Justin Carter

[quote=sirell][quote] A terroristic threat is a crime generally involving a threat to commit violence communicated with the [b]intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent intent[/b] to terrorize another, to cause evacuation of a building, or to cause serious public inconvenience, in reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror or inconvenience. It may mean an offense against property or involving danger to another person that may include but is not limited to recklessly endangering another person, harassment, stalking, ethnic intimidation, and criminal mischief. [/quote] Just for you, Moon, because you didn't get it the first 20 times or so.[/quote]

[quote=Searz][quote=The_Nameless_Bard] I don't particularly think he belongs in jail for an extended period of time (aka several years) based on the facts so far. However, if they had chosen to ignore this based entirely on the fact that he was supposedly being sarcastic without any investigation, it would set a precedence that I'm really not too keen on as well.[/quote] Yeah, let's the detain the damn kid and waste thousands or tens of thousands of tax-payer dollars over 5 months on something that could have been investigated properly in one afternoon. [quote=The_Nameless_Bard] The definition of sarcasm, ironically enough, makes that quoted statement moot: "A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound"[/quote] That's a very narrow definition that I doubt properly covers sarcasm. [quote=The_Nameless_Bard] That means, assuming he was actually being sarcastic and not just hyperbolic, his statement, ironic or not, was intended to inflict mental damage on a person.[/quote] Oh, so he was exaggerating? He was just gonna shoot up one kid and eat his still beating heart?[/quote]

[quote=Bioalchemist]^ our government loves spending our money frivolously. had to look up the first amendment...as i have not been in government class for quite some time. thought it would protect this but i guess it doesn't depending on your interpretation of the following: advocacy of illegal action, fighting words, commercial speech and obscenity as those are not covered under the 1st amendment. guess you could say that those are fighting words or advocating illegal action and justify an arrest. that whole terroristic threat stuff...is that a state law or federal? i could see it being part of the patriot act. regardless...just check with the kid and sit him down to make sure he isn't crazy. maybe give him a good whack on the ass or a night in a solitary jail cell to allow him to think about what he did and be done with it. or of course you can do as searz suggested they most likely will do which is waste a crap ton of money on him in court. really though do you need more than one still beating heart? i feel like that would probably satisfy any hunger pains you may be having..maybe we should ask kano from mortal kombat ;)[/quote]

[quote=The_Nameless_Bard]The ability of the government to detain an individual indefinitely during the investigation of a terrorist threat is part of the Patriot Act, yes. Besides the fact that his statement isn't protected by the first amendment due to its nature. The fact that he intended it as a joke doesn't matter, the same way you can't run into an airport and yell "FIRE!" as a joke. The fact that you did intended it to be a joke doesn't make you any less guilty of attempting to incite actions that would harm others. My only issue with this argument is the fact that if they'd done what most of the people in this thread have suggested and he went and acted on his threat, the very same people would likely try to claim the government was incompetent for not having completely investigated a supposedly 'sarcastic' threat.[/quote]

[quote=Bioalchemist]^ yeah i hear your point. not saying that he shouldn't be sat down with and that they look into it is a bad thing. just saying that arresting him and charging him with a pretty serious crime might be a bit overboard unless he is unwilling to speak to the authorities otherwise.[/quote]

[quote=Searz][quote=The_Nameless_Bard] My only issue with this argument is the fact that if they'd done what most of the people in this thread have suggested and he went and acted on his threat, the very same people would likely try to claim the government was incompetent for not having completely investigated a supposedly 'sarcastic' threat.[/quote] If everything was the same, then I'd be incredibly surprised and wouldn't blame the government for it at all. Because quite literally EVERYTHING points to it being a silly joke. Then again, I'm more self conscious than most people.[/quote]

[quote=Pheyniex][quote=Bioalchemist] ^ our government loves spending our money frivolously. [/quote] who dafuq doesn't? bombmakers?[/quote]

[quote=The_Nameless_Bard][quote=Searz] If everything was the same, then I'd be incredibly surprised and wouldn't blame the government for it at all. Because quite literally EVERYTHING points to it being a silly joke. Then again, I'm more self conscious than most people. [/quote] well, I'm glad you wouldn't...based on how some of these other people have acted you can understand my annoyance.[/quote]

[quote=Bioalchemist][quote=Pheyniex] [quote=Bioalchemist] ^ our government loves spending our money frivolously. [/quote] who dafuq doesn't? bombmakers? [/quote] ummmm people who prefer profit over debt?[/quote]