If you want to see the worst case of violation of first amendment rights in recent memory, click on the link below. Note that a Police Officer likens the comment made by the teacher to someone going into an Airport and claiming they have a bomb. It is apparent that one is nothing like the other.....unless you represent the government. and are trying to justify an illegal arrest. It reminds me of someone saying something that a dictator doesn't like and being arrested for it.
GO HERE to view the article.
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
9 comments:
Just another form of government harassment.Just like the suit filed against you.
However, asying "bomb" in an airport is the same as saying "fire" in a crowded theater or threatening the life of the President. It is NOT protected speech under the first amendment, and is punishable by law (depnding on jursitiction.)
Plus, I would not liken this to your case. The things you write and post attack the integrity of the SFD and SPD, but you do not directly attack them physically or call for violence against them. This guy's posting did just that: praising violence against the teachers, and through that (even if unintended) saying that violence is an accepted form of greivance.
This is not governmental over-reaching or an assault on First Amendment liberties. This is a guy who said something stupid and wrong and recieving consequences for it.
Free Speech is not being able to say anything you want whenever you want to. Remember: my rights end where yours begin and vice-versa.
Dan....how can you say that?
Saying "I have a bomb" is definitely wrong because the intent is to create panic or something of the kind. Definitely a crime and rightfully so.
But saying something stupid or insensitive while expressing an opinion may be in bad taste, but it is certainly not a crime.
What if those kids had mooned everyone at Columbine rather that one a shooting spree? If the teacher had made the same comment would it still be a crime? The fact that he used such a shocking statement does not rise to the level of being a crime. He did not use profanity, he did not threaten anyone, and he did not make anyone feel like thier lives were in immediate peril causing a riot or something of that nature. Just because he says something we don't like or agree with doesn't make him a criminal.
It is a poor analogy granddad, as had the Columbine boys done anything other than what they chose to do, there would be no discussion.
It is certainly not criminal to say things that people disagree with. That act alone is the very lifeblood of democracy, but again, you cannot say every inane comment that pops in your head, and then put it out for all the world to see.
What the teacher said was profoundly stipid and insensitive. Criminal? Depends. Maybe I am being overly senstive, and I will cop to being easily incensed when people do not act like rational human beings. But his intent is not in question, and it never is in these cases.
To bring this home a bit, if there was a blog entry discussing the anniversary of the 1968 murder of the Sheriff and Deputy, and in the comments someone writes that "they had it coming and the best way to deal with the new Sheriff would be another bullet," there would be outrage, and the commentor would be question by authorites (and rightly so.) If that commentor was arrested and then released later, would you defend his freedom of speech, or chastize his stupidity and question his motives?
There is not a problem with being too careful, especially in situations regarding threats against others. I am by far not a "pro-Bush-wiretapping," and am as liberal as the next tree-hugger, but we need to be aware of what seems out of place.
Paying attention to those sort of things may have allowed someone to stop Eric and Dylan before they walked into Columbine High that day.
Dan....I still have to disagree. Yelling "fire" or "bomb" wreaks of specific intent and thus is disorderly conduct. Additionally, if the theoretical incident involving someone who speaks of the shooting of a law enforcement officer in exactly the context in which you placed it, it would not justify an arrest. In Maryland, law enforcement cannot physically "bring someone in" for questioning. To forcibly take someone into custody constitutes an arrest and charges are filed immediately. I believe you are, as you indicate, sensitive to these types of comments, but we can't arrest people because they say something others may find appalling. That is way too socialist for me. My analogy is an exact likeness because they were only words - not threats, and in no way did I get the impression that he was going to bring a gun to school and kill people. Is that the impression you got from his statement....really? Or are you just upset that someone would use this type of terrible event which brought so much unimaginable horror, to express thier position? Honestly.
Looks like that ice you've been skating on just got a little thinner, Albero.
I have reread the original article a few times and my postings here, and I seem to have confused the issue (or my angle on it) more than necessary. (I blame a part of this cold medication that I have been drowning myslef in the last few days.) :)
Arresting this guy for moronic statements is probably out of line. However, I think this comes down to the fine point of "my rights end where yours begin" and vice-versa.
A statement is made condoning violence against people, and praising shooters as heroes. Someone who read the posting not only took offense to it, but also saw it as a threat. At that point, the second person contated authorities to complain/express her concern, and things degreaded from there.
The original poster spent an hour behind bars and paid a $350 bail. Does he have a case against the police force? Probably? Can we say that the actions of the police force were a bit much? Probably. Were they wrong in investigating a concern brought aboutby a citizen who was in fear of harm? Not at all.
I don't think this was governmental over-reaching and a threat to our liberties (and believe me, I would help carry the torches and pitchforks to the White House lawn if that was the case.) "They" are not coming after the bloggers.
Dan.....I agree. I don't think it was indicative of a conspiracy against bloggers....although I do see an attempt to regulate them in the near future. It was, perhaps, an overzealous officer who got caught up in moment.
Anyway....good debate. I enjoyed it, thanks.
Very welcome, and thanks to you too granddad. (Of course, according to the dinks over at Duval's blog, I am a liberal ass who, apparently, really gets under their skin...)
Post a Comment