never failed to bring a laugh of rueful recognition.

Haggis · Jul 10, 2013

RichardGarfinkle said:
It's been going on a long time. Here's a quote from the musical 1776.

I first saw this musical on stage around 40 years ago in New York. This exchange never failed to bring a laugh of rueful recognition.

And nobody liked poor John Adams.

I loved that musical.

Way To Go Florida: Governor Signs Law That Accidentally Bans All Computers & Smartphones

New kid...seven years ago!

Clever User Title

Alex

Nurture Phoenixes

Bright and Early for the Daily Race

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Nurture Phoenixes

Nurture Phoenixes

Grand Duchess

unaccounted for

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Evil, undead Chihuahua

Twitching

Grand Duchess

Twitching

Old revolutionary

Your Genial Uncle

Old revolutionary

Delerium ex Ennui

Bright and Early for the Daily Race

Nurture Phoenixes

Evil, undead Chihuahua