It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Chicopee Man Faces Charges For ‘Put Wings On Pigs’ Facebook Post

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Okay, just so we're clear. And I agree with you on this, the guy said something stupid, but in my opinion not something illegal. As I said I don't expect these charges to go far.

I understand I used an extreme example to make my point, I'm not comparing what I used as an example and what the guy said as similar.




posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 11:46 AM
link   
The guy should not be charged for anything, He is not making a threat, just a very stupid comment, but he still lives in America, wher last i checked it free to say whatever he wants. I dont agree with the remark, but when do we decide it is Not Ok. This is the start of the war on our last remaining rights. I feel like the police and media are going to run with this story, and try and gain as much ground as they can against the right to say whatever you want. If he was making a threat, then I would agree, but he isnt



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

I understand



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Unless you are a politician that threatens to throw a reporter off a ledge.

It is a facebook post people, he didn't say it to someones face.

edit on rdTue, 23 Dec 2014 12:32:35 -0600America/Chicago1220143580 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: TheBlackDog

He deserves to be charged for using words? Is that really a road you want to go down?


Words are powerful and they can provoke people into doing stupid things, and freedom of speech is a double edged sword- it can make people drink the kool aid or it can slap the cup out of their hands.

What would happen if an honest cop on the beat was gunned down as the killer chanted "wings on pigs?" would the defendant get a reprise because his actions were inspired by a facebook post? you can bet your last dollar that the suit defending him will play that card.

Freedom of speech is a staple in many countries; but when a person abuses that right and encourages violence then what do you do?
edit on 23-12-2014 by Thecakeisalie because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74


I understand the police being afraid and it was tragic what happened to the officers in NYC AND this guy is an idiot for posting that... BUT we can't criminalize speech just because of fear.

Just to be clear. I do not support vigilante justice against cops. Nor do I support making threats against them.
That said: This wasn't a threat. It was an opinion. That falls under free speech. Smart comment to put on facebook? No. But I have personally heard cops say much worse about the citizens they police, and though I agree the gratuitous murder of two cops is indeed tragic. The lives cops have ruined, and the unwarranted shootings they have been involved in, are just as tragic.

I will not value their lives over the lives of those who have been their victims.



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 12:37 PM
link   
He's an idiot for sure-

but start prosecuting idiots in this country for things they say on the internet and it's going to be a real mess.



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

I made the thread here about the mans postings. I guess they will get me and you now.



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 12:43 PM
link   
If anyone is responsible it would be facebook for allowing the content. Just like they and others allow wartime postings across the world.



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 01:15 PM
link   
The police can arrest him for their own reasons.
The DA will most likely not take this to court.
He has a win loss record to worry about.



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheBlackDogThe guy's an idiot and deserves whatever charges he's facing.


you're half right.



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 01:17 PM
link   
This slope is awful slippery.



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick
If anyone is responsible it would be facebook for allowing the content. Just like they and others allow wartime postings across the world.


That would be like banning books because they can teach people how to build bombs.

You can't blame the medium for the content that's posted to it.
edit on 23-12-2014 by ScientificRailgun because: grammar



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Glassbender777
The guy should not be charged for anything, He is not making a threat, just a very stupid comment, but he still lives in America, wher last i checked it free to say whatever he wants. I dont agree with the remark, but when do we decide it is Not Ok. This is the start of the war on our last remaining rights. I feel like the police and media are going to run with this story, and try and gain as much ground as they can against the right to say whatever you want. If he was making a threat, then I would agree, but he isnt


The last time you checked? You should check more often than every twenty yrs.



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: deadeyedick

If anyone is responsible it would be facebook for allowing the content. Just like they and others allow wartime postings across the world.




That would be like banning books because they can teach people how to build bombs.



You can't blame the medium for the content that's posted to it.


yes i can. and i do.
it is called responsibility and learning how to make bombs is not the same as telling someone to set one off or incite them through hate speech.
I am cool with books teaching things but not cool with a place where armies are using to wage wars.


as long as facebok tweeter and others allow it they will be used to perpetuate violence.

The site we are on is a great example.
I am free to post anarchist cook book but not free to tell someone where and when to use it.
edit on 23-12-2014 by deadeyedick because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 01:54 PM
link   
How asinine. His comment was a bit stupid in light of recent events, but the article in no way, shape or form shows his comment to be threatening in ANY way from what I could see.

It's only a matter of time before this:



Also earns charges because people can't help but pearl-clutch over any insinuated offensiveness, whether or not it's even there.

How long until the phrase "when pigs grow wings & fly" is considered threatening speech? I'm taking bets, come on, folks.



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadeyedick

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: deadeyedick

If anyone is responsible it would be facebook for allowing the content. Just like they and others allow wartime postings across the world.




That would be like banning books because they can teach people how to build bombs.



You can't blame the medium for the content that's posted to it.


yes i can. and i do.
it is called responsibility and learning how to make bombs is not the same as telling someone to set one off or incite them through hate speech.
I am cool with books teaching things but not cool with a place where armies are using to wage wars.


as long as facebok tweeter and others allow it they will be used to perpetuate violence.

The site we are on is a great example.
I am free to post anarchist cook book but not free to tell someone where and when to use it.
Books, texts, etc have incited rebellions and toppled nations. The ideologies they teach may teach things that cause people to rise up against their government. Books have indirectly been responsible for millions of deaths, why not place blame on them?

You cannot apply the standard to one medium and not the other.



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 01:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

It's not about fear, it's about due diligence.

A cop killer that just took out two cops peacefully sitting in their cruiser use that nearly exact same phrase prior to committing the murders. Copy-cat killings are a reality, and what this assbag posted could legally hold up as a threat, which is an arrestable offense.

Take the whole picture into account, and understand that this response is not driven by "fear" as much as it's driven by experience and logic.



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Assault and Battery

Two separate offenses against the person that when used in one expression may be defined as any unlawful and unpermitted touching of another. Assault is an act that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent, harmful, or offensive contact. The act consists of a threat of harm accompanied by an apparent, present ability to carry out the threat. Battery is a harmful or offensive touching of another.

The main distinction between the two offenses is the existence or nonexistence of a touching or contact. While contact is an essential element of battery, there must be an absence of contact for assault. Sometimes assault is defined loosely to include battery.

Assault and battery are offenses in both criminal and Tort Law; therefore, they can give rise to criminal or civil liability. In Criminal Law, an assault may additionally be defined as any attempt to commit a battery.

Link to above.

People tend to not understand that "assault" is just the threat. Yes a person can be arrested and charged for a threat, but I'd think it is right they cannot for an opinion or most of the country would be in jail


I actually know a person who did two years felony parole for calling someone and threatening them over some money they owed him. He called over state lines so it was the FBI who showed up at his door. He learned a hard lesson about making threats and lost his right to own a gun or hunt forever. He did a stupid, stupid thing and paid the price.

How stupid a person would have to be to post something like that online is pretty apparent.

Now if a person who were say a member of a gang were to make that statement, I think they could easily make a case for assault and win. I'm sure it's a case by case thing.

I think the real story is how many people are foolish enough to hate all Cops. Imagine how many lives, including minority lives in inner cities they save every year. How many are talking about that. I'm saddened to see the late sixties and early seventies being replayed by yet another population of irrational people. The Lemmings fall in line at every opportunity I suppose.
edit on 12/23/2014 by Blaine91555 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2014 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

By all means look into it. I would hate for another person to die because of an assumption... but I'd also hate to see someone punished based on an assumption.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join