You think a simple lapse of common sense is deserving of 8 years of jail time? This sensitive society has a knee jerk reaction to everything nowadays.Doomsdaylee said:
Judge Refuses To Dismiss League of Legends Terrorist Threat Case
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I think context is an important thing here, something that a lot of people are missing.Doomsdaylee said:
Yeah, in an example like that it would definitely be handled differently. (Also, thanks for being reasonable in your secondary response. I wasn't anticipating that, haha.)Doomsdaylee said:
Like I said, if he wanted it so it couldn't be mis-interpreted, it should have been completely absurd and in theory someone unhinged enough might kill schoolkids and eat their hearts.
That said, that's still vague and absurd enough lots of people would look at it and just shake their head at the stupid joke and move on.
But that sort of humor is very fuzzy on where that second line is. And missing it can be pretty bad.
Like others have pointed out, if he doesn't in any way give the impression of actually going through with his supposed plot, we should be talking about community service, or maybe some kind of online manners/behavior course to explain to him why that was a stupid thing to do.
8 years in the clink is actually more likely to make the kid want to shoot up a school. Which seems sliiiightly counter-intuitive.
'Making an example' out of people pretty much never works.
I guess that is where we have different mindsets. I don't think there is ever such a thing as "too soon" for making a joke. It might be tasteless but it isn't deserving of a jail time. Politicians make regular use of tragedies as a way to knee jerk ban things and as a society, we become amazingly paranoid. You might as well just jail everyone.Doomsdaylee said:
Just want to let you folks know that don't seem to understand, "up to 8 years" is the maximum of the sentence which he hasn't been convicted of yet. Therefore and its very likely that, if convicted, he would get a lesser sentence. Most this kid will probably get is a slap on the wrist and a bunch of legal fees to pay, all in learning a lesson on how not to be a douchebag, and that threats are serious bzns not a joke.
Some of ya'll seem to forget he was getting harassed first. Not to mention, wasn't it a family member of the person who initially harassed him that kickstarted this legal issue?Chaosritter said:
I agree he said something stupid, but who here can say they've never said something mean or stupid when someone was bothering us. "Severs that little shit right" is just as stupid and mean. Hes just a kid who made a mistake.
I thought that's why we have that "freedom of speech" thing, so that our government can't police what we say. I guess the constitution doesn't mean much anymore.
Big fucking difference. Directly threatening a specific individual to their face is very different to a tasteless all encompassing comment on facebook.Doomsdaylee said:
I disagree he deserves ANY jail time for this. As for public... well, i don't use facebook, but aren't your comments on your facebook page pretty much private? I don't really know, serious question there.
We'll have to see what the conviction is in the end.
A fine or something similar could be useful after this whole scary ordeal to encourage him to be more tasteful in what he says but if by some fluke he gets the maximum sentence then he's fucked for life.
But that's unlikely I like to think.
A fine or something similar could be useful after this whole scary ordeal to encourage him to be more tasteful in what he says but if by some fluke he gets the maximum sentence then he's fucked for life.
But that's unlikely I like to think.
He deserves the stress and fear he'll probably go through during the trial but not jail, the best thing would be to let the trial go through and when the jury says guilty the judge gives him all 8 years says jk lol and then gives him some community service.
You can understand the police investigating the claim; police generally get shafted by the media after every school shooting. One inquiry that usually gets drawn out is "should the police have known anything?".
At this point, it should be clear in hindsight that the facebook post was made in jest and that the kid had no intention of shooting up a school. I know I've said much worse in private chats on the Internet, and indeed in private conversation in real life. I don't know how public the post was, but even if it was visible to everyone, it's not analogous to shouting fire in a theater, or something. There's no immediate danger or panic caused by making a post on facebook. And even shouting fire won't get you convicted for 8 years; it gets you a fine.
In any case, it's fine that the trial is continuing, I guess, since the poor kid is no longer in jail. I dunno, I can't really blame the judge for not throwing the case out. I would blame the prosecution for attempting to continue. But it will be an injustice if the kid is found guilty of anything, unless the police have any more proof that we haven't seen.
At this point, it should be clear in hindsight that the facebook post was made in jest and that the kid had no intention of shooting up a school. I know I've said much worse in private chats on the Internet, and indeed in private conversation in real life. I don't know how public the post was, but even if it was visible to everyone, it's not analogous to shouting fire in a theater, or something. There's no immediate danger or panic caused by making a post on facebook. And even shouting fire won't get you convicted for 8 years; it gets you a fine.
In any case, it's fine that the trial is continuing, I guess, since the poor kid is no longer in jail. I dunno, I can't really blame the judge for not throwing the case out. I would blame the prosecution for attempting to continue. But it will be an injustice if the kid is found guilty of anything, unless the police have any more proof that we haven't seen.
Yeah, I'm easily on the side of "this kid should be compensated for all this crap, rather than jailed".
Black comedy (which this clearly was) is not something that should be punishable on a legal level, regardless of how soon it was made after a tragedy. The fact that no specifics whatsoever were given to make it an actual threat (no specific target, date, location, etc.) and that it was clearly established as a (albeit crude and insensitive) joke through both the "eat the still-beating heart" nonsense and the "lol, jk" means that this case really should not have any grounds whatsoever.
It is not illegal to be an asshole nor should it be, contrary to what some people on this thread seem to think.
Black comedy (which this clearly was) is not something that should be punishable on a legal level, regardless of how soon it was made after a tragedy. The fact that no specifics whatsoever were given to make it an actual threat (no specific target, date, location, etc.) and that it was clearly established as a (albeit crude and insensitive) joke through both the "eat the still-beating heart" nonsense and the "lol, jk" means that this case really should not have any grounds whatsoever.
It is not illegal to be an asshole nor should it be, contrary to what some people on this thread seem to think.