SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
An Army veteran, a recent college graduate and a student who once won a poetry contest by condemning prejudice stirred up by the Sept. 11 attacks intervened as a man screamed anti-Muslim insults at two women in Portland, Ore., on Friday.
[...] Two of the men — Taliesin Myrddin Namkai Meche, 23, and Rick Best, 53 — died in the attack, which occurred on a commuter train. The third, Micah David-Cole Fletcher, 21, was treated on Saturday for injuries that the police said were serious but not life-threatening.
Jeremy Christian, 35, of North Portland, Ore., was charged with two counts of aggravated murder in the attack and could face additional charges when he is arraigned on Tuesday. Mr. Christian, who the authorities said had a history of making extremist statements on social media, was ranting at, and talking disparagingly about, the two women, one of whom was wearing a hijab.
Source: The New York Times
President Donald Trump has released his first official statement on the attack in Portland, Oregon, more than 48 hours after the two victims died.
"The violent attacks in Portland on Friday are unacceptable," Mr Trump tweeted. "The victims were standing up to hate and intolerance. Our prayers are w/ them."
Source: The Independent
Portland law enforcement leaders were tightlipped Saturday about the investigation into Friday's attacks that killed two men on a light rail train but a federal official did say it was too early to label the incident a hate crime.
[...] Loren Cannon, special agent in charge of the Portland FBI office, [...]
"It's too early to say whether last night's violence was an act of domestic terrorism or a federal hate crime," he said. "However, in the coming days, the FBI, PPB and the prosecutors will work together to share information, leverage resources and make determinations about future criminal charges."
[...] Leaders of the Muslim community said they were thankful for the men who gave their lives to save the girls from harm. They have raised $50,000 toward a goal of $60,000 to help support the victims and their families.
Source: The Oregonian
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 30 2017, @04:07AM (12 children)
The terrorist in the tragedy seems to have been an advocate of alt-right racist free speech, kind of like what we hear on SoylentNews all the time. This is why we don't need to censor them, we need to identify and incarcerate them before they commit terrorist acts.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 30 2017, @04:36AM (7 children)
I'm waiting for the mighty bueller to make his statement condemning this, the ultimate failure of a fellow traveler to respect these people's freedom of expression.
Bueller?... Bueller?... Bueller?
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Tuesday May 30 2017, @04:45AM (6 children)
to threaten someone with violence is a felony.
I don't know if that right chap said anything that could be specifically considered a felony, but certainly those two young women had cause to feel threatened.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 30 2017, @05:07AM
uh, threatening to kill the driver and anyone else coming close to him was felonious. (vids were in the PDX news tonight).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 30 2017, @05:15AM (1 child)
Don't make me come over there.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 30 2017, @06:14AM
Lighten up, Francis. [youtube.com]
(Score: 3, Informative) by NCommander on Tuesday May 30 2017, @09:46AM (2 children)
As far as the first amendment is concerned, the legal standard is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action". Brandenburg v. Ohio [wikipedia.org].
That's generally why you don't see hate speech and such as charges in these types of cases. That being said, harassment and such have a much lower bar and deal with the actions of an individual and not the specific words they say.
Still always moving
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday May 30 2017, @07:24PM (1 child)
That is *a* legal standard for *one* of the exceptions to the first amendment. But I don't think it's necessarily the only relevant one to this thread. GP suggested that threats are illegal, and that is true in many circumstances. So-called true threats [wikipedia.org] of illegal activity are not covered by first amendment protection, even if they do not "incite imminent lawless action."
The question in such cases is generally whether the individual making the speech makes a clear and specific threat of some sort, as well as appearing willing to carry out such threats. Without such legal doctrine, we'd rarely be able to convict people for extortion, for example. Similarly, purely verbal harassment CAN constitute a crime, if it involves, say, a credible threat of violence.
(Score: 2) by NCommander on Saturday June 10 2017, @04:44AM
We're getting caught up in technicalities here, but I'll try and be more specific.
Specifically, there's the act of saying something, and the words themselves. In the cases of harassment, the definition varies state by state, but if I keep bothering you by singing off-key and following you to your workplace and doing it non-stop after being asked to stop, that's harassment. Specifically, its not the words (or idea) themselves that cause criminal penalties to apply, its using them (regardless of content) to harass an individual.
In other cases, the words themselves can be "illegal" (for want of a better word). Specifically, words that would let a reasonable person believe they would incite imminent lawless action, or constitute a true threat. I actually wasn't aware of Watts v. United States prior to this comment, so thanks for the education case, but I don't think it defeats my point. Hate speech, for better or worse, is not illegal in the United States. Once it becomes violent, or becomes a true threat, then a crime has occurred.
Still always moving
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 30 2017, @05:03AM
Like... the department of pre-crime?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Bot on Tuesday May 30 2017, @07:26AM (2 children)
> The terrorist in the tragedy seems to have been an advocate of alt-right racist free speech, kind of like what we hear on SoylentNews all the time. This is why we don't need to censor them, we need to identify and incarcerate them before they commit terrorist acts.
Cool, so all I need to criminalize any social movement of any kind is to set up one useful idiot and then call for the unlawful move of incarcerating all the others.
Nazi collective punishment at its best.
You should be identified and incarcerated before you commit fascist acts. Or trolling which is more probable.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 30 2017, @03:38PM (1 child)
I see you feel all the decent people breathing down your neck.
The more people like Jeremy Christian who get spun up by the kind of rhetoric you endorse, the more your freedom is in danger.
You disclaim collective responsibility, but Christian was part of your community. As long as you are willing to put collective responsibility for islamist terrorists on all muslims, you invite collective responsibility for guys like Christian on your head.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday June 01 2017, @10:31AM
Sorry, Christian is as Christian does (Matt 21:31, John 14:21). The guy was not following much the instructions (Matt 5:22).
Second, I don't put collective responsibility on anybody. In fact most militant Muslims can rightfully invoke the "I was following orders" defense, which we will hear a lot if that final judgement is a thing. Your personal responsibility is irrelevant when you are following orders, that does not stop the right of your enemy to get a bullet in your head.
What I would be wary of, as a Muslim, is that the act of violence against the society who opened borders and hosted you is so shameful that you can no longer claim any moral superiority to any bomb happy yankee. When you have become worse than your enemy, you have lost.
Account abandoned.