Threat or Really Distasteful Joke?

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by corrinavatan, Jan 19, 2011.

  1. corrinavatan

    corrinavatan New Member

    123
    0
    0
    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?
     
  2. winds-of-change

    winds-of-change The Balota's Staff Member

    29,544
    563
    113
    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.
     

  3. skullcrusher

    skullcrusher New Member

    10,888
    1
    0
    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.
     
  4. Yunus

    Yunus New Member

    5,250
    0
    0
    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.
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2011
  5. NGIB

    NGIB New Member

    7,143
    1
    0
    Skully's comment above about sums it up for me...
     
  6. JonM

    JonM Moderator

    20,110
    19
    38
    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.
     
  7. billdeserthills

    billdeserthills New Member

    774
    0
    0
    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."
     
  8. freefall

    freefall New Member

    2,325
    3
    0
    But hanging Sarah Palin in effigy, saying she should be sot or gang-raped is just political satire...:cool:
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2011
  9. DrumJunkie

    DrumJunkie New Member

    4,823
    0
    0
    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.
     
  10. billdeserthills

    billdeserthills New Member

    774
    0
    0
    Correct, but only because Sarah is not a member of our Ruling Elite.
     
  11. corrinavatan

    corrinavatan New Member

    123
    0
    0
    It could be his stuff was taken as evidence while an inquiry/investigation is conducted, and/or charges are pending/not yet filed.
     
  12. dunerunner

    dunerunner New Member

    8,411
    3
    0
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    They would be disarming Thomas Jefferson!! Granted, this person isn't Jeffersonian in any respect and the tone of his speech is not rhetorical but incites violence. These are dangerous times, my friends. May the path of this nation be laid by cooler heads with sound judgment.
     
  13. DrumJunkie

    DrumJunkie New Member

    4,823
    0
    0
    But what will be the charge? did he name anyone? I'm asking because I'm too lazy to look for the full blog. It just smells a little to me but as I said I do not have the whole story and nothing ruins a good story faster than learning the other side.

    There are tons of sites that call for the head of this or that guy but that wont get the cops out there unless It's some person in the federal government I guess. how long till we get some new and improved flavor of the sedition act?
     
  14. mpd8488

    mpd8488 New Member

    245
    0
    0
    Brandenburg V. Ohio (1969) held that:

    "Freedoms of speech and press do not permit a State to forbid advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action"

    I can't find his original post so I can't judge whether his advocacy is directed to incite imminent violence, but I smell a civil rights lawsuit in the works. The man has not even been charged with a crime. His remarks anger me, but I hope for the sake of free speech, privacy, due process, and the right to bear arms that the officials involved in this are forced to detail exactly why they did this. Anything less is an insult to the Bill of Rights.
     
  15. bkt

    bkt New Member

    6,964
    0
    0
    Neither a joke nor a (vague) threat are crimes. This is a knee-jerk reaction by idiots, in light of the Tucson shooting, screwing with someone's rights. That's not good.
     
  16. spittinfire

    spittinfire New Member Supporter

    9,663
    4
    0
    I'm sorry but I really don't see what the issue is other then his statement is extremely insenitive to congresswoman and her family.

    Remember the books about killing Bush? The play about it? The endless comments about it. I personally take someone more serious who takes the time to right a book about how to assasinate the sitting POTUS then some guy on a blog. Where those people investigated and their (if they owned any) weapons taken away?
    If you want to see threats being made just watch Chris Matthews on national "news".

    Outside of being in poor taste the man made a statement and that's it. A very dumb one that will hurt converatives and gun owners.
    IMO, his rights have been violated if they are going to take his firearms lincense. Maybe they should come take my soccer shoes because I've said I'd like to kick Obama in the junk.
     
  17. alsaqr

    alsaqr Well-Known Member Supporter

    6,213
    277
    83
    What the guy did is very dumb. The fact that he did it in MA is expotentially dumb.
     
  18. orangello

    orangello New Member

    19,156
    0
    0
    That wasn't terribly bright, but i'm not sure i'm OK with a summary suspension of his 2A rights while some judge mulls it over. Did we have a charge, a formal accusation, a grand jury, a trial, anything? It sounds like we had some instant "justice" beyond just authority (even if well-within the bounds of common good taste & sense).
     
  19. JonM

    JonM Moderator

    20,110
    19
    38
    i still dont think we are getting the full story. generally, even after the az thing, the cops dont "come and get ya" for running your mouth on the interweb. there is usually more than just one thing going on.

    i generally fall on the side of law enforcement giving them the benefit of the doubt. i think more details of this guy's prior history needs to be let out before a real opinion can be formed.
     
  20. 556plinker

    556plinker New Member

    338
    0
    0
    Given the political climate, anyone who read his post should be immediately disarmed for fear of what they might be inclined to do after reading that vitriolic rhetoric. Dumb, yes! Insensitive, Yes! He now has a "suitability" hearing to determine if he is sane as a result of his blatherings. I say take them away and forever forbid him from owning a firearm if congress is completely wiped out within the next few weeks.