Another FB Post About Obama Causes Arrest. Now This One I Can Understand!

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Sissel

 

They don't investigate threats against a presidential candidate. The law states that threats against the President are investigated, not threats against a presidential candidate. The Capitol Police investigate threats against anyone else.

Okay, thanks for that. I have never heard of the Capitol Police before. They might be looking to hire, too!

www.uscapitolpolice.gov...

The moment of transformation… when you slip into the uniform… put on the badge… and join our elite ranks, you’ll feel it. This is the moment you truly become a part of the dedication, the pride, and the legacy that makes the United States Capitol Police a force like no other. What does it take to join this prestigious team? A deep sense of patriotism, unyielding dedication to protecting the public, and a passion for the American way of life are just the beginning. The desire to make a difference in the lives of many will take care of the rest.

They make the job sound.....sexxxxxy!

Originally posted by Lonewulph

There is no freedom of speech in regard to a verbal threat, (involving death or great bodily harm), to anyone.
To be 'arrestable', the threat must typically be in physical presence of the one being threatened..in most states.

edit on 16-11-2012 by Lonewulph because: (no reason given)

This is perhaps my favorite "threatening" arrest of all time:

Man arrested for threatening tattoo

I wonder, will he continue to be arrested over and over as long as the tattoo remains?

reply to post by Zaphod58


Makes sense. I always thought if you made it far enough to run for election against the president the S.S. would be assigned to protect you.

Making threats because of Obamacare....I hope the Secret Service notifies him that his case will be reviewed by a death panel.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere


This is perhaps my favorite "threatening" arrest of all time:

Man arrested for threatening tattoo

I wonder, will he continue to be arrested over and over as long as the tattoo remains?

That's definitely a keeper! People never cease to amaze me!

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by Lonewulph

There is no freedom of speech in regard to a verbal threat, (involving death or great bodily harm), to anyone.
To be 'arrestable', the threat must typically be in physical presence of the one being threatened..in most states.

edit on 16-11-2012 by Lonewulph because: (no reason given)

This is perhaps my favorite "threatening" arrest of all time:

Man arrested for threatening tattoo

I wonder, will he continue to be arrested over and over as long as the tattoo remains?

Wow I've never seen assault successfully prosecuted as a result of a graphic image. Reading the rest of that story I can see where they can prove the officer was 'in fear', which is an element necessary to establish the crime. Don't know if it flew in court though.

Except you can threaten anybody who is not in a position of power and the police will take no action.

There are many examples of people asking for help due to threats and the police always seem to say there is nothing they can do (especially here in UK) not so sure about elsewhere but do seem to remember reading various cases of a similar nature elsewhere.

They then react after the person has been killed or hospitalised.

reply to post by Sissel


I have said this before...and I am saying it again.

Some people are just...STUCK ON STUPID!

I pity this young man; I hope he learns from this and uses more diplomacy in the future.

Originally posted by Lonewulph


Wow I've never seen assault successfully prosecuted as a result of a graphic image. Reading the rest of that story I can see where they can prove the officer was 'in fear', which is an element necessary to establish the crime. Don't know if it flew in court though.

This article says what the tattoo guy faces for this stunt:

FOX NEWS

Up to 5 years, and a $10,000 fine. That's some expensive tattoo!

Typing it on FB is the same as saying it with your mouth in public, so in this particular case I do agree. What still troubles me is that FB is clearly monitored, which is why I quit using it, but then again, ATS is probably monitored too.

Originally posted by johnb

They then react after the person has been killed or hospitalised.

I have experienced that myself being in a domestic violence situation. My husbands daughter made threats to me, and then finally beat me up on Christmas day of 2008. I suffered a broken eye orbit. That's when the police finally did something!

reply to post by smkymcnugget420


They are, but it's a very limited detail, usually no more than four or five agents in rotating teams. I think I've seen as many as three on a shift, but usually it's two. They are there for physical protection, but they don't investigate threats made, unless it's deemed credible, and then the Secret Service back in Washington will handle it. Other than that, it's the Capitol Police that handle it.

Originally posted by Sissel

Up to 5 years, and a $10,000 fine. That's some expensive tattoo!

They should rule he remove or alter it. Otherwise they're not really tackling the crime and just punishing for the sake of punishing.

Locking the guy up for 5 years over a tattoo certainly isnt going to make him want to kill that cop or any other cops less.

Geez what an idiot. He even has bigger balls to talk to the secret service like that.

wow.......


Soon they'll visit my sister, she's a FB whore. 24/7... Me, I probably login once every 3 months.

Some people just need a life.

Well, regardless of how stupid the guy was, he was honest about his feelings.

They asked him a question and he didn't hold back. D'oH!He is what I would call, stupidly honest.

reply to post by TDawgRex


He must not have that off switch that connects his brain to his mouth in certain situations...LOL! Absolutely no contemplation or fear on his part.

I am not the fastest typist in the world, but I mean c'mon. Most the time I put some thought into my words before typing them at least! (Thank God for that, or I might have been in a heap of trouble here on ATS a few times!)

reply to post by Sissel


Sometimes "Honesty is not the best policy." My Dad taught me that after I admitted to some misadventure and he proceeded to paddle me.

But he was "Proud" of me for telling the truth. I believe that is where the term, "The truth hurts", originated.

My brain to mouth filter broke decades ago. But ATS is helping me fix it.

reply to post by TDawgRex


I was wondering what kind of "hurt" this fellow might be in for considering his post on FB. I found an interesting article about a similar situation in 2008 just before the election.

CNN

In 2008, two weeks before Barack Obama was elected the first black president in this nation's history, a California man posted violent, racist messages about Obama on an online message board: One posting said, "Shoot the ____" using a racial slur to describe Obama. Another post said Obama would end up with a "50 cal in the head soon."

The Secret Service tracked down this individual as you might imagine - a guy named Walter Bagdasarian - within weeks. He had a .50-caliber rifle and five other guns and ammunition in his possession when they found him. He was arrested, and after waiving his right to a jury trial, Bagdasarian was convicted by a federal judge of two felonies for threatening to kill a presidential candidate.

Now you would think this person would have had the book thrown at him, right? Not so!

In a 2-to-1 ruling, the court said his actions were protected by the First Amendment and that while his words were "alarming and dangerous," they were not illegal. The court also said Bagdasarian expressed no intent to act on his words himself.

An interesting lesson though......stay away from the keyboard while you're drunk!

After Bagdasarian was initially convicted in 2009, he apologized for his actions and said he had posted the messages while drunk. Apparently in his mind that made it OK. He was sentenced to two months in a halfway house in addition to the 24 days he had already served in jail.