posted on Jun, 14 2015 @ 10:17 PM
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
For someone to comment that someone should be taken out back and shot is encouraging violence against judges, and could also certainly be interpreted
at the very least as a veiled threat, if not a direct threat. I would say people do have the freedom of speech but if while using their freedom of
speech, they directly put someone at risk of being harmed, its fair to take action against the person putting them at risk of harm. In this case the
judge directly participated in harming a person very severely, so it may be a bit hypocritical to then go after someone else for merely mildly
increasing the risk of harm for another person. I believe the comment was generally fair to say, but the action taken against it was also fair due to
the circumstance that the judge actually believed his own nonsensical and barbaric actions are the moral high ground.
I agree with the posts saying it is a waste of resources to pursue the commenter, especially when the worst case is that the commenter will just
repeat the same remark only for millions of people to hear it on TV if they chose to stand by the remark instead of retracting it. What Reason and the
government parties involved would best do is simply have the comment deleted, which probably already happened. By perusing this further than that, it
can only play into political opponents of the judge. But, not on grounds of freedom of speech, but just on the grounds of pointing out how immoral the
judge was when he sentenced someone to life for pressing buttons on a keyboard in a way that brought people the products they wanted and have a human
right to consume in any way they see fit.
edit on 14-6-2015 by wayforward because: (no reason given)