SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
California man arrested for threatening to kill FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's family over net neutrality
A 33-year-old resident of Norwalk, California was arrested today for sending threatening emails to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai last year, according to the US Department of Justice. The threats, sent by an individual named Makara Man, were made primarily in the second of three messages sent to Pai's official FCC email accounts in late December, just days after the FCC voted to repeal net neutrality protections.
The first email allegedly accused Pai of causing the suicide of a teenager through his actions that led to the net neutrality vote. The second email contained an explicit threat against members of Pai's family, as well as a listing of three locations in and around Arlington, Virginia where Pai is said to live. The third email allegedly contained a photo of Pai and a separate photo of Pai and his family.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday July 01 2018, @04:41PM (16 children)
See, the thing about threatening violence is you want to only do it when your threat level is greater than your adversary's or at least greater than your adversary's ability to overcome at an acceptable cost. At this particular moment, there just aren't enough people willing to take up arms over net neutrality to make threats anything but laughable.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by frojack on Sunday July 01 2018, @05:55PM (5 children)
THREATENING violence is never productive for long. People just get more entrenched. Ask Antifa how its working out for them.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday July 01 2018, @07:29PM (4 children)
Well, yeah. You only make the threat once (if that). Then you go from threat to fact. Any other way and you don't get taken seriously.
That said, I find that threats of wild and inventive punishment that you would never actually carry out work far better with kids than threats of realistic punishment that you absolutely would. Like "Boy, you don't quit that I'm gonna choke you till your eyes pop out then make myself a peanut butter and eye-jelly sammich." for instance.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday July 01 2018, @07:54PM (3 children)
Was being taken seriously ever the primary motive?
Everyone already knows the issue at hand. Civil discussion has failed at this point.
It wo .. .. .. [no carrier]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 4, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday July 01 2018, @08:46PM
Well, I dunno about you but I prefer people always take threats from me seriously. I dislike having to leave heads on pikes outside; they draw flies and smell a bit whiffy in the summer.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by lentilla on Monday July 02 2018, @12:13AM (1 child)
Being taken seriously is an essential human need. When someone makes a threat they are telegraphing a critical need to be taken more seriously. This need can be met in a variety of ways: submission ("oh my God, please don't hit me!"), escalation ("fuck you, motherfucker, I'm gonna fuck you up real good!") or compassionate hearing ("I sense you are angry about the situation - would you be able to describe how you feel?"). All three of those responses meets that need to be taken seriously, and ironically; the third response; the only one that has a chance of a lasting accord; is the hardest to deliver.
Unravelling needs from threats isn't always easy, or exactly clear-cut. There will be many times when there is no middle ground - but when both parties feel they have been listened to respectfully and their needs heard, they are in a far better position to negotiate a solution or even to accept a loss.
(Score: 4, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday July 02 2018, @02:29AM
Actually, violence (escalation) has been the means to most lasting resolutions throughout history. It's just not PC to say so anymore.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday July 01 2018, @06:00PM (1 child)
I was thinking that it took Ajit's aide this long to get around to reading the e-mails...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Sunday July 08 2018, @03:06PM
You're probably right. They had an INCREDIBLE amount of EMAIL asking them to repeal the net neutrality. And, I assume, a huge amount thanking them for their very smart decision on that one.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 01 2018, @06:18PM (7 children)
Or maybe threatening to hurt someone is just a bad way of communicating. It only increases the divide and makes serious violence much more likely. Aside from viokence being the first choice of the incompetent it can be useful for the under dog in calling the bluff of the group in a more powerful position. Not a great idea and a risky gamble
TLDR: uzzie isnonce again simplifying reality into a convenient sound bite. Limited applications for his insight.
(Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday July 01 2018, @07:21PM (6 children)
Bad as in immoral or bad as in ineffective? The first is highly situational but the latter is just dead wrong; violence is extremely fast and effective at resolving conflicts compared to more diplomatic means.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 02 2018, @12:00AM (5 children)
--R.A. Lafferty
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday July 02 2018, @02:32AM (4 children)
Indeed. Dead people rarely object to your position anymore. Violence's morality may vary depending on the circumstance but its effectiveness is beyond question.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 02 2018, @03:22AM (1 child)
"its effectiveness is beyond question."
I would most definitely question the effectiveness of violence.
At best, violence is only effective for one side and quite ineffective for the other. At worst, it's ineffective for both sides. A non-violent agreement can be effective for both sides.
(Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday July 02 2018, @06:19AM
I'm gonna guess that most people perpetrating violence upon someone over a dispute are not concerned with how it turns out for the other side in the least. That pretty much makes your argument a null op from their perspective.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 02 2018, @03:48AM (1 child)
Yeah, I just love all the retaliatory violence we have on Earth right now. Even the act of violence has an impact on those who use it. While it may be effective in stopping someone from doing something, if you're morality is not in line with human values then you will damage your own culture. Just look at the depths of depravity the US has sunk to and the world wide problems that have resulted.
Basically your words are a prelude to genocide. Just FYI.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday July 02 2018, @06:21AM
My words are historical fact. Ignore them at your own peril.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.