Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by wavesounds | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

wavesounds

"He’s been incarcerated since March without trial."

That's the problem. A jury of his peers would throw this out no questions asked.

View on HN

To be specific, here are a list of constitutional issues being called into question:

> Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech

> Excessive bail shall not be required

> In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial

Okay, so the speedy trial clause has been adapted de facto to mean six months, but maybe if he forms a law suite for free speech and excessive bail and wins he could be set for life.

Unfortunately for anyone who appeals to the Constitution, the government it establishes is also the government to which it awards the authority to interpret its meaning. In other words, the government can only make laws which the government decides don't abridge the freedom of speech, the government cannot require bail which the government decides is excessive, and the government must provide a trial which the government considers speedy.

I wouldn't count on it. It was some uptight woman who saw the comment and told the police in the first place, and you can bet its the fear of uptight parents that's causing the prosecution. Can you imagine how the shit would hit the fan if the kid had said something like that, the police had been notified, and the police had done nothing, and the kid had shot up some school?

You mean like the uproar and lawsuits that occurred when it turned out the FBI was tracking the 9/11 hijackers for months before they attacked?

But that's exactly the problem -- some fearful little officials saying, "But what if he meant it?"

An intelligent chief of police and prosecutor should have looked at the kid's background, maybe dropped by his house, and said, OK there's no "there" there. Unless there's a history of violence, or record of mental illness, or sociopathic behavior officially noted, etc. Which as far as I know, there isn't in this case. Just pure blind, stupid bureaucratic grinding an individual with their jackboots, simply because they have the power.

I don't know if you remember high school, or more specifically other peoples' parents, but it doesn't ring true to me to blame the bureaucracy with their "jackboots."

Parents are fucking nuts, suburban parents doubly so. This is some town outside of San Antonio--you think these police officials are acting out of step with what most of the local parents want?

See my earlier comment :)

It's the suburban soccer moms wearing the jackboots. The police are just their messengers.

Everything up to calling the police and them searching his house is fine, even expected. Police investigate and find that this is a random, sarcastic comment from an otherwise normal 19 year-old and warn him not to do that again - that's what we should expect, not sitting in jail awaiting trial.

But at the same time, I have to ask where the line should be drawn. Our babysitter's boyfriend was arrested and jailed (charges of making "terroristic threats" again) for leaving a bomb threat in the bathroom of their high school His stated reason: he wanted the day off. He's harmless, but ridiculously stupid. However, he did make the threat. Even if it was an empty threat, he has to be held responsible for the cost of evacuating the school, bomb-sniffing dogs and police searching and the general disruption that ensued.

In the case of this story, though, I'd like to believe that the police or the DA would have had the balls to say "this is just a dumb kid shooting off his mouth. We told him to be careful and let him go."

Like the concerned woman who reported him to the police?

Actually, if you saw that posted, would you not consider whether to tell the police?

The proper thing to do - as said in the article - is for the police to investigate if he was serious. And you or I would - depending on lots of context on whether we thought it a remotely credible threat I guess - report it for them to investigate?

The problem seems to be on the police end, not the concerned citizen (of another country) end.

No, I would not consider it for one moment.

>> Actually, if you saw that posted, would you not consider whether to tell the police?

No. Not at all. Have you not read what is commonly spouted on the internet? You have to be 100% illiterate to not understand that this was tasteless sarcasm.

This doesn't mean I think it is funny or that I agree with it, but calling the police over a joke is pointless and irresponsible.

How could you think that's a remotely credible threat?

I definitely would. I'm not sure what the rest of these people are talking about. If some angst-ridden teenager is posting something like that on facebook, they probably need to speak with a psychologist/councilor. In today's America, you can't take that shit lightly.

However, this is like putting out a candle with a fire hose.

So it's only if an american says this that you'd report it?

Have you ever been to 4chan? Just scroll through: http://boards.4chan.org/b/ ... things like this can be considered the norm depending on what sites you go to.

That's just the thing though. Context matters a lot. Are you so excited to have something to be outraged about that you don't think about this? I mean, if I yell "I'm going to rape you" in a video game that's the equivalent of "Good game buddy", and quite innocent. I wouldn't however yell that in a public arcade at a 12 year old.

The inability to discern the difference hints at mental issues that need to be discussed with someone, even a parent would do.

Yet, kids do scream such things in public at one another. Constantly.

And, in this context, he was replying to his friend with whom he played video games with on a facebook page, and adding "lol" and "jk" to the joke. Do you consider that equivalent of an adult yelling "I'm going to rape you" to a 12 yo in a public arcade?

To me, it looks like the inability to discern the differences is not with Justin.

I guess everything I've read about it was inaccurate then. I had read that it was just a facebook post, like a post to his own wall. To me, it's still a fucking retarded thing to say in a public forum. Free speech is great, but your words still have consequences. Again, I don't think he should have been essentially abducted with no trial or bail.

However, I do believe that if you say "I'm going to murder children" in a public forum in a country where that exact thing happened on a disgusting level recently... you should get some counseling.

I've seen worse, heard worse, said worse, and am ashamed for you. Nothing anyone says on an online game should be taken seriously.

No. I may respond with "lol". That's it.

Wander around most any part of Reddit for 5 minutes, and you'll see things that are far worse said in twisted jest. And that's a mainstream site.

By these standards, you'd have to arrest every teenager in America eventually. That isn't an exaggeration.

We have provided people with easy ways to voice their thoughts and we are now confronted with what everyone should already have known: that people have a lot of 'bad' thoughts.

Every teen has at one occasion thought: I feel like killing [everyone in school, my team, my so-called friends, my brother, my ...]. Writing such a thought down gives it extra power and a screen doesn't confront you with a person and make it easy to misjudge whether you can press 'send'.

Monitoring that speech and acting on it, directly by the government or indirectly via 'concerned citizens': that way lies police state insanity.

So the answer is emphatically, decisively: no. You should not want to report this.

I'd think one of his peers would know what 'lol' and 'jk' stand for, which a middle aged women might not.

Don't be so sure. I was on a jury recently, and the deference given to the government position is alarming. Your fellow Americans are ready to send you to jail.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com