Laws Policing Tech Use: What do You Think?

What got my attention about this proposed anti-”sexting” law was the rationale put forward by proponents: We want this law to pass so that certain morally-questionable actions become illegal. As put forward by Oregon State Rep. Olson, one of HB 2461’s sponsors:

“Last year, law enforcement was not able to take action on an incident involving a high school teacher and a female student because there was no crime for illicit text messaging… Though the teacher was eventually removed through administrative action, the principal asked for text messaging to be added to the statute. HB 2641 delivers on that request.”

A good idea on paper: through consensus, we declare what should be illegal as illegal. But I’m not sure how effective such a legislative approach is towards the use of technology.

For one thing, the versatility allowed by technology gives rise to a virtually limitless number of scenarios. Legislatures may find themselves overwhelmed with the sheer number of sensible—yet over-specific—proposed bills designed to punish those morally-questionable scenarios as they crop up.

Wikipedia

The relatively conservative and deliberately-paced outlook necessary to get things done via consensus may be literally too slow to cover all possible abuses of technology as they become clear. New laws may plug some holes and give law enforcement the tools they need to protect technology-users. But this could lead to a case of never-ending legislative obsolescence, as creative minds find ways to victimize the people.

One solution to this potential problem is some creative legal wording. You create laws that cover a broad (or perhaps generic) category of abuses, while still being specific enough to cut down on potential loopholes.

I bet this will require some out-of-the-box thinking on the part of lawmakers. The problem is, would it be reasonable to expect that kind of thought process from the mainstream legislature?<

That’s just me however. I ask you dear readers: what do you think of laws designed to police tech use? Are they too specific that they run the risk of being obsolete once they’re passed? Should lawmakers take the generic and not the specific route when crafting these laws?