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.

 

Emoji = PRISON!

page: 2
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: hefficide
a reply to: Annee

And there is the slippery slope. What constitutes a threat?



The Ninth Circuit concluded that a “true threat” is “a statement which, in the entire context and under all the circumstances, a reasonable person would foresee would be interpreted by those to whom the statement is communicated as a serious expression of intent to inflict bodily harm upon that person.”995 “It is not necessary that the defendant intend to, or be able to carry out his threat; the only intent requirement for a true threat is that the defendant intentionally or knowingly communicate the threat.”996



the Court held in Claiborne that “[t]he mere fact the statements could be understood ‘as intending to create a fear of violence’ was insufficient to make them ‘true threats’ under Watts.”

Source

If anything I think Americans have got pretty used to threatening language due to the internet. Violent statements and common speech are sometimes hard to separate. It's pretty clear what the pictures were intending and as far as the question of this being a 'true threat' ... I don't think they intended the victim to feel cuddly.

Games of hangman are obviously not threats based on the fact its a game of hangman. There isn't any intention or knowing in my hangman game.
edit on 17-6-2015 by Pinke because: Grammar




posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 12:30 PM
link   
The world is full of nutcases going around threatening to behead people, and actually showing it over social media, all for their make believe magic man in the sky, yet they are more worried about random cartoon threats on social media involving a fist and an ambulance?

Priorities are all out of whack.



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: hefficide

Well it was sent by 2 people who already tried to beat the guy up at his house, so yeah I would feel threatened. If I posted that in a response to one of my rivals here I would be banned.



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: hefficide

A threat with intent to harm is still a threat. It really doesn't matter what form that threat happens to take. In this case it happens to be emojis. Really the stupidity of this particular episode rests entirely on the heads of the abusers -- not the victim.



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 12:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: hefficide
a reply to: Annee

And there is the slippery slope. What constitutes a threat?



The way I look at this:

If both a child and an adult are standing in front of me -- pointing loaded guns at me -- is one more innocent then the other?





We're not talking about loaded guns. We're talking about emoticons that come stock with a FB account. Trying to connect the two is way past my ability to relate to.

It is absolutely clear to me that we, as a nation, very recently devolved into mind set where what we feel matters more than reality. And we are happily embracing an absolutist police state to enforce the idea that our feelings shall never, again, be so much as prodded a bit.

Is what they posted a bit tasteless? Probably.

Is it totally open to interpretation? This thread proves it in the first few replies - people saying that it seems to say "One punch would put you into the hospital"

Does it constitute a real and definable threat? Not at all. If the law considers that a threat? We're going to need more prisons - or maybe those FEMA camps that some folks keep insisting we're all going to end up piled into.

FTR: The emoji's, to me, are simply passive aggressive alpha male BS. It being a crime infers that if I were to tell another guy "Hey, leave me alone. I can kick your ass" then I'd end up in prison as well.

If we, as a nation, have reached that level of over sensitivity? Then all is lost.



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 12:49 PM
link   
The real crime here is that people see nothing wrong with these bullys. ..
bullying is bullying and threats are threats no matter what form they take..
sometimes the mentality on this site makes me think wtf.. Why do I bother.. Especially when someone even decides to make a thread to defend abuse and bullying.. or maybe you get more stars and flags these days for being anti establishment no matter what the background story is... It doesn't really matter for some people.

Op if that was your child or brother sister whatever receiving messages like that.. and the police did nothing. . Your view would be different and you would be on here crying out for these bastards to be locked up.
edit on 17/6/15 by Misterlondon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Misterlondon

I have not and do not endorse or support bullying in any way shape or form. BUT when emoji's qualify as "bullying"??? That's beyond the pale. Even with the history between these people it was, at best, tasteless and at worse a cheap shot. But a threat???

Anyone who wants to find me on FB and send me emoji based "threats" just to prove that they will NOT illicit a reaction from me - feel free. Smiley face picture things are NOT threatening.



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 12:56 PM
link   
I would agree with hefficide, that this is completely ridiculous. If it was some random person who sent the emoji and got arrested. But it was not a random person. It was someone who was already threatening the guy and had already beat up the guy in his own house. Since they beat him up once and have threaten him in the past. How can you argue that the intent of the sender was not to threaten and intimidate. To me its a bigger leap to say its just a cute cartoon than to think its a legitimate threat. If this guy did not report this and then got beat up so bad that he had to stay in the hospital. What would people think then.

Whichever way you think about it. As an evolution of speech or as a devolution of speech. A lot of people nowadays use pictures to communicate. You see it all the time, even here. How many people have responded to some post with a picture to get their point across. Like it or not. There is such a thing as text speak. Where people use shorthand, pictures, videos, and emoji's, to communicate. Even if you do not understand this form of communication. You can not just dismiss it. What if you did not understand German. But I was threatening you in German. Saying I was going to kill you. Should the threat be dismissed just because someone does not understand German or thinks German is just a cutesie language.


edit on 17-6-2015 by karmicecstasy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 12:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: hefficide

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: hefficide
a reply to: Annee

And there is the slippery slope. What constitutes a threat?



The way I look at this:

If both a child and an adult are standing in front of me -- pointing loaded guns at me -- is one more innocent then the other?





We're not talking about loaded guns. We're talking about emoticons that come stock with a FB account. Trying to connect the two is way past my ability to relate to.


You're making something benign/innocent just because its a cartoon type character.

Same to me as making a child innocent, just because its a child - - even if that child is holding a loaded gun pointed at me.

Don't let your brain trick you.


JAK

posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 01:00 PM
link   
a reply to: hefficide

If not a threat then what message were those responsible were trying to convey?



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: karmicecstasy





There. Is that a threat? It's pictures on a screen. Did I just click my mouse five times and condemn myself to a prison sentence? Did I just commit a viable and real crime by using little pictures that are sitting right beneath the text input screen?

If that is the way things work now - as I've said, the entire game is over.

Like I said earlier - this is barely a shade away from being arrested for staring at somebody with a mean look on your face. That's actually far more threatening than emoji's are - but it's no reason to arrest anyone.



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Meh, I give up. If a police state is what the population hungers for? Then that's what will come.



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: hefficide

I think the disconnect is that you think of emoji's as just little cute pictures. When many people who grew up with them, think of emoji's as a form of speech. A language only known by its users. If there is a large segment of your population using a different form of communication. You can not just dismiss that form of communication because you do not like it or do not understand it.

This is not some new law being made to oppress people. This is just applying current laws to a new form of communication. If I were to send someone, who I have a violent past with, where I was the aggressor. A message that said. I am going to punch you in the face until you are in the hospital. I would be arrested. Just because someone relayed that same message in a different way. Why does it mean they should not be punished by existing laws.


edit on 17-6-2015 by karmicecstasy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: hefficide

We have crossed a line, imo. There is some serious mass psychosis working in today's society. They have taken political correctness to mentally-ill heights.

It seems to me there are some real bona fide mental disorders at play on a mass societal scale. At some point these folks "running the insane asylum" will themselves have to be put in a straitjacket so rational people can bring back common sense to our national thinking.

Mass psychosis is real. Maybe this is the way Big Pharma wants it.



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 01:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: hefficide
a reply to: karmicecstasy





There. Is that a threat? It's pictures on a screen. Did I just click my mouse five times and condemn myself to a prison sentence? Did I just commit a viable and real crime by using little pictures that are sitting right beneath the text input screen?

If that is the way things work now - as I've said, the entire game is over.

Like I said earlier - this is barely a shade away from being arrested for staring at somebody with a mean look on your face. That's actually far more threatening than emoji's are - but it's no reason to arrest anyone.


You are acting like this has opened a floodgate. You are acting as though prior context in this situation should have no relevance. Why would your little bomb symbols be threatening? You have never bombed me. However if you'd already assaulted me in my own home then sent me a picture of a fist and an ambulance, that would feel like a threat.



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: hefficide

I find it so ironic that about 2 years ago someone threatened
to rape me on facebook and nothing...No response to my messages,
nothing.
But now you send someone one of those cute little emoji thingies
you can go to jail.My favorite was the one sticking his tongue out
at you.I am assuming now that would be considered committing
sexual harassment.



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 01:29 PM
link   
This is getting out of hand.

Instead of maturing as a species, we are devolving into more and more child-like patterns of behavior. We are now encouraged to all live in our own little realities, and everyone is supposed to tip-toe around, as to not topple the fragile make-believe worlds we create for ourselves.

I'd want to be Mr. Olympia. I am Mr. Olympia, don't tell me otherwise because it's mean. So what if that other guy has bigger muscles and is more cut? He's won a bunch of times already. I'm Mr. Olympia and telling me otherwise hurts my pride, ego, and self esteem.

"Okay honey, you can be Mr. Olympia...now, now...don't cry..."

This is a very, very slippery slope. We are now pandering to the lowest denominator because we're tired of the complaining by the weakest among us. We're throwing grease everywhere because everyone is now a squeaky wheel, and loud ones at that.

The guy can always block the people sending him "emojis" on Facebook. The guy has already been beaten up once, why doesn't he just cut these guys off his Facebook, or change his name on there?

So we're going to start locking people up for threats, before any actual physical harm has been done? I bet there are rapists and murderers running the streets that have committed actual physical acts of violence that could be the focus of attention.

"Hey bro, what are you in for? ... Emoji? What the hell is that? ... You mean like a smiley face thing on a computer? Hahaha!"

If the guy really wanted to threaten this guy, he would have probably done so in a much more direct manner. Sending an emoji threat is probably the weakest kind of threat I can think of. He didn't even use words or spoken voice. Slashing tires, stalking, phone calls, these are all much more proactive threats that would indicate a far higher potential of violence.

If this guy is so afraid of this other guy, there must be a reason. Oh, he was beat up in his own house? Then why haven't the authorities done their job and punished the man sufficiently to keep him from doing it again? Why are we even in a situation where this has become an ongoing problem?

We are behaving like spoiled, paranoid children with no mother or father to run to. We are becoming increasingly incapable of dealing with the adult responsibilities of being an adult, and I fear this will lead to a very dark future.



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: hefficide We're talking about emoticons that come stock with a FB account.



hmm maybe FB can be charged with 'facillitating or assisting in a criminal act'. sounds nutso but then lunacy seems to be the new normal.



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 01:38 PM
link   
If this kind of behavior continues and the current trend is allowed to be fostered...

The next headline we'll be discussing:

"Man sues over right to be Goblin King"

We're going to clog up the court system with people trying to assert their own personal realities upon everyone else, and not accepting the shared reality we all live in. When this happens, society itself will begin to break down as nothing will ever get done.

Eventually we'll all be living in our own little fantasy lands, ignoring the real-world problems around us. We'll simply refuse to acknowledge other human beings because they "rain on our parade".

Does this behavior remind you of anyone?

Try a five year old.



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 01:42 PM
link   
This should send anyone that views this into paroxysms of absolute terror....












new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join