Because you wouldn't know where to go without a URL.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
There are many, many cases reported of police essentially ignoring claims of harassment over the internet. The notable exception is a case where police pressed charges far beyond the pale when police of a town, in general, were the target of "threats".
I don't think "many" counts toward a substantiated claim. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! It's not that I think you are wrong, it's just that I'll hold my opinion of the efficacy of police in cyber-crimes until I get a better picture than just your off-the-cuff opinion (no offense intended, but that is what you've put forth so far). There is no way to judge such a thing without taking into account the media's effect on what news we read. After a widely-publicized train crash, the news will be rife with every train crash in the worlds for several weeks. One might become alrmed at such a rash of crashes. But no, the apparent upsurge is simply an artifact of the news process. Objectively - you don't know, and I don't know just how seriously they take cyber-crimes.
I know that they do not take it seriously enough. There are far too many stories of police ignoring online harassment. But don't worry: as a white man, you'll probably never have to face it. So just ignore the problem.
I don't believe an anti-bullying law has passed through congress: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...vist-named-worlds-ugliest-woman-a6690781.html The film follows Ms Velasquez up until the moment her TED talk made her internationally famous and documents her fight to have the first federal anti-bullying bill passed by Congress.
The case posted by rpenner ( http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dennis_Markuze ) documents over 20 years of harassment from one individual. The victims would seem to be fairly high profile and articulate. While it is possible that an inarticulate non-entity like myself might receive more assistance I guess (without proof) that this is highly unlikely.
First, that wasn't an ad hominem. I was pointing out something relevant to your position. Second, the fact that someone makes and ad hominem does not invalidate everything that they said. That is a fallacy. I'm sorry that you don't like to think that police are victim to the systemic influences in the wider culture. I'm sorry that you don't like to think about the us-vs-them mentality that far too many police officers have. I'm glad that you won't be victim to a lot of it; at least you have that.