Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-13-2004, 06:25 PM   #26
cnjmorris
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 925
No, because lynching is a racist act. It is not the same as simply murdering him. Lynching is done and has been done with racist intent.
Certainly one could assume that but it is also possible that someone just got tired of the crap that Jackson says and decided to kill him in the most insulting way possible. Not because he is black, but because they relish the look on his face before he dies.

Certainly I don't condone killing anyone for any reason. I just don't assume everything is racism.

I also don't condone hate crime law. Murder is hate, period. I don't think that a minority, religious group, or gender deserves more consideration than any other. A victim is a victim. It is stupid to put the worth of one human over another. People say that victims of hate crimes deserve to be able to live a normal life without being tortured for just being themselves. I thought everyone had that right.

Lets look at recent figures. Compare how many people have been assaulted or killed for no reason with how many have have been killed or assaulted due to what the law has determined to consider hate. Who does it look like needs protection? Thats right, both. Equally.
__________________

Catcen, Level 65 Beastlord.

Newbie for life.
cnjmorris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2004, 06:39 PM   #27
Trith
The lesser of two weevils
 
Trith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Posts: 3,490
Send a message via MSN to Trith
Trith I agree with you up to a point. There is nothing in there to prosecute someone on. To say you would like to kill someone is not inciting a riot, it isn't conspiracy and it isn't endangerment. There is no conspiracy in any means in those words. It is foolish, but it isn't illegal.
Yes Bumble but there is a huge difference between saying "I'd like to kill him" in idle conversation between two people..and taking out a huge newspaper article that could be read by thousands that says "Kill him"...

It was careless and IMO illegal.
Trith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2004, 09:36 PM   #28
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
It was careless, not illegal.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2004, 10:08 PM   #29
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Rico Act, Conspiracy to murder, accomplice, enticement to kill, And more.

This should be taken to court. F-the ACLU, And the civil rights assholes.
This is a threat against one of our leaders.

I can't believe that people here are dismissing this as a RANT in a public forum.
I'll bet if this was an article from the Repubs against Any Dem, this would be an OUTRAGE!
And the fd-up Idiot-Liberal-Media would be going bonkers.

Anybody trying to argue that this is O.K>Wink-Wink is nothing more then
an ignorant fool.

The left are fools anyway. And they've crossed the line. I've already written my state senators.
I'd suggest that you all do the same.


Anybody notice that the Lib's that put this in print is,,,
in direct contact with John Kerry campaign?




God Bless America
Zolmaz.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2004, 10:27 PM   #30
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
F-the ACLU, And the civil rights assholes.
I suppose that it should be taken to court based upon the fact that it pisses you off. I'm sorry Z, but that is not something prosecutable. As I said before- you are showing your anger not your judiciousness. Thank you for verifying this for me. This simply does not have the legal bearing to stand in court.
It is stupid, but its not illegal.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 04:39 AM   #31
Trith
The lesser of two weevils
 
Trith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Posts: 3,490
Send a message via MSN to Trith
I suppose that it should be taken to court based upon the fact that it pisses you off.
No, it should be taken to court because it's a direct threat against one of the leaders of the nation. Zolmaz is right, if this had been a Republican article that said "Kill Ted Kennedy" Bumble would be sitting on his ass right now in front of a courthouse somewhere with a group of hippies protesting and singing Kum-by-ya.
Trith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 06:16 AM   #32
crimsonedge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 767
Actually a verbal threat made against the President is prosecutable and the person making the threat can face a sentence of up to 5 years in federal prison. Dont know if it extends to any high ranking government official but I wouldnt be surprised if it did.

Found this comment from the secret service:

Any death wish, even in jest is a felony, and always prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Also here is a Naval recruit that was dishonorably discharged and sentenced to a year in prison for making verbal threats against the President.

If you dont want to open it or dont have acrobat here is what he said:

"Fuck off. And fuck the rest of the staff. Fuck Admiral Green. Hell, fuck the President too...[As] a matter of fact, if I could get out of here right now, I would get a gun and kill that bastard."


http://www.armfor.uscourts.gov/opini...rm/00-0169.pdf

Now, that was just a verbal threat sworn to by petty officers. Wasn't even a written threat. I would suspect these people are going to be wishing they didnt print that advert.
crimsonedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 06:38 AM   #33
Hormadrune
Sociopathic bully?
 
Hormadrune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: PA
Posts: 11,897
No way this results in legal action- I agree it is poorly thought out and in bad taste to both compose and print an ad like this, but I really don't think it's illegal. The only direct call to action is for people to send money and vote Kerry.
__________________
WoW-Ghostlands-US: Prae | sp | Prolonix | Horm | Ulfhednar | l
EQ: Hormadrune <Retired> <OFS> <CoI> <Affy> <CE>
Hormadrune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 07:08 AM   #34
Flub Man
Here's to you liberals!!!
 
Flub Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Geaux Tigers
Posts: 3,326
Goodness, I agree with Horm. Except the part about sending money to Kerry.

Noone has brought up this point, if instead of saying Rummy, they used Bush. I can guarentee the Secret Service would have been knocking on some doors wanting some answers.
__________________
Dirty Ol' Flub <retired>
My Sports Blog

"Starkville is the Indian word for Trailer Park."
~ Skip Bertman

'I was just wrong. Flub you are correct.'
~bumble
Flub Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 07:20 AM   #35
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Zolmaz is right, if this had been a Republican article that said "Kill Ted Kennedy" Bumble would be sitting on his ass right now in front of a courthouse somewhere with a group of hippies protesting and singing Kum-by-ya.
This is wrong and an utterly STUPID assumption. I could care less whether it was Teddy or Rummy. It isn't about the politics as you so stupidly think it is.

Saying someone deserves to die and threatening their lives are not the same things. You cons are always saying someone ought to die for their sins. You cons are always saying such and such ought to be shot for the crimes they committed. How is that anymore of a crime than this? This ad says the exact same thing.
It isn't. That's how.
The people who did it ought to be investigated simply because they could have dangerous plans although its probably just anger. However, there is no threat on Rumsfelds life.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 07:23 AM   #36
Trith
The lesser of two weevils
 
Trith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Posts: 3,490
Send a message via MSN to Trith
Saying someone deserves to die and threatening their lives are not the same things
Problem is he didn't say Rummy deserved to die..he DID threaten his life. What part of this are you not understanding Bumble?

It isn't about the politics as you so stupidly think it is.
It's all about politics...don't try and go soft on me now.
Trith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 07:36 AM   #37
crimsonedge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 767
Ok found the pertinent law:

Section 871. Threats against President and successors to the Presidency

(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully deposits for conveyance in
the mail or for a delivery from any post office or by any letter
carrier any letter, paper, writing, print, missive, or document
containing any threat to take the life of, to kidnap, or to inflict
bodily harm upon the President of the United States, the
President-elect, the Vice President or other officer next in the
order of succession to the office of President of the United
States, or the Vice President-elect, or knowingly and willfully
otherwise makes any such threat against the President,
President-elect, Vice President or other officer next in the order
of succession to the office of President, or Vice President-elect,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five
years, or both.
(b) The terms ''President-elect'' and ''Vice President-elect'' as
used in this section shall mean such persons as are the apparent
successful candidates for the offices of President and Vice
President, respectively, as ascertained from the results of the
general elections held to determine the electors of President and
Vice President in accordance with title 3, United States Code,
sections 1 and 2. The phrase ''other officer next in the order of
succession to the office of President'' as used in this section
shall mean the person next in the order of succession to act as
President in accordance with title 3, United States Code, sections
19 and 20.



The Sequence of Presidential Succession

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Vice-President
2. Speaker of the House
3. President Pro Tempore of the Senate
4. Secretary of State
5. Secretary of the Treasury
6. Secretary of Defense
7. Attorney General
8. Secretary of the Interior
9. Secretary of Agriculture
10. Secretary of Commerce
11. Secretary of Labor
12. Secretary of Health and Human Services
13. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
14. Secretary of Transportation
15. Secretary of Energy
16. Secretary of Education


"We should put this S.O.B. up against a wall and say 'This is one of our bad days,' and pull the trigger,"

That is a verbal threat to take Rumsfields life no ifs ands or buts about it. I suspect she is going to be in crying a river soon if she isnt already.
crimsonedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 07:41 AM   #38
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
He did not threaten his life. Stop letting your politics blind you as you cons always do. Take Rummy's name and replace it with Ted Bundy and tell me if it is a crime and a threat to his life. It is all too common an expression.

Here I will do it for you....

"We should put Ted Bundy up against a wall and say 'This is one of our bad
days,' and pull the trigger," or try this one on for size.
"Ted Bundy should be killed because he deserves it."
Neither is a threat. By your logic simply using someone's name and the word "kill" or "shoot" in the same sentence is a threat.

Had they said-
"Go find Ted Bundy so we can kill him" That would be a threat.

Instead it is an expression of anger. You are blinded entirely by your politics.
As I said, I think this is a poor, tasteless ad. I would never advocate the sentiment by this group, but It is not a crime. My politics have nothing to do with it. I am a liberal and I am judicious. That is something you conservatives don't know shit about. Hence you deplore lawyers and always whine about them.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 07:44 AM   #39
Trith
The lesser of two weevils
 
Trith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Posts: 3,490
Send a message via MSN to Trith
Bumble..let me ask you a really stupid question..one that I think even you can get.

If I put you (Bumble) up against a wall and put a gun to your head and pulled the trigger..what would happen to you?

(assuming of course the gun is loaded).

What would be the result of my doing that to you?
Trith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 07:51 AM   #40
Wildane
Psychopath w/a conscience
 
Wildane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Hospitality State, asshole!
Posts: 10,540
He did not threaten his life. Stop letting your politics blind you as you cons always do. Take Rummy's name and replace it with Ted Bundy and tell me if it is a crime and a threat to his life. It is all too common an expression.
Damn, that list for Presidential succession must have stopped short, I don't see 'serial killer' anywhere on it
__________________
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." - Umberto Eco

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Wildane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 08:00 AM   #41
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
If I put you (Bumble) up against a wall and put a gun to your head and pulled the trigger..what would happen to you?
Trith, that is physically killing. That is murder. It is a crime.
Saying someone ought to die for their crimes is not murder. It is free speech. But you and your Ashcroftian principals wouldn't understand anything about free speech would you? It's probably because you guys always have this big stick of anger stuck up your asses.
Get over your anger. Its not a crime to say someone should die. Its a crime to kill someone.

Here try this one on for size since you have NO FUCKING concept of semantics.

Statement 1- "I should exercise more"
Statement 2- "I exercise more"
Which one actually gets more exercise and which one is physical activity?

I also noticed how this article doesn't mention anything of an arrest. Gee Trith, I wonder why that is.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 08:06 AM   #42
crimsonedge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 767
Wow Bumble you sure are in denial. I have given you a specific federal law dealing with the situation.I have given provided you a related incident and the result of the threat. I can also link another case in which a verbal comment resulted in jail time. Why are you even arguing this? It is the law and a fact.

I never said this person is related to democrats or Kerry, I just said what this group put in print is actionable and gave facts, law and examples. You have given me your "feelings". You have argued in another thread that you present facts and us "cons" as you call us never do it. Please show me some facts instead of conjecture or quit whining.
crimsonedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 09:10 AM   #43
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Wow Bumble you sure are in denial. I have given you a specific federal law dealing with the situation.
No sirreee, you have shown us a law of what the penalty is for threatening to kill a public official. The problem is that this ad was not threatening to kill anyone. It is a supposition.

This is the definition of Threat
An expression of an intention to inflict pain, injury, evil, or punishment.
Since the operative word is intention I will define Intend for you which is what the word intention is a form of....
To have in mind; plan:

Show me where there is a plan to kill Rumsfeld on here. It doesn't exist. As I said if he said to round up Rummy so we can kill him that would be different but there is no plan, only a supposition.

Last edited by bumbleroot; 04-14-2004 at 09:16 AM.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 09:19 AM   #44
crimsonedge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 767
Holy shit your own definition does you in "to have in mind". Not only did this group have it in mind, they published it. Again I point out my links to the facts plus a case that totally refutes your argument. At least come up with a good reason showing why this doesnt exactly follow the law and the cases I have presented ? Giving me a Websters definition of a word doesnt work bud, especially when the definition can easily be used against you.
crimsonedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 09:27 AM   #45
Hormadrune
Sociopathic bully?
 
Hormadrune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: PA
Posts: 11,897
Crimsonedge, you're gonna pull a muscle reaching like this. Nobody's going to jail for that ad.
__________________
WoW-Ghostlands-US: Prae | sp | Prolonix | Horm | Ulfhednar | l
EQ: Hormadrune <Retired> <OFS> <CoI> <Affy> <CE>
Hormadrune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 09:42 AM   #46
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
to have in mind
Once again to have in mind means that there is a plan.
If I have in mind to eat something, that means I plan on eating something.
You seem to believe that wanting to kill someone is a crime. It is not. It is perfectly legal to want to kill someone.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 10:06 AM   #47
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Crimson (3)
Bumble (0)

Lets see how Bumble can twist this thread (like others) into another WMD or GAY debate.
(Grabs the popcorn)




God Bless America
God Bless our Troops
Zolmaz.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 10:08 AM   #48
crimsonedge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 767
The law does allow for semantics when it comes to ordinary people. However in this specific case they called for the shooting of a public figure, a public figure in the direct succession line from the President. There is a specific law on threats of this nature which I provided you. There is a case example dealing with this specific topic. What more do you need ?

That said, I have no idea how far it will be taken. It could be blown off but do you really think in this age of the FBI defending itself against allegations of slackness and massive failure, they will let this go ? I dont think so, but that is just my opinion.
crimsonedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 10:16 AM   #49
chukzombi
The Undead Shaman
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Bowels of Hell, A.K.A. New Jersey
Posts: 9,566
Its more than likely the government has already swooped down on this newspaper, they are now in damage control by retracting the ad and coming out against ever placing it. IMO this is the same as a threat, you dont threaten political leaders in their country without expecting some kind of legal/police action.
__________________
Chukzombi Astrocreep
Magister (re-united)
chukzombi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2004, 10:39 AM   #50
Inmountains
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,501
Zolmaz
I got my popcorn, this is actually entertaining.

Bumble, you just do NOT know how to admit that you are WRONG. There is way too much LEGAL PRECEDENCE in these cases to prove you WRONG. Any 'threat, real or implied, said or in writing, against a Public Official in the Presidential Line, is ILLEGAL.

If there were a post on this board with an even implied threat on any public official's life, Ogmuk would most likely delete it immediately, then contact the FBI or Secret Service. This is NOT something you fool around with!!!!
Inmountains is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:25 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.