Discussion in 'The Off-topic Lounge' started by KWingJitsu, Aug 20, 2019.
I feel for the mother.
Silly kids will be silly...But the shitty world we live in sort of handcuffs enforcement here...If he shoots up a school and they take no notice they will be blamed afterwards.
Yep, it's a tough one, but .... fuck it.
Every school shooter had a mom who said "he was a nice quiet boy".
Also every school shooter wrote somewhere - manifesto or chat room that they were going to shoot people.
Consequences are warranted imo.
If it were my son I'd say take him to jail
it's functionally retarded for law enforcement to engage in these circle-jerks of signalling "We Do Things".
She should have asked the cop why they didn't do anything when they interviewed the Parkland kid before the shooting. Clowns.
They're stomping all over neighborhood relations to mitigate a risk which is essentially non-existent.
how old is your son?
Annnnnnd this is why ...
Police Thwart Three Potential Mass Shootings Over Two-Day Period - Blue Lives Matter
They are all white males in their twenties, and each of them sent threatening texts or posted online about carrying out mass shootings, police said.
seems like a slippery slope anybody who is a little weird can now be arrested on "threat".
throw away the key.....
Dont have a son
LOL @ a 15 year old posting online that he's going to shoot up a school and being surprised when the cops show up.
If you don't want to get arrested, don't threaten to commit mass murder
So when someone makes a threat what should they do?
In this case the kid actually made a threat.
no, this was not a "true threat" as defined by the SCOTUS.
but seriously, people actually think this is a good use of law enforcement resources?
So what is a "true threat"?
that is a good name for van damme film doe. bring back coked out van damme Obama.
the fact that the cops in the video acknowledge that it was "probably a joke" and "it doesn't matter if he's joking" means that they know this kid made a hyperbolic statement, but they don't know that vile, caustic statements made in public are protected under the 1st Amendment.
If they thought this kid was actually going to kill someone after interviewing him, and were able to articulate elements that made the threat true (intent, motive, opportunity, anti-social history, etc) then they have the authority to effect an arrest. But there are no 'magic words' that get you thrown in jail when you're 15.
Threats of physical violence are protected under the 1st amendment?
yes, under the Watts v United States decision (1969) a threat which is made as hyperbole, and not as a statement of actionable intent, is protected speech.
It's an officers job to put people before a court, not to replace it.
no, an officer's job is to know the extent of his authority. The current interpretation of 'qualified immunity' is one of the reasons communities are so confrontational with police. The cop has to know that there has to be something beyond the words to justify an arrest...cops shouldn't be able to throw anyone in jail that they want to, and then say 'well I wanted to err on the side of caution." that's not Rule of Law.
And this limit is established case law that's been around for 50 years. The cop is wrong, and should know he's wrong.
EDIT - cop is wrong based on what's in the video and what I've seen reported...could be more evidence, but doesn't seem to be.
The extent of an officers authority is to enforce laws, not interpret them. If someone is uttering threats they should be arrested. Whether or not it's a legitimate threat is for the courts to sort out.
that's your opinion, but it's a fantasy.
It's not how the law is written. I don't want to live in a world for cops have blanket authority to imprison people over jokes.
Going to jail is no small thing, especially for a 15 yo.