Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday March 07 2014, @05:00PM   Printer-friendly
from the Me-and-my-big-mouth dept.

karmawhore writes:

"A Mississippi man, Josh Pillault, was sentenced Thursday to 6 years for a comment he made while playing Runescape in 2012. The story wasn't carried by national media, but was covered in several online and local outlets.

Apparently Pillault made threats against his former high school, but no weapons or bomb making materials were found during the SWAT team's search of his home. According to the local newspaper, 'U.S. Federal Judge Michael Mills sentenced Pillault above the recommended sentencing guidelines 'to protect the public.'"

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Covalent on Friday March 07 2014, @05:05PM

    by Covalent (43) on Friday March 07 2014, @05:05PM (#12781) Journal

    "The thought police would get him just the same. He had committed--would have committed, even if he had never set pen to paper--the essential crime that contained all others in itself. Thoughtcrime, they called it. Thoughtcrime was not a thing that could be concealed forever. You might dodge successfully for a while, even for years, but sooner or later they were bound to get you."

    I understand trying to stop these sorts of things from happening, but 6 years in prison for TYPING??? Counseling, sure. Police intervention is fine by me, too...within limits. But they checked his home and found no weapons.

    6 years in prison.

    --
    You can't rationally argue somebody out of a position they didn't rationally get into.
    • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by ngarrang on Friday March 07 2014, @05:10PM

      by ngarrang (896) on Friday March 07 2014, @05:10PM (#12786) Journal

      Imagine this man's first week in prison.

      Future Boyfriend: "What are you in for, meat?"

      The Typist: "I jokingly typed a threat about blowing up a highschool."

      30 minutes later, with Future BFF stops laughing, its party time.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @05:25PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @05:25PM (#12796)

        Sweet prison rape joke.

        • (Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @05:50PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @05:50PM (#12817)

          Nothing's funnier than an Internet Tough Guy becoming a turned out bitch in prison.

        • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Friday March 07 2014, @05:51PM

          by Grishnakh (2831) on Friday March 07 2014, @05:51PM (#12818)

          There's nothing wrong with prison rape jokes, in fact they're a good thing. They're black humor; they serve to remind us how utterly cruel and barbaric the prison system is here in the US, and how shameful it is that we allow it to continue this way. Of course, each of us individually is powerless to change the situation, but it is important that we remember the horrible conditions that our countrymen are subjected to by our fascist cops and politicians who we keep voting for.

          • (Score: 5, Insightful) by edIII on Friday March 07 2014, @06:31PM

            by edIII (791) on Friday March 07 2014, @06:31PM (#12841)

            Ohhhh, but it has nothing to do with fascism though. To say fascist is plain wrong.

            That would imply a specific ideology at work with the cops and politicians in which they are loyal to the state above all else, or in general believed in something.

            At some level I can respect and understand a fascist cop or politician. At least they have a belief in something, and honestly believe it's a better world for the people.

            Prisons are set up like for this for one reason, and one reason held above all others, and one reason worshiped as a god:

            MONEY

            You "transfer" a citizen into the prison system to turn them into a nice little asset that allows you to put your hands in the "cookie jar", and instead of paying the prisoner a living wage they would be receiving outside (living wage is pushing it), you put it in your own pocket. You still need to clothe, feed, and provide shelter to your asset, but those things can be done on a large scale. You can get plenty of tax benefits and additional assistance to create that infrastructure by putting your hands in the "cookie jar" for that too.

            In the end, you end up making a quite tidy profit. Of course, there is the matter of keeping the "cookie jar" full all the time, but that's for other theives^H^H^H^H^HPoliticians to do.

            --
            Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
            • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Friday March 07 2014, @06:42PM

              by Grishnakh (2831) on Friday March 07 2014, @06:42PM (#12849)

              You "transfer" a citizen into the prison system to turn them into a nice little asset that allows you to put your hands in the "cookie jar", and instead of paying the prisoner a living wage they would be receiving outside (living wage is pushing it), you put it in your own pocket. You still need to clothe, feed, and provide shelter to your asset, but those things can be done on a large scale.

              No, you don't. You get to charge the taxpayer for taking care of the prisoner. It's all about privatizing profits, while socializing losses.

              • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @06:53PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @06:53PM (#12861)

                Yep these for-profit prison companies are total scams. It's why we see more and more non-violent offenders being locked up so they can maintain their profitable capacity.

                • (Score: 3, Insightful) by edIII on Saturday March 08 2014, @07:33AM

                  by edIII (791) on Saturday March 08 2014, @07:33AM (#13124)

                  Add to that the interesting problem of manual (slave) labor in places like Georgia, Alabama, etc. I remember reading that they enacted very strong legislation to deal with illegal aliens. This however affected the migrant farmer populations that would harvest the crops.

                  They all thought that getting rid of the illegals would allow citizens who wanted the job to get them. Didn't happen.

                  Whole crops were being lost and the operators of the farms were desperate. State steps and sends prisoners to harvest the crops.

                  If that's not chilling I don't know what it is. None of those prisoners got paid more than a bare fraction of what the migrant population would have been paid, which itself, would have been only part of a living wage.

                  Yet, the "owners" of the prisoners got a pretty penny for the use of their slave labor to save crops that would have otherwise gone bad. All of it state sponsored too.

                  With almost everybody being guilty of something (a popular legal theory) it doesn't take much to be a "law abiding" citizen one day with barely close to a living wage, and then a prisoner the next day with the fruits (no pun intended) of your labor going to your "owners", the share holders operating the prison systems.

                  The wonderful irony will be so thick it could cause a singularity to form when one of those share holders end up being a prisoner themselves working to make themselves richer...

                  --
                  Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
              • (Score: 2) by edIII on Friday March 07 2014, @07:32PM

                by edIII (791) on Friday March 07 2014, @07:32PM (#12883)

                That's exactly what I said though :)

                Privatizing profits and socializing losses....

                --
                Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
              • (Score: 2, Informative) by BradTheGeek on Friday March 07 2014, @09:57PM

                by BradTheGeek (450) on Friday March 07 2014, @09:57PM (#12956)

                It is also about welfare. I have more experience with prisons than I care to recount right now.

                It is no accident that prisons are often placed in poor rural areas. You can hire poorly trained officer (GED and no felonies) out of he unemployed and generally boost a local economy with tax dollars, without calling it welfare. To serve the needs of a moderate prison takes a bit of resources and brings in quite a bit to a struggling local economy.

                All in the name of 'protecting' people. Crime happens regardless. Most 1st world countries have around the same crime rate regardless of the percentage of people incarcerated or the toughness of the laws. Some people will commit crimes, period, and that the percentage looks consistent speaks to the fact that prison is in no significant way a deterrent.

                • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Kell on Saturday March 08 2014, @12:42AM

                  by Kell (292) on Saturday March 08 2014, @12:42AM (#13024)

                  That's an interesting comment - I'd love to see the numbers supporting this well-laid out, with references. I suspect that a lot of the high incarceration rate in the United States is driven by racism and poorism (ie. the poor are poor because they are bad people, and bad people go to prison) as much as it is cynically profit driven.

                  --
                  Scientists ask questions. Engineers solve problems.
                  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by edIII on Saturday March 08 2014, @02:40AM

                    by edIII (791) on Saturday March 08 2014, @02:40AM (#13060)

                    Well you have violent crime and non-violent crime.

                    The percentage of people in prison for non-violent drug related offenses is just too damn high. As well as really stupid stuff like that 19 year old kid getting SIX YEARS for "terroristic thoughts" he expressed as a defense mechanism against somebody else asking that he kill himself.

                    If you're a truly bad person and you go around stabbin, killin, stealin, and raping your way through life you deserve to go to prison.

                    I find it egregious to say the least that there are millions of non-violent offenders disproportionately locked up for their crimes, and this just happens to make some people billionaires.

                    --
                    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
            • (Score: 2, Interesting) by gishzida on Friday March 07 2014, @09:32PM

              by gishzida (2870) on Friday March 07 2014, @09:32PM (#12935) Journal
              You've made a lot of poor assumptions there [Which means you're lucky you've never been caught "doing something bad"]. You have no conception of what purpose the "justice" system serves until you have been sucked into it and find you cannot leave it.

              First and foremost it serves as a retribution engine to blindly punish. Not to rehabilitate. Not to "pay a debt to society". Not to provide Justice. Not to help the victim(s)

              Second it is a "holding tank" for those that society has deemed troublesome, which is to say it is a dumping ground for the anti-social, "evil" minorities, or [thanks to Ronald Reagan and his ilk] people with mental health issues.

              Third it is designed to reward politicians at election time for "protecting the public". Who cares if justice is served? Law and Order gets votes.

              Fourth it can be used as "Law and Order" Welfare to reward political contributors and supporters for their support by rewarding contracts of various kinds.

              Now there is a question you haven't asked that needs to be answered: Why does our society need a retribution system? Neal Gabler [reuters.com] posted a Blog/Essay at Reuters proposing the punitive nature of our political discourse is due to the very roots of our country's history: The Puritan religious idea that has influenced political discourse. This is simply stated as: "If you are not 'good' then God must punish you. Therefore it is society's 'sacred duty' to punish unceasingly. That includes the Victims since obviously if they were good they would not be victims."

              Why are recidivism rates so high? Is it because the convicts are bad or is it because now that society sees them as bad they cannot leave the past behind. You may laugh and make jokes about prisons just don't ever do anything that will put you behind bars. In fact don't even try to cross the "establishment" or you will end up like Aaron Sorkin who was driven over the edge by a Prosecutor who wanted to gain political traction using an easy, soft target.

              The last question you should ask yourself is why do you allow this continue? I think you will find that you will make excuses as to why you take no steps to change an ugly and evil system.

              Yes I know there are "evil" people. I know there are "nut nobs". I know there are people that deserve to be kept away from society... But the method we do this is inhumane.

              Final bonus question: what are the most popular genre of TV programs in prisons? Wait for it: Crime Dramas.
              • (Score: 3, Informative) by edIII on Friday March 07 2014, @11:14PM

                by edIII (791) on Friday March 07 2014, @11:14PM (#12987)

                I keep reading what I wrote, and I have absolutely no clue why people are misunderstanding what I said.

                What assumptions? Why I am lucky? Is it because I said it isn't fascism, which does not mean I endorsed any part of it at all?

                I specifically said the prison system has been turned into a for-profit system that only serves money. That's it. Whole hosts of problems arise from such a fundemental philosophy being put into place, which includes everything you said, in addition to the poster I was replying to.

                With respect, I think the both of you need to concentrate a little bit more on reading comprehension.

                I made no assumptions of any kind. The multi-billion dollar prison industry and its associated evils and detractions are well known facts. I've assumed nothing.

                --
                Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
                • (Score: 2) by gishzida on Saturday March 08 2014, @07:12AM

                  by gishzida (2870) on Saturday March 08 2014, @07:12AM (#13118) Journal
                  My goodness are you so wedded to your conception of the world that anyone that disagrees with you is ignorant and unable to read??? You see "the system" in terms of its least important component-- "prison corporations"-- What matters more is the broken moral compass that allows a system like the one we have.

                  Tell me: Have you ever been an inmate in a prison or know someone who was? A simple yes or no will do. If the answer is "no" then that is sufficient evidence that you do not understand what *YOU* are talking about. I'm betting the answer is No, because from what I can see you have no clue what *your* justice system is actually doing in your name 24/7/365.25 yet you are talking like you know what is what.

                  If there is a problem with this conversation it is your willing ignorance to the actual purpose and results of "the system". If you are not a part of the solution you are part of the problem. Alas.
                  • (Score: 2) by edIII on Saturday March 08 2014, @07:23AM

                    by edIII (791) on Saturday March 08 2014, @07:23AM (#13123)

                    Once again, why are people getting so upset at something I wrote and claiming I made assumptions at all? You said I had many incorrect assumptions, when I made no assumptions. I only reported FACTS.

                    You haven't disagreed with anything I said, as the disagreement itself would imply that we are saying something different. I never disagreed with what you said in particular, or the other poster. You only added to it with another viewpoint, reinforcing what I already said, which is what we all already agree was true.

                    Both of you need some reading comprehension. I don't care what you are trying to add, only that you obviously read nothing of what I said, and then attacked me and claimed with the claim I made assumptions and an appeal to emotion that I would understand your great points if I was a prisoner.

                    Whether or not I have been inside the justice system has absolutely zero relevance to my reports on the quite clear facts surrounding the for-profit prison system that exists right now, and is rapidly growing.

                    I don't need to know a prisoner, nor do I need to have been one, to talk about such facts.

                    What's wrong with you?

                    --
                    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
            • (Score: 2, Informative) by SpockLogic on Saturday March 08 2014, @02:21PM

              by SpockLogic (2762) on Saturday March 08 2014, @02:21PM (#13181)

              There has been a consistent push over the last 20 years or so by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) to expand the prison population and privatize the prison system. Corrections Corporation of America and Geo Group (formerly Wackenhut Corrections), the largest private prison firms in the country have their hands deep in the taxpayers pockets.

              A captive workforce is being used for private profit. Its a modern form of Indentured Servitude.

              More reading ...
              http://www.thenation.com/article/162478/hidden-his tory-alec-and-prison-labor/ [thenation.com]

              --
              Overreacting is one thing, sticking your head up your ass hoping the problem goes away is another - edIII
          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Angry Jesus on Friday March 07 2014, @07:06PM

            by Angry Jesus (182) on Friday March 07 2014, @07:06PM (#12869)

            they serve to remind us how utterly cruel and barbaric the prison system is here in the US, and how shameful it is that we allow it to continue this way.

            That's a tough one. You are right, if it weren't for prison rape jokes most of the people with the power to do anything about prison conditions wouldn't have even the faintest clue as to how fucked up the situation is.

            On the other hand, I think they have become such a staple of mainstream prison commentary that they've 'dilbertized' the problem -- they provide an outlet for frustration that might be better channeled towards actual change.

            • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday March 07 2014, @07:35PM

              by Grishnakh (2831) on Friday March 07 2014, @07:35PM (#12884)

              I don't think that channeling frustration towards actual change is really possible though. That's like saying that some concerned 1930s Germans could have helped avoid the rise of Hitler; it was an inevitability. I think it's good we're frequently reminded of how horrible we are and how horrible this country of ours has become (although it's going to get much, much worse in coming years), but I'm under no illusion that anything can be changed for the better within my lifetime.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @07:32PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @07:32PM (#12882)

            There's nothing wrong with prison rape jokes, in fact they're a good thing. They're black humor; they serve to remind us how utterly cruel and barbaric the prison system is here in the US, and how shameful it is that we allow it to continue this way.

            They also remind us not to be taken alive.

          • (Score: 1) by moo kuh on Friday March 07 2014, @11:11PM

            by moo kuh (2044) on Friday March 07 2014, @11:11PM (#12986) Journal

            I disagree that we are powerless. We just need to be louder. In the US, politics are an often avoided topic because people gwt worked up about it and discussions turn to arguments. I think the key is to start engaging people (friends, family, coworkers) in political discussions and take responsibility for keeping things civil. Michael Sandel made an excellent presentation at a TED conference about this. Read books and articles about persuasion. With the exception of killing, persuasion is the only real power. Even putting a gun to someone's head can't make someone do anything. It is just a very persuasive way to do so by providing a very powerful incentiive. I'm not advocating violence just pointing out that all power boils down to convincing people to do or think a certain way. I think we need to start convincing people to be willing to discuss controversial topics, listen (real listening, not just preparing counter arguments) to opposing views, verify facts, and evaluate all evidence. I am basically saying that I think we need to start learning how to convince sheeple to think.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by ikanreed on Friday March 07 2014, @05:19PM

      by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 07 2014, @05:19PM (#12791) Journal

      Hell, probation, and a month community service, just to help push the kid towards keeping clean, is plausible. 6 years is approaching what we should be giving for serious crimes, if we really cared about maximizing prevention.

      Instead, we've taken away the best years of a kid's life in a manner that makes them extraordinarily predisposed to commit serious crimes in the future.

      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by sjames on Friday March 07 2014, @11:03PM

        by sjames (2882) on Friday March 07 2014, @11:03PM (#12981) Journal

        Society has proven itself to be his enemy. Why shouldn't he return the favor?

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by pjbgravely on Friday March 07 2014, @05:07PM

    by pjbgravely (1681) <pjbgravelyNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Friday March 07 2014, @05:07PM (#12783) Homepage
    From the Article "Leaving aside the fact that Josh seems to be protected by the First Amendment, this case makes little sense to me."

    Doesn't everyone know the Bill of Rights was made null and void by the patriot act?
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by ikanreed on Friday March 07 2014, @05:25PM

      by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 07 2014, @05:25PM (#12798) Journal

      But, no, more seriously, it's been decided time and again that "Freedom of speech" does not extend to actionable threats. The only case that can be made here from a legalistic point of view that immediate lack of weapons prevents the threat from being actionable.

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Desler on Friday March 07 2014, @06:00PM

        by Desler (880) on Friday March 07 2014, @06:00PM (#12822)

        This is an actual insightful post. Watts v. United States (1969) which covered threats against the president stated that such threats were only protected if they were political hyperbole. And that's not even the oldest of such precedence.

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Covalent on Friday March 07 2014, @06:47PM

        by Covalent (43) on Friday March 07 2014, @06:47PM (#12854) Journal

        This. Right here. The threats weren't actionable and resulted in no hysteria or other mass action. Result? He didn't commit a crime, or at least not much of one. He committed an act of poor judgement and stupidity. Should the police have gone to him and warned him that further such acts could result in arrest? Sure. Should he have been sentenced at all? No way.

        --
        You can't rationally argue somebody out of a position they didn't rationally get into.
        • (Score: 1) by Desler on Friday March 07 2014, @06:56PM

          by Desler (880) on Friday March 07 2014, @06:56PM (#12865)

          Agree as well. But the GGP claiming this is all due to Patriot Act is an ignoramus.

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by melikamp on Friday March 07 2014, @07:08PM

        by melikamp (1886) on Friday March 07 2014, @07:08PM (#12871) Journal

        it's been decided time and again that "Freedom of speech" does not extend to actionable threats

        Things said over the Internet are not "actionable threats", whatever that means. They are nothing. Ocean noise. May be, MAY BE if cryptographically signed, they can be considered seriously. His first mistake, I assume, was admitting any part of it.

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by snick on Friday March 07 2014, @07:52PM

        by snick (1408) on Friday March 07 2014, @07:52PM (#12892)

        I don't believe that a threat to "kill himself and then shoot up his local school." is actually actionable. At least not anything past step 1.

        • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Friday March 07 2014, @09:38PM

          by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 07 2014, @09:38PM (#12938) Journal

          And that's a great opinion. But sadly threats have legal definitions.
          Mississippi's definition of a threat [laws.com]. Bizarrely, these are supposed to have a minimum recommended sentence of a half year, and max of 5, both less than what he got. This probably means there was some charge-piling going on.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 08 2014, @12:31AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 08 2014, @12:31AM (#13018)

        Josh responded to another player who repeatedly told him to kill himself by saying that he would kill himself and then shoot up his local school.

        If he was to do those things in that order, then the threat wasn't actionable either.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Desler on Friday March 07 2014, @05:54PM

      by Desler (880) on Friday March 07 2014, @05:54PM (#12819)

      Why was this modded insightful? Bomb threats, murder threats, etc. are not protected speech (unless clearly shown to be hyperbole). This is like 50+ years old jurisprudence.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @09:01PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @09:01PM (#12926)

        Fuck your law. Fuck your religion.

      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by sjames on Friday March 07 2014, @11:07PM

        by sjames (2882) on Friday March 07 2014, @11:07PM (#12985) Journal

        If someone claims they will kill themselves and then X where X is anything but 'haunt you', it's clearly not intended seriously.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by darkfeline on Friday March 07 2014, @06:00PM

      by darkfeline (1030) on Friday March 07 2014, @06:00PM (#12823) Homepage

      You mean "selectively applicable". Don't worry, once Newspeak is finalized you won't be able to make such a mistake again.

      --
      Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
  • (Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @05:19PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @05:19PM (#12790)

    What is that, 1 year for making a threat, and 5 years for the unpardonable crime of playing Runescape?

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by bradley13 on Friday March 07 2014, @05:25PM

    by bradley13 (3053) on Friday March 07 2014, @05:25PM (#12795) Homepage Journal

    For those who don't RTFA, here are the key bits:

    "While playing an online game called “Runescape†last year, Josh responded to another player who repeatedly told him to kill himself by saying that he would kill himself and then shoot up his local school. A few days later, the Pillault household was attacked by a SWAT team composed of agents from the FBI and ATF."

    "...authorities asked Josh “if he wanted an attorney.†Josh, unfamiliar with legal procedure, asked if he needed one. “Not if you want to get out faster,†was the reply. So Josh spoke to them without a lawyer."

    Your justice system at work...

    --
    Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
    • (Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Friday March 07 2014, @05:37PM

      by Nerdfest (80) on Friday March 07 2014, @05:37PM (#12805)

      I would have assumed that if he said he was going to kill himself and then shoot up a school he was joking, or at least very, very confused.

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by ikanreed on Friday March 07 2014, @06:10PM

      by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 07 2014, @06:10PM (#12828) Journal

      Unfortunately, there's no legal cure for the problem of people trusting the police.

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by HiThere on Friday March 07 2014, @08:02PM

      by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 07 2014, @08:02PM (#12894) Journal

      That is one minor example of why I no longer call it "the justice system". "The injustice system" would be a more accurate term, but sometimes it does produce justice, so that's not appropriate either. "The court system" or "the legal system" are the terms I prefer.

      --
      Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Reziac on Saturday March 08 2014, @02:48AM

        by Reziac (2489) on Saturday March 08 2014, @02:48AM (#13064) Homepage
        Well, they do usually refer to it as the criminal justice system....
        --
        And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by nitehawk214 on Friday March 07 2014, @08:52PM

      by nitehawk214 (1304) on Friday March 07 2014, @08:52PM (#12921)

      "kill himself and then shoot up his local school"

      Zombie crimes are punished more harshly.

      Also how the hell is "Not if you want to get out faster" not violating someone's Miranda rights?

      --
      "Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by GungnirSniper on Friday March 07 2014, @05:35PM

    by GungnirSniper (1671) on Friday March 07 2014, @05:35PM (#12803) Journal
    So we're paying for our law enforcement to conduct military raids, instead of using a much safer tactic of arresting the young man when he's on the street, and simultaneously searching his home? Why does our law enforcement need to use risky, excessive, expensive, fear-inducing tactics against people are supposedly innocent until proven guilty? Why is it acceptable for them to terrorize not just the suspect but anyone else in the home at the time? What of their rights?

    His parents failed him, as many do, by not telling him to avoid talking to cops. Too many people give worship-like 'hero' status to law enforcement, rather than rightly viewing any authority with skepticism. It is quite a sad state of society that we deal with law enforcement, we must act as prisoners of war, as under the Geneva Conventions prisoners of war should give "name, rank, service number, and date of birth" and [when questioned] personnel should "evade answering further questions to the utmost of [their] ability." [wikipedia.org]

    With such a draconian sentence, which likely amounts to months per word, the judge Michael P. Mills has not only robbed this young man of his youth, but has inflicted a permanent label of being a dangerous, potentially violent felon. The young man, sentenced to prison for a federal crime, is ineligible for parole. So not only did the judge sentence the man, but his family with the years-long loss of their son, and indeed every taxpayer with a bill to keep this non-violent man caged. Judge Michael P. Mills should be ashamed of himself for his lack of compassion.

    This young man deserves a pardon immediately.
    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Friday March 07 2014, @05:54PM

      by Grishnakh (2831) on Friday March 07 2014, @05:54PM (#12820)

      The cops in this country are all jacked up on steroids, and get a big adrenaline rush from raiding peoples' homes. They also like to terrorize people to make sure us plebs don't forget who's in charge.

      • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @09:04PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @09:04PM (#12928)

        If we had machine-guns or a willingness to preemptively use gasoline, this would eventually stop occurring because either we or they or the country would be dead.

        A nuclear war would be preferable to this feminist police state world.

        Kill them. Torture them. They took from you your peace and tranquility.
        Kill their sons.

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by timbim on Friday March 07 2014, @10:41PM

      by timbim (907) on Friday March 07 2014, @10:41PM (#12974)

      Chambers of Chief Judge Michael P. Mills

      911 Jackson Avenue
      Oxford, MS 38655
      Telephone: (662) 234-1538
      Facsimile: (662) 234-1447

      Judge_Mills@msnd.uscourts.gov

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Reziac on Saturday March 08 2014, @02:51AM

      by Reziac (2489) on Saturday March 08 2014, @02:51AM (#13066) Homepage

      "Why does our law enforcement need to use risky, excessive, expensive, fear-inducing tactics against people are supposedly innocent until proven guilty?"

      Because it demonstrates that our SWAT tactics (and budget) are in fact necessary -- if this weren't so, we wouldn't be going around knocking down doors in search of desperate criminals! Because that way next year we can not only justify our budget, we might finagle a budget increase.

      Seriously, that's the core of it.

      --
      And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by bucc5062 on Friday March 07 2014, @05:37PM

    by bucc5062 (699) on Friday March 07 2014, @05:37PM (#12804)

    What will happen next? â€I’m so upset with the attorney,†Stacey told me. “I’m not sure what happens next. I’ve felt helpless. Josh is going to be a convicted felon for the rest of his life. Hopefully, there is an attorney who will take this up pro-bono.â€"

    The article was sketchy, but given the circumstances and the way he was handled after being arrested, getting a good lawyer was not high on the list for him. Sadly, had this been a child from an affluent family, he would never see the inside of a prison. Justice may be blind, but it can feel the weight of money in its hand.

    Arguing that he was unlikely to be acquitted at trial, Josh’s attorney encouraged him to plead guilty to one count of making threats in interstate and foreign commerce and to deny the remaining charges.

    That sounds like an overworked, under paid public defender who needed to get this kid off the books as fast as possible. IANAL but how do they get interstate and foreign commerce to stick when all he did was a provoked outburst, not a thought out or planned statement. FFS, if someone had taken time to review other conversations, if they looked at his life it is possible the case could be made that he was not one to [REDACTED STATEMENT FOR FEAR OF BEING ARRESTED]. What have we become?

    So a 19 yo kid who says something stupid in a game gets 6 years and his life basically ruined. A mental evaluation says he is no danger so they try again (till they find one that says he is I guess). The judge says "to protect the public", from whom? This kid or our justice system. Between the two, the latter is way more scary and dangerous. They took a pissed off kid was not really a danger, shoved him into a system that in 6 years will make him more dangerous and more reliant on government help/control. U.S.A U.S.A...we're number one (at fucking kids over).

    Let's not forget they needed to send a SWAT team after him with no investigation before hand. I cannot believe how bad this whole story reflects on this country. By the way, any information on how or who sent this information to the police? There was nothing in the linked article.

    --
    The more things change, the more they look the same
    • (Score: 5, Informative) by bucc5062 on Friday March 07 2014, @05:47PM

      by bucc5062 (699) on Friday March 07 2014, @05:47PM (#12814)
      Found this link [sourcefed.com] which makes it seems like Josh was almost set up. However, this article from the Jackson Free Press [jacksonfreepress.com] gives the impression Josh was no choir boy. Still, this all smells.
      --
      The more things change, the more they look the same
      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by bradley13 on Friday March 07 2014, @08:04PM

        by bradley13 (3053) on Friday March 07 2014, @08:04PM (#12895) Homepage Journal

        Well, all of the incriminating stuff follows this little phrase: "An FBI interview with Pillault, also unsealed this week, said..."

        We know all about FBI interviews by now: You are not allowed to have any record of the interview - only the FBI's handwritten notes count. They can and will twist anything you say to match what they want to hear. If you deny that their records are true, then they charge you with lying to a federal officer, which is itself a felony.

        The only thing you should say in an FBI interview is "where's my attorney?"

        --
        Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @08:55PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @08:55PM (#12922)

        On the one hand you can say the way it works is that once you've made a threat, the gears of the system begin grinding into motion. Historically we've taken the view that once the police have a "good" reason to think something, it's well within their duty to start collecting what would otherwise be private information. Civil rights protections have largely been focused on preventing the gears of the system from being engaged without a valid pretext, rather than directly on limiting what those gears do once they're engaged (see lawcomic.net for a systematic overview of the conventional thoughts on this).

        However, historically people who potentially have emotional problems making threats did not become a public matter unless those threats were screamed in public. However, the threshold seems to be a hair trigger now. On balance, it is more difficult to have someone institutionalized now, but that may also mean that imprisonment is the go-to response for dealing with people deemed as threatening to society.

        Maybe this is our version of the scifi trope of criminals being identified at an early age based on symptoms and being dealt with in a harsh but effective manner. I'm not sure what should be done. Society, as a collection of individuals, has to decide how to handle concerns about its own members. I don't know if it's right to declare online venues as sanctuaries exempt from that kind of scrutiny.

        In my youth I was less emotionally contained and could have triggered an investigation in today's online environment. But I don't feel comfortable recommending a social balance that just puts me in the safe zone. This issue needs to be tackled in a broader way rather than just being an argument between people who have some checks in the abnormal column versus those who don't see themselves as having any.

      • (Score: 1) by karmawhore on Saturday March 08 2014, @01:23AM

        by karmawhore (1635) on Saturday March 08 2014, @01:23AM (#13039)

        Glad to see the JFP article. I didn't turn that one up when submitting the article, else I would have linked it. I've been following this. Don't remember what first put it on my radar. What prompted me to submit it is precisely what I put in the submission -- it hasn't been covered. There was no article in the New York Times, there was no article on our previous favorite tech news site. If you check my profile on that site, you'll see it took me 15 years to even post a comment (so my sig is truth!), but this looks like the kind of thing everyone should know about. Whether this kid really wanted to blow up a school is not for me to say, but:

        1) There was a SWAT team deployed to his house with very little pretense, and

        2) He was held for over a year with no bail on charges that were shaky to say the least.

        And now he's been sentenced, and I'm wondering why no one knows about it. More eyes are better.

        --
        =kw= lurkin' to please
    • (Score: 2, Interesting) by darkfeline on Friday March 07 2014, @06:10PM

      by darkfeline (1030) on Friday March 07 2014, @06:10PM (#12827) Homepage

      Justice may be blind, but it can feel the weight of money in its hand.

      A nice analogy, but what do you think the scales of justice are for? One pan is obviously for the sins of the accused, but the other? Money does make the world go round, after all.

      --
      Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @06:55PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @06:55PM (#12863)

      Justice may be blind, but it can feel the weight of money in its hand.

      There's a reason she carries around a set of scales.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by keplr on Friday March 07 2014, @05:48PM

    by keplr (2104) on Friday March 07 2014, @05:48PM (#12816) Journal

    I'm going to blow up the Earth. This isn't a joke. I'm making a terrorist threat to blow up the Earth like Alderaan. How many years in prison will I get now?

    This is absurd. Home of the brave, indeed.

    --
    I don't respond to ACs.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @06:03PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @06:03PM (#12825)

      The only thing absurd is your ignorance of Supreme Court precedent when it comes to the issue of threats and protected speech. Bomb threats of never been considered protected speech.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by mhajicek on Friday March 07 2014, @08:08PM

        by mhajicek (51) on Friday March 07 2014, @08:08PM (#12900)

        There is no bomb that can blow up the Earth. What's the precedent on "fully operational battle station" threats?

        --
        The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
      • (Score: 2) by keplr on Friday March 07 2014, @08:56PM

        by keplr (2104) on Friday March 07 2014, @08:56PM (#12923) Journal
        --
        I don't respond to ACs.
    • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @06:07PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @06:07PM (#12826)

      The more you tighten your grip, keplr, the more star systems will slip through your... oh wait.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Pslytely Psycho on Friday March 07 2014, @06:28PM

      by Pslytely Psycho (1218) on Friday March 07 2014, @06:28PM (#12838)

      Going to miss keplr......I liked a lot of his replies.....

      --
      Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
    • (Score: 1) by CoolHand on Friday March 07 2014, @06:50PM

      by CoolHand (438) on Friday March 07 2014, @06:50PM (#12857) Journal

      Well, we enjoyed having you here while it lasted...

      --
      Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job-Douglas Adams
    • (Score: 2) by AnonTechie on Friday March 07 2014, @08:39PM

      by AnonTechie (2275) on Friday March 07 2014, @08:39PM (#12914) Journal

      While you are at it, why stop at the earth ?? Could you try our solar system as well ... or the Milky Way Galaxy ??

      --
      Albert Einstein - "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 08 2014, @03:02AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 08 2014, @03:02AM (#13074)

      Earth is still here, hello. Do you have a timeframe for demolition, or are you a lazy asshole?

  • (Score: 2) by buswolley on Friday March 07 2014, @08:32PM

    by buswolley (848) on Friday March 07 2014, @08:32PM (#12907)

    If we leave aside the fact that he said it on a game forum, aren't death threats illegal?
    That aside, the punishment seems more than a little out of balance...If he was deranged he should have psychiatric care, and if he was making a stupid joke, then he should at most be fined and do some community service.
    6 years ruins a person's life.

    --
    subicular junctures
    • (Score: 1) by Reziac on Saturday March 08 2014, @02:54AM

      by Reziac (2489) on Saturday March 08 2014, @02:54AM (#13067) Homepage

      And what kid, in the heat of anger, hasn't made a 'death threat'? Consider that nowadays even kindergarteners can be targeted as 'dangerous' and remember that few get past the toddler tantrum stage without "wanting to kill" someone.

      Once you start down this road, there is no logical stopping point.

      --
      And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 08 2014, @03:07AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 08 2014, @03:07AM (#13076)

        There's always a logical stopping point. It's called the Final Solution to the Human Problem: Total Genocide.

      • (Score: 2) by buswolley on Monday March 10 2014, @05:05AM

        by buswolley (848) on Monday March 10 2014, @05:05AM (#13748)

        This does not address the fact of law that death threats are illegal.

        --
        subicular junctures
  • (Score: 1) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @09:41PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 07 2014, @09:41PM (#12944)

    A more appropriate response would have been to have a talk with the KID and explain to him that when he says or writes certain things a lot of people will freak out and be scared out of their minds and do all sorts of irrational things, like trying to send him to prison.
    Then they should have locked up the little asshole that was trying to get him to kill himself in a psychiatric ward for observation and treatment of his antisocial disorder.

  • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 08 2014, @02:55AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 08 2014, @02:55AM (#13068)

    When you voted for Obama, you voted for a tyrant and a totalitarian police state. You got what you deserve.

    And no, I did not vote for Obama, but I have to live in your totalitarian police state because you idiot Obama voters are pure evil scum. Thank you for nothing, fucking fuckers.