It's time for the Midseason 12 Guide Contest! Create or update guides in the following 8 weeks for the chance to win up to $200 in prizes! 🏆
The_Nameless_Bard wrote:
Because if they'd let him out on his word and he just went out and shot up an elementary school, you totally wouldn't try to claim the government was incompetent because they hadn't investigated enough to find out if he was serious.
I don't understand the logic of people.
Well I was just trying be funny, but there's a difference between investigating and ruining someone's life by sending them to jail for 8 years.
he hasn't even been put on trial yet :P all they've done so far is detain him while they investigated.
8 years is the MAXIMUM sentence and it's very likely he'll be acquitted unless they have evidence to suggest he was serious.
8 years is the MAXIMUM sentence and it's very likely he'll be acquitted unless they have evidence to suggest he was serious.
Again, would you rather they just let people out without investigating? The actual details of the investigation have not been made public, it's very possible they found something that caused him to be detained for as long as he was.
Potential terrorist threats are not something to be taken lightly. Would it have been better for him to have been able to go out and act on his threat purely because he claimed to be joking? Is the possibility that he might be mentally unstable enough kill innocent children something to be ignored until he does it?
luizdeh
<Member>
<Member>
threats are not protected by freedom of speech the same way hate speech isn't.
so that argument is largely moot.
but yes, not enough QQ.
Smurfing sucks, I miss my runes Q.Q
so that argument is largely moot.
but yes, not enough QQ.
Smurfing sucks, I miss my runes Q.Q
You need to log in before commenting.
<Inhouse Regular>