Of course, incitement to violence against anybody should be held to account. I’m not trying to excuse this atrocity. All I worry about is the rush to judgement without evidence. It’s a slippery slope.
a) Whoever, with intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a felony that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against property or against the person of another in violation of the laws of the United States, and under circumstances strongly corroborative of that intent, solicits, commands, induces, or otherwise endeavors to persuade such other person to engage in such conduct, shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or (notwithstanding section 3571) fined not more than one-half of the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the crime solicited, or both; or if the crime solicited is punishable by life imprisonment or death, shall be imprisoned for not more than twenty years.
b) It is an affirmative defense to a prosecution under this section that, under circumstances manifesting a voluntary and complete renunciation of his criminal intent, the defendant prevented the commission of the crime solicited. A renunciation is not “voluntary and complete” if it is motivated in whole or in part by a decision to postpone the commission of the crime until another time or to substitute another victim or another but similar objective. If the defendant raises the affirmative defense at trial, the defendant has the burden of proving the defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
c) It is not a defense to a prosecution under this section that the person solicited could not be convicted of the crime because he lacked the state of mind required for its commission, because he was incompetent or irresponsible, or because he is immune from prosecution or is not subject to prosecution.
9 Likes
I’m judging Trump and Yannapukeolis on things that we KNOW they’ve said.
17 Likes
That’s two.
Three more and we have a BINGO.
17 Likes
I hate the right with unbridled passion but as Kimmo has posted there are legal instruments that deal with this, throwing accusations around on circumstantial evidence does us no favours at all. If it turns out that this asshole has been indoctrinated with right wing terrorist ideology fair enough, but we know nothing about this right now and if we are wrong make no mistake the right wing press will have a field day about it. Trying to think long term - not trying to gaslight.
(edit - and if we are wrong)
1 Like
I’m not accusing Trump and Yannapukeolis of carrying out the shooting. I’m accusing them of making public statements that could reasonably be interpreted as incitement to carry out such a shooting.
Whether or not this particular shooter turns out to have been inspired by those statements doesn’t change the fact that Trump and Yannapukeolis made them. I need not rely on “circumstantial evidence” to accuse them of making such statements, because the statements are an undisputed matter of public record.
22 Likes
The circumstantial allegations that are in play here on this discussion are, as you well know, are that the shooter went into the newsroom, shot the place up, murdered people because of stuff that Trump and the YouTube idiot said. This is not proven. Yet.
Milo already deserves to be publicly shamed out of every eating and drinking establishment that doesn’t have a Confederate flag hanging in it.
Him being culpable strengthens that argument. Him not being culpable, or not being proven to be culpable, doesn’t weaken it.
With his history, he definitely knows by now what making a “joke” like that entails.
18 Likes
Agree with that.
1 Like
The paper has been around longer than the United States. They published the freakin’ Declaration of Independence!
13 Likes
“Will no one rid me of these troublesome journalists?”
Replied the publisher: “Damn it, we’re putting out a paper tomorrow.”
11 Likes
(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)
are you sure?
The New York Police Department deployed counterterrorism teams to news media organizations in and around New York City, a decision that has become standard practice during terrorist and active shooter events. The latest deployments were not based on a specific threat, the N.Y.P.D. said in a statement, but rather “out of an abundance of caution until we learn more about the suspect and motives behind the Maryland shooting.”
7 Likes
If you really, really want to be sure wait for El Presidente to pardon the shooter of all Federal charges.
6 Likes
I’m 2 down already my friend. I can’t anymore with the BS that is this society.
5 Likes
7 Likes
Hey @SmokyBarnable you do know this is the BBS forums. It’s not a court of law. It’s not legally binding. It’s not even the court of public opinion. It’s a rather small group of people discussing topics and sharing their opinion.
So to that point…jumping to conclusions is allowed. Making assumptions is acceptable. While you can disagree with all of whatever those are…continuing to argue against those who want to express their opinion only paints your position as that of a troll or apologist.
I’m being sincere. It’s ok if someone doesn’t agree with you or you with them. Say “roger that” or “agree to disagree” and move on with your day. This is friendly advice. And will lead to happier and often times friendlier interactions. I say this from experience that it’s ok to think we should wait before condemning folks but it is also ok for others to rush to Judgment. Especially on this news item of the day.
14 Likes
Consider other reasons why the current US authorities may wish to normalise the intrusion of police into newsrooms.
10 Likes
