reply to post by hp1229
Originally posted by hp1229
Why the double standards? After all there were countless threads and name calling during the election and debates for Romney. I wonder what the
secret service did so far about the Romney threats on twitter.
As I said in the other thread
about this subject a few days ago, it's not
a double standard for the Secret Service to investigate the allegation made against this young woman.
It is a Class-D felony to threaten the life of the President. They are required by law and the virtue of their very job to investigate any and all
claims related to such if notified of them.
Romney is NOT
the President of the United States.
Although they are required to protect a major Presidential candidate 120 days before the general election, they aren't required to continue to protect
them afterwards. That can end after just a few days.
Currently their primary duty is to the President of the United States not Romney.
He can notify the authorities if he feels he has been threatened and they can investigate and see if it amounts to a real threat.
The same thing happened to citizens who were reported as having threatened George Bush Jr.
There was even a few High School students questioned by the Secret Service over alleged threats to Bush.
Teen questioned for online Bush threats
SACRAMENTO — Upset by the war in Iraq, Julia Wilson vented her frustrations with President Bush last spring on her Web page on MySpace.com. She
posted a picture of the president, scrawled "Kill Bush" across the top and drew a dagger stabbing his outstretched hand.
- USA TODAY
Secret Service confiscates anti-Bush drawings by 15-year-old at Prosser High
On Friday, the boy was questioned by the Secret Service after his art teacher turned in sketches by the boy featuring President Bush. In one, Bush's
head was on a stake. In another, he was dressed as the devil, firing off rockets. The caption on one sketch read, "End the War -- on errorism."
We REALLY do have short memories.
Originally posted by resoe26
eeeek. Girl is quite brave!
I'd say she's more stupid than brave.
It doesn't take courage to threaten someone online or make racist statements about them.
In fact it is quite cowardly and trollish.
She foolishly put her job in jeopardy by making an offensive public statement because unless she is in Montana or has a union contract her employment
Meaning she can be fired for conduct outside of her job that her employers feel reflect poorly on them in the eyes of the community. If she feels this
is unjust she can plead her case to the National Labor Relations Board but I don't believe she has a case at all.
As I posted in that other thread:
Can You Be Fired for What You Post on Facebook?
You might think the First Amendment decides the legal issue here, but it doesn’t. The Constitution protects free speech from government
interference. In the private sector, however, courts have made management discretion the rule. Employees who don’t work for the government and
aren’t in a union can be fired or punished for almost anything they say, wherever they say it. Business groups say companies need the authority to
put the best person in the job and to shuffle as they deem necessary.
Free speech can have consequences.
Things you publicly post online doesn't just float into a black hole of anonymity...it can go right back to you.
You can be fired for how you behave on the various social media out there and it isn't always unjustified.
Don't let the results of the election turn you into an irresponsible child throwing a public online tantrum.
edit on 14-11-2012 by lee anoma because: (no reason given)