100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: GA woman arrested for facebook post that allegedly makes ter | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Thu 04/30/15 08:01 AM
|
|
regularfeller stated >>> So, limited free speech...unless you make terroristic threats towards a group deemed socially unacceptable? Sojourning_Soul stated >>> Your rights end where anothers begins My AG of KS stirred this BS up back when the Internet was in it's infancy >>> because he was so worried about 'smut/porn/naked images' haunting his every computer screen on his PC!!! ********** COPA represents Congress' second attempt to impose severe criminal and civil sanctions on the display of protected, non-obscene speech on the Internet. A first attempt, the Communications Decency Act of 1996, was declared unconstitutional by all nine justice of the Supreme Court in Reno v. ACLU. In 2002, the Supreme Court upheld a law requiring public libraries throughout the country to install blocking software on their computers to censor sexually explicit speech as a condition of federal funding. Briefs supporting the ACLU challenge in Ashcroft v. ACLU (03-218) were filed by a broad range of mainstream media and arts organizations, including the Association of American Publishers, American Society of Newspaper Editors, the Recording Industry Association of America and Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts. ************** About 'Internet/Terrorist Threats' this case was one that the SCOTUS heard >>> For decades, the court has essentially said that ��'true threats'�� are an exception to the rule against criminalizing speech. These threats do not have to be carried out -�� or even be intended to be carried out - to be considered harmful. Bans against threats may be enacted, Justice Sandra Day O'��Connor wrote in 2003, to protect people ‘'from the fear of violence' and ��'from the disruption that fear engenders.'�� Current legal thinking is that threats do damage on their own. **************************** But we already have this as our Interstate Communication Statute to go by >>> 18 U.S. Code § 875 - Interstate communications (a) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any demand or request for a ransom or reward for the release of any kidnapped person, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both. (b) Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, or corporation, any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both. (c) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (d) Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, or corporation, any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to injure the property or reputation of the addressee or of another or the reputation of a deceased person or any threat to accuse the addressee or any other person of a crime, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/875 Not to worry. The new "govt sponsored" Internet 2.0 will fix all that, and their freedom of speech and expression problems, their opposition problems, and all those pesky protests. They simply won't allow you to post, research, or contact anyone they deem to be a "cause" of them Oblowme has stated this is one of his priorities before leaving office |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So long freedom of speech? Opinions? Freedom of speech does not include the right to threaten someone's life... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So long freedom of speech? Opinions? she actually made Threats against Life and Limbs! http://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/MC1/MC1-Part2Section2.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So long freedom of speech? Opinions? first off,she's Dumber than Feces to go on FB making these kind of Threats!  http://www.11alive.com/story/news/crime/2015/04/28/facebook-threats-to-kill-police/26552507/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So, limited free speech...unless you make terroristic threats towards a group deemed socially unacceptable? Your rights end where anothers begins This pretty much sums it up. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But how do we keep that 'Knee Jerk Reaction' from swinging to far back to the RIGHT>>> and once again I have an example from my state of KS as an prime example:
Kansas Bill Could Send Teachers To Jail For Six Months For Teaching ‘Harmful’ Materials by Kay Steiger Posted on February 25, 2015 at 5:10 pm A lawmaker in Kansas is seeking to criminalize the distribution of “harmful” materials to minors in schools, lifting an exemption for teachers using approved materials. Advocates working against the bill worry it will have a “chilling” effect on teachers in the state. “It’s purely a reaction to this instance of this one particular sex ed poster,” said Micah Kubic, of the American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas, who testified against the bill. “This poster must be the most impactful poster in the history of the poster.” The text-only poster, displayed in Hocker Grove Middle School in Shawnee, Kansas, in 2014 was titled, “How Do People Express Their Sexual Feelings?” and included the words “hugging,” “grinding” and “**** sex.” Kubic said the bill is unnecessary. “The teacher who put that up was disciplined by the school almost immediately after that parent complained,” he said. “There was a list of sexual acts, some of which were highly offensive,” Sen. Mary Pilcher-Cook told KMBC 9 News. Pilcher-Cook previously introduced a bill that would criminalize surrogate parenting, saying “you are creating a child purposely that you know is not going to have a biological mother.” The bill would criminalize displaying material to minors that is “harmful,” including “any description, exhibition, presentation or representation, in whatever form, of nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement or sadomasochistic abuse when the material or performance.” The bill looks likely to pass the state Senate this week, and carries a penalty of up to six months in jail. Kansas already has a law that protects minors from “harmful” material, mainly to prevent adults from distributing pornography to minors. As it is written now, the law includes an exemption for teachers, but this bill aims to remove that exemption. Pilcher-Cook has not yet responded to ThinkProgress’ requests for comment. ACLU Kansas and teachers worry that the language is overly broad, and that teachers could be targeted for things that are part of a normal curriculum, including books with sexual or controversial themes like Huckleberry Finn. A lesson an anatomy, say, might be dicey for a biology teacher, or an art history class could be scrubbed because some of the content included nudes.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But how do we keep that 'Knee Jerk Reaction' from swinging to far back to the RIGHT>>> and once again I have an example from my state of KS as an prime example: Kansas Bill Could Send Teachers To Jail For Six Months For Teaching ‘Harmful’ Materials by Kay Steiger Posted on February 25, 2015 at 5:10 pm A lawmaker in Kansas is seeking to criminalize the distribution of “harmful” materials to minors in schools, lifting an exemption for teachers using approved materials. Advocates working against the bill worry it will have a “chilling” effect on teachers in the state. “It’s purely a reaction to this instance of this one particular sex ed poster,” said Micah Kubic, of the American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas, who testified against the bill. “This poster must be the most impactful poster in the history of the poster.” The text-only poster, displayed in Hocker Grove Middle School in Shawnee, Kansas, in 2014 was titled, “How Do People Express Their Sexual Feelings?” and included the words “hugging,” “grinding” and “**** sex.” Kubic said the bill is unnecessary. “The teacher who put that up was disciplined by the school almost immediately after that parent complained,” he said. “There was a list of sexual acts, some of which were highly offensive,” Sen. Mary Pilcher-Cook told KMBC 9 News. Pilcher-Cook previously introduced a bill that would criminalize surrogate parenting, saying “you are creating a child purposely that you know is not going to have a biological mother.” The bill would criminalize displaying material to minors that is “harmful,” including “any description, exhibition, presentation or representation, in whatever form, of nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement or sadomasochistic abuse when the material or performance.” The bill looks likely to pass the state Senate this week, and carries a penalty of up to six months in jail. Kansas already has a law that protects minors from “harmful” material, mainly to prevent adults from distributing pornography to minors. As it is written now, the law includes an exemption for teachers, but this bill aims to remove that exemption. Pilcher-Cook has not yet responded to ThinkProgress’ requests for comment. ACLU Kansas and teachers worry that the language is overly broad, and that teachers could be targeted for things that are part of a normal curriculum, including books with sexual or controversial themes like Huckleberry Finn. A lesson an anatomy, say, might be dicey for a biology teacher, or an art history class could be scrubbed because some of the content included nudes. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tell a cop hes a pig, and see how far free Tell the right Jew that hes a **** and see what it gets you. Call an African American the n word and see what happens. Use the term "*******" when talking to a Latino and see what happens. Play stupid azz games, win stupid azz prizes. speech gets you. a buddy of mine witnessed a Sounds like he played stupid azz games and won stupid azz prizes.....as did the woman in the OP.
kid on his 21st bday drunk off his @$$ getting beat by like 5 cops simply for being drunk and talking back to the cops. he didnt threaten the cops, just had a few choice words for them |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tell a cop hes a pig, and see how far free Tell the right Jew that hes a **** and see what it gets you. Call an African American the n word and see what happens. Use the term "*******" when talking to a Latino and see what happens. Play stupid azz games, win stupid azz prizes. speech gets you. a buddy of mine witnessed a Sounds like he played stupid azz games and won stupid azz prizes.....as did the woman in the OP. kid on his 21st bday drunk off his @$$ getting beat by like 5 cops simply for being drunk and talking back to the cops. he didnt threaten the cops, just had a few choice words for them dont matter cop has no right to beat your head in cause you called him a name. the kid was 21 and most likely blacked out drunk. there was a fight in the bar which the kid wasnt even involved in but when he went outside the cops were acting like a bunch of hardasses to everyone. so as the kid walked away he said a few words to the cops, who i will add started the tension in the first place by acting like a bunch of tuff guys for no reason. then 4-5 cops tackle him and hit him in the head and smash his face off the pavement. so you think it should be ok for cops to do that? thats messed up man. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 guess thats ok because she called him a name! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ACLU Kansas and teachers worry that the language is overly broad, and that teachers could be targeted for things that are part of a normal curriculum, including books with sexual or controversial themes like Huckleberry Finn. A lesson an anatomy, say, might be dicey for a biology teacher, or an art history class could be scrubbed because some of the content included nudes. The bill states that this: "an exhibition in a state of nudity is for a bona fide scientific or medical purpose, or for an educational or cultural purpose for a bona fide school, museum or library". Is not considered to be a criminal act. So that entire paragraph I quoted is BS. We now live in an easily offended society, so you have to accept that the offended are going to come from all sides. That equal protection under the law thing is a b*tch.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so who was my "diatribe" against? who did i commit a forceful and bitter attack against? all i said is a cop has no right to beat someone for calling them a name. seems like your the one who is committing forceful and bitter attacks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
2OLD2MESSAROUND
on
Thu 04/30/15 10:27 AM
|
|
ACLU Kansas and teachers worry that the language is overly broad, and that teachers could be targeted for things that are part of a normal curriculum, including books with sexual or controversial themes like Huckleberry Finn. A lesson an anatomy, say, might be dicey for a biology teacher, or an art history class could be scrubbed because some of the content included nudes. The bill states that this: "an exhibition in a state of nudity is for a bona fide scientific or medical purpose, or for an educational or cultural purpose for a bona fide school, museum or library". Is not considered to be a criminal act. So that entire paragraph I quoted is BS. We now live in an easily offended society, so you have to accept that the offended are going to come from all sides. That equal protection under the law thing is a b*tch.. Things have gone so far 'TILTED' over board with all this religious BS that it's gotten out of hand on the state level!!! Not every one in my state agreed with the 'NUT JOBS' behind this issue/bill but unfortunately when you have the cretins like Rev. Fred Phelps {out of Topeka} getting such notoriety and showing up nation wide the lobbyist come pouring into this state when there's a bill that needs support! And idiot bills like this get pushed through! Lots of art classes/English teachers were up in arms about this; what are they supposed to teach if the studies - text books that they've used in the past will now get them brought up on charges...because everything will have to pass a REVIEW BOARD prior to being brought into a classroom: grade school/high school/college etc., etc., etc., --- heaven forbid some student brings something from home that shocks a fellow student? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
stupid people doing stupid things... the media has been advertising that the police will arrest you for being stupid on facebook, so why post anything that gets their attention?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So, limited free speech...unless you make terroristic threats towards a group deemed socially unacceptable? Walking into a crowded fire, and shouting the word "theatre" is almost guaranteed, to score you strange looks, and a free psych eval. But, its perfectly legal. Walking into a crowded theatre, and shouting "fire", will score you a citation and arrest, for inciting panic. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
JOHNN111
on
Thu 04/30/15 11:53 AM
|
|
A Woman in my city was recently arrested and convicted for posting on FB graffiti pics of the "police public spokesperson" caricature with a bullet mark between the eyes & threats.
Zero tolerance for such stupidity. IMO, throw the book at her for threatening death of peace officers. Gawd! Did anyone catch Geraldo Rivera almost getting punched out reporting in Baltimore?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
tealbreeze
on
Thu 04/30/15 12:01 PM
|
|
A Woman in my city was recently arrested and convicted for posting on FB graffiti pics of the "police public spokesperson" caricature with a bullet mark between the eyes & threats. Zero tolerance for such stupidity. IMO, throw the book at her for threatening death of peace officers. Gawd! Did anyone catch Geraldo Rivera almost getting punched out reporting in Baltimore? "Fools and Vandals" Stop Blocking My Camera! Geraldo Nearly Comes to Blows with Baltimore Protester |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JOHNN111 A Woman in my city was recently arrested and convicted for posting on FB graffiti pics of the "police public spokesperson" caricature with a bullet mark between the eyes & threats. Zero tolerance for such stupidity. IMO, throw the book at her for threatening death of peace officers. Gawd! Did anyone catch Geraldo Rivera almost getting punched out reporting in Baltimore?  Another broken 'NOSE'...oh, noooo! Don't suppose anyone got THAT ON FILM 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited for targeting members rather than the topic.
soufie Site Moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
regularfeller
on
Thu 04/30/15 01:26 PM
|
|
"A Missouri police officer who was caught on video raising his weapon and telling Ferguson protesters that he would kill them has resigned from the force".
Sounds like a terroristic threat, yes? AND he was pointing a weapon at those he had threatened. Should the book not be thrown at him as well? Why does all the clamoring for morality and law and order stop when it no longer involves a "dreg of society" making such statements. My point is, why was this man not arrested and charged same as the GA woman? Why is his speech more protected than another's? Your's, mine? ***Edit: And this is just one example. There are many, many more instances of police officer's submitting social media posts making terroristic threats against civilians. |
|
|
|
|
