Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   Legal and Activism (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/)
-   -   Threat or Really Distasteful Joke? (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/threat-really-distasteful-joke-37091/)

corrinavatan 01-19-2011 02:22 PM

Threat or Really Distasteful Joke?
 
http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/bston.cbslocal.com/2011/01/18/arlington-man-loses-gun-license-due-to-blog-about-tucson-shooting/


Wanted to see how the forum feels about this.

A quote from the blog: "It is absolutely, absolutely unacceptable to shoot indiscriminately. Target only politicians and their staff and leave regular citizens alone." (emphasis mine)

Also, the blog post title: "1 down, 534 to go."

This man's firearms license might be revoked, according to the state.

Do you feel that this is a legitimate threat? A joke that was of such bad taste that it looked like a threat? A regular idiot shooting his mouth off?

winds-of-change 01-19-2011 02:47 PM

I don't know if it was a bad joke or a threat but I DO know it was a very, very stupid thing to write in his blog.

skullcrusher 01-19-2011 03:02 PM

Threat. There is no joke in mentioning harm to elected officials. Not only should he lose any firearms license he has, but he should also be put on a list of those being watched by the Secret Service. Not because he could possibly be a domestic terrorist, but because he is so stupid. I mean, that is Michael Moore level of stupid.

Yunus 01-19-2011 03:07 PM

Threat!

He got specific in his blog about whom to target. I don't even want to quote it and have it in my post.

BTW you need to add an O to Boston as part of your link for it to work.

Arlington Man Loses Gun License Due To Blog About Tucson Shooting CBS Boston – News, Sports, Weather, Traffic and Boston's Best

It's also hard to explain in words but there is a distinct difference between what he posted and what I have seen on this board about rope, tree and some assembly being required. What I see on this board is usually said as just a general disgust with the situation or individuals not a threat.

NGIB 01-19-2011 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skullcrusher
I mean, that is Michael Moore level of stupid.

Skully's comment above about sums it up for me...

JonM 01-19-2011 03:25 PM

well from the story it wasnt just one quote but an entire blog post. and the story inferred that it had been an ongoing thing with him.

there is more to this story than the media is reporting in that news bit.

i have no problem at all with removal of guns from him until it is sorted out. there is no harm in that. if dupnik had of done that with laughner, giffords the judge and all the others would never have been killed or injured. a good portion of the enabling blame can be laid squarely at dupnik's feet.

if it turns out he just made a mistake in bad taste then no harm done. if he is a mental case maybe it will save some lives.

but i cant judge based on that poorly written story with no real info.

billdeserthills 01-19-2011 03:37 PM

Just one more American to find out just how little the First Amendment guarantee to free speech actually means. I don't care if he is right, wrong or indifferent, The First Amendment doesn't say "As long as you aren't talking about America's Ruling Elite."

freefall 01-19-2011 03:40 PM

But hanging Sarah Palin in effigy, saying she should be sot or gang-raped is just political satire...:cool:

DrumJunkie 01-19-2011 03:42 PM

I'm not sure how to look at this. The idea that he has not been charged with a crime but had weapons removed from his home does not set too well threat or not. I've threatened to put my boot up the rear of many people. Some had held office when I said it. Someone want to take my shoes?

According to the quote in the story from the link he didn't say he was going to shoot anyone. I do think it was a dumba$$ thing to say to say the least. I'm not too sure anyone had been threatened. take away the shooting in az. and this quote has no real weight. How many people have said on these boards that they would love to take rep A or Sen-B out and smack the crap out of them? I can't see that as any different. The level of violence is different. But both will be a crime is followed through with. What about all the gun ho youtube ninjas that advocate taking the country back by force if necessary? Should we send a SWAT team to get them? or at the least take any weapons they might have? I didn't real the blog. I'm just going from the article. But takng actino like this sets a tone that I am not all that comfortable with. It just looks like the skin is getting a little thin and it can get a whole lot thinner. Just where should the line be drawn? I'm no lawyer adn I really have no knowledge of what constitutes a threat when it comes to the law. I would imagine it would at the least require the name(s) of those that are being threatened.

I think what has me so unsure is the idea that at the time of this article no charges have been filed but there's enough to take away the mans personal property and possibly remove his right under the 2A. I think if it as me I would be more than a little upset if police took property out of my house but not arrest me or at least file charges giving me a court date. If it's that big a deal then I think it be pretty easy to charge the dumbass man. For something beyond being a dumb as a rock anyway.

billdeserthills 01-19-2011 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freefall (Post 425186)
But hanging Sarah Palin in effigy, saying she should be sot or gang-raped is just political satire...:cool:

Correct, but only because Sarah is not a member of our Ruling Elite.


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:55 PM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.