- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Upstate NY man receives ICE warning about social media posts
Posted on 7/7/26 at 10:59 am to TigerAxeOK
Posted on 7/7/26 at 10:59 am to TigerAxeOK
quote:
WHITEST nations on GOD's blue earth.
Doesn't Finland have a huge indigenous population? I'm not sure of their preferred nomenclature so I'll call them "Eskimo cousins".
0
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:00 am to onmymedicalgrind
You dont even know what Irony means
But it is hilarious you defend these retards and vote for them
But it is hilarious you defend these retards and vote for them
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:01 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
So you agree that, if I tell people walking into to an abortion clinic “you will never know peace,” I should be arrested?
If you say it to an on-duty police officer you should and very likely will be arrested.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:02 am to Robin Masters
quote:
Imagine he sent the same message to your wife or child…would you be concerned or looking over your shoulder? Be honest.
You keep mentioning “context” and then type this nonsense.
He didn’t randomly email someone. He emailed a government official who he was displeased with. That is a core tenet of freedom of speech.
If my wife or child was a government official and a member of the public sent them this very same email….no I would not take it as a threat.
When did we become so soft?
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:04 am to Robin Masters
quote:
If a scuba instructor asks if you want to “swim with the fishes” is that the same thing as a mafia member to whom you owe money?
So can I tell someone walking in to get an abortion “you will never know peace?”
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:05 am to shinerfan
quote:
If you say it to an on-duty police officer you should and very likely will be arrested.
That means nothing
Charges will get thrown out as soon as the (hopefully competent) DAs office gets involved.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:08 am to SDVTiger
quote:
You dont even know what Irony means But it is hilarious you defend these retards and vote for them
The problem is your IQ is single digits so everything to you is about Team.
You don’t have the minimum necessary synaptic connections required to fathom the possibility of disagreeing with what someone says, but defending their right to say it. I feel bad for you.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:09 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
He emailed a government official who he was displeased with. That is a core tenet of freedom of speech.
He didn’t say that though, did he. And no, a core tenant of freedoms of speech is not unfettered access in which to harass someone at work and in private with vile personal attacks and threats, Regardless of whether you are a government employee or not.
quote:
my wife or child was a government official and a member of the public sent them this very same email….no I would not take it as a threat.
Then you are a failure as a husband and father.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:11 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
So can I tell someone walking in to get an abortion “you will never know peace?”
My hunch is you would be promptly removed from the premises because the people going in felt threatened.
Does it arise to the the level of having charges filed, probably not, but, maybe I missed it, neither was this guy charged.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:11 am to Robin Masters
quote:
And no, a core tenant of freedoms of speech is not unfettered access in which to harass someone at work and in private with vile personal attacks and threats,
Again, the issue here is you don’t understand the legal definition of “threat” in the first amendment context. There is plenty of jurisprudence on this. Do you want to learn more about this topic or remain ignorant? The choice is, again, yours.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:13 am to Robin Masters
Which is worse board conduct, not including a picture of a young attractive girl friend ,,,,,,,,,,or not including a copy of the entire social media post.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:14 am to Robin Masters
quote:
My hunch is you would be promptly removed from the premises because the people going in felt threatened.
Removed by who? The police? And from a public sidewalk? For protected speech? Anyone can feel “threatened” for any reason. Is the police’s job to enforce the law or protect feelings?
Do you understand how any of this works?
You are a soft man who cares more about people feeling good than our rights being upheld. Sad.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:24 am to Robin Masters
So, when was this guy’s rights actually violated or infringed upon? He was skirting a fine line and got called out on it. He wasn’t arrested or otherwise inconvenienced in any capacity. He suffered no harm or consequence that I can see. He can continue doing what he was doing at his own choice.
But threatening actions and behaviors are not defined by the guy doing it, or by random biased spectators. Isn’t it what a reasonable person may infer? And if he keeps that kind of repeated communication up, then I can easily see it crossing over the threshold, thus the warning.
But threatening actions and behaviors are not defined by the guy doing it, or by random biased spectators. Isn’t it what a reasonable person may infer? And if he keeps that kind of repeated communication up, then I can easily see it crossing over the threshold, thus the warning.
This post was edited on 7/7/26 at 11:26 am
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:25 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
Again, the issue here is you don’t understand the legal definition of “threat” in the first amendment context. There is plenty of jurisprudence on this. Do you want to learn more about this topic or remain ignorant? The choice is, again, yours.
A simple Google search reveals you don’t know what tf you are talking about.
https://www.law.georgetown.edu/icap/wp-content/uploads/sites/32/2024/08/True-Threats-Guidance-3.pdf
The Supreme Court recently held in Counterman v. Colorado that, in a criminal prosecution
based on threatening communications, the First Amendment requires the government to prove that the
speaker had “some subjective understanding of the threatening nature of his statements.
”17 The Court held
that prosecutors need only prove that the speaker was “reckless,” meaning that he was aware “that others
could regard his statements as threatening violence and deliver[ed] them anyway”—not that he specifically
intended that his words would be received as a threat.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:26 am to Robin Masters
quote:
When you state in direct communication that someone will “never know peace” and their behavior will “lead to a downfall”, it is most definitely a threat.
Doesn't seem very threatening to me.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:28 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
I thought you were a lawyer? Surely you know what was in that email doesn’t meet the legal threshold of a “threat.”
You think there is some single threshold of what is a threat? List it. What are the elements?
What was in the email can certainly be deemed a threat.
This post was edited on 7/7/26 at 11:28 am
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:28 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:OMG, point taken.
Again, the issue here is you don’t understand the legal definition of “threat” in the first amendment context.
Is the response, a simple warning, not subject to the same freedoms though?
I am also not sure as to the "harm" as basis for the suit. If he had been detained, arrested, financially impacted, I'd get it. Was he?
We also do not legitimately have the complete content of the guy's message(s) as far as I can tell. FWIW, someone sending that kind of message does not come across as a person who'd do it as a one-off. So there may be other messages.
This post was edited on 7/7/26 at 11:30 am
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:29 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
Removed by who? The police? And from a public sidewalk? For protected speech? Anyone can feel “threatened” for any reason. Is the police’s job to enforce the law or protect feelings? Do you understand how any of this works? You are a soft man who cares more about people feeling good than our rights being upheld. Sad.
Ironic considering you are melting down because some twat can’t dm threatening messages unabated.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:29 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
Do you understand how any of this works?
never fails. Opining with hubris from a place of complete ignorance. You’re a joke. Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:30 am to OccamsStubble
Both are bad and shouldn't occur
Page 4 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News