Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Several El Paso Independent School Board trustees filed a police report on Saturday based on what they felt was threatening comments posted on the El Paso Times website.
"As soon as our web team was made aware of the comment, which was clearly inappropriate, they blocked the user from being able to use our Facebook comment function," said El Paso Times Editor Robert Moore.
The commenter, using the name Sue Lin, posted: "Just how much money is being wasted on this group of crimminals? We don't want them, the city doesn't want them, the agency that they work for, TEA, doesn't want them. They refuse to leave as long as there is a buck to be made off of the taxpayer. People of El Paso, we need to revisit our second amendment and rid ourselves of this parasitic group of people. This must be done not only, "For the kids" but every hard working, minimum wage earning taxpayer in this city that these aristrocrats look down upon." The Second Amendment is the right to own arms.
Obviously. Especially on sites where unless you like about who you are (which defeats the purpose of facebook), its very easy to find out who you are. He should be questioned by authorities for his comments. He made the choice to make them publicly.
All the guy had to do was leave out the referring to gun rights and getting rid of some people and his comment wouldve been fine.
Obviously. Especially on sites where unless you like about who you are (which defeats the purpose of facebook), its very easy to find out who you are. He should be questioned by authorities for his comments. He made the choice to make them publicly.
All the guy had to do was leave out the referring to gun rights and getting rid of some people and his comment wouldve been fine.
Yes, calling for the murder of people tends to set off warning bells for some folks. If the gun nut in question just would have left off the call to murder and the obligatory 2nd Amendment babbling, we wouldn't be sitting here. I know I've found these to be quite adept at maintaining that sort of self-discipline in their online postings. Them and Youtube commenters.
I've said over and over, that the 2nd amendment gives every individual the right to impeach the President, to maintain freedom, paying the ultimate price to do so.
Yes, calling for the murder of people tends to set off warning bells for some folks. If the gun nut in question just would have left off the call to murder and the obligatory 2nd Amendment babbling, we wouldn't be sitting here. I know I've found these to be quite adept at maintaining that sort of self-discipline in their online postings. Them and Youtube commenters.
I can admit I tend to get overboard on CD forums. I will not however, ever make a threat. While I do get heated and at times say some things I shouldn't, I still consider myself a relatively clean poster as far as the internet goes. Though I do feel I need to tone it down sometimes.
I see what you mean by other sites though, like Youtube. It makes me not look forward to being a parent. Especially when I want to avoid some of the things I read/see but they are all over the place. Youtube, no matter how nice, clean the video is, no matter the subject matter (comedy, educational, diy, etc) you always get the meanest, most vile, immature comments you can imagine. It really is a shame. Im all for free speech, but at the same time, I wish people would grow up. That or I wish there werent so many internet tough guys that get to hide behind anonymity.
I've said over and over, that the 2nd amendment gives every individual the right to impeach the President, to maintain freedom, paying the ultimate price to do so.
The 2nd amendment, protects all the other 26
In a way you are correct. However, one has to be very careful how you carry yourself. Those several words he through in there could be perceived as a threat easily, and it was right that the authorities to be called about it. I dont know the subject matter of what he was talking about, and he may have been right with everything else he said, but you cant say what he said like that.
I've said over and over, that the 2nd amendment gives every individual the right to impeach the President, to maintain freedom, paying the ultimate price to do so.
The 2nd amendment, protects all the other 26
The Court has really had it wrong all this time, hasn't it? It's not the First Amendment that is the fundamental freedom, but rather the amendment and what you imagine it to say.
I would go so far as to argue that we won't even need those other 20-odd amendments once we successfully arm everyone. Then we can move number 2 up to number 1. Problem solved.
In a way you are correct. However, one has to be very careful how you carry yourself. Those several words he through in there could be perceived as a threat easily, and it was right that the authorities to be called about it. I dont know the subject matter of what he was talking about, and he may have been right with everything else he said, but you cant say what he said like that.
Yep, we really need to hear the other side of the story in his calling for the murder of people. Maybe he had a perfectly justified reason for doing that. And, really, the issue here is not the calling for the murder of a group of people, it's that he said it in public. I could see saying those things when no one else is listening, but not when someone might be bothered by it.
Yep, we really need to hear the other side of the story in his calling for the murder of people. Maybe he had a perfectly justified reason for doing that. And, really, the issue here is not the calling for the murder of a group of people, it's that he said it in public. I could see saying those things when no one else is listening, but not when someone might be bothered by it.
Exactly. Sometimes those that do commit crimes like murder, may actually make a warning publicly first, no matter how un-serious it may initially seem. Doing so publicly is just asking for trouble, even if you truly dont mean it to be a threat. After similar things being done in the past and ignored, things like this will be taken very serious from now on.
The Court has really had it wrong all this time, hasn't it? It's not the First Amendment that is the fundamental freedom, but rather the amendment and what you imagine it to say.
I would go so far as to argue that we won't even need those other 20-odd amendments once we successfully arm everyone. Then we can move number 2 up to number 1. Problem solved.
There was a day, everyone had a gun in this nation. Our nation lived. Actually prospering.
A gun in thy hand, keeps everyone else honest.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
