- 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
1
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:36 am to BBONDS25
quote:
What was in the email can certainly be deemed a threat.
Which part specifically?
Make the case.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:38 am to Robin Masters
quote:
A simple Google search reveals you don’t know what tf you are talking about.
LINK
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.
Lol some people shouldn't be allowed to use the internet.
What violence did he threaten?
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:39 am to Eurocat
quote:
In the email, Streever told Lyons he was "a monstrous human being" who "will never know peace" and will "go down in history as America's Reinhard Heydrich, the butcher," a reference to a Nazi leader. "The way you are protecting the obvious execution in Minnesota, even as we see the videos, will lead to your downfall. Even Trump will turn on you before the end, and you will be a sad, despised man who eats himself alive with shame at your own pathetic weakness," Streever said in the email, according to the complaint.
"You will seek to lose yourself, to escape the burden of knowing the truth about yourself. But wherever you go, you will find yourself. You will torment yourself until your last day on Earth," the email added.
If this is all there is I don’t see a true threat here. I imagine the authorities felt the same as this person was not arrested and charged.
This post was edited on 7/7/26 at 11:40 am
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:40 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
OMG, point taken.
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?
This is a reasonable take. However, if we are going to classify something as protected speech or not--this dichotomy shouldn't allow for shades of grey regarding enforcement. Meaning, if the speech is protected--whats the point of the warning. And if its not--legal action should be taken.
quote:
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.
Of course. I reserve the right to change my stance on this particular case if actually threatening messages are brought to light.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:41 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
What violence did he threaten?
The absence of peace can reasonably be interpreted as a state of perpetual violence.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:41 am to BBONDS25
quote:
never fails. Opining with hubris from a place of complete ignorance. You’re a joke.
Bonds, its been quite some time since I've made you look foolish. Behave or that may change.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:42 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?
Who was arrested?
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:43 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
If my wife or child was a government official
I thought context didn’t matter?
dumb idiot. Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:43 am to Robin Masters
quote:
The absence of peace can reasonably be interpreted as a state of perpetual violence.
Yes, and don't you think there are people in society who will never know peace due to some of their abhorrent prior actions? And if you tell them that, you are now threatening them?
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:45 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
Yes, and don't you think there are people in society who will never know peace due to some of their abhorrent prior actions? And if you tell them that, you are now threatening them?
Me thinking it vs me threatening them with that condition is where the distinction lies
This post was edited on 7/7/26 at 11:45 am
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:45 am to BBONDS25
quote:
I thought context didn’t matter? dumb idiot.
When did I say that? Your reading comprehension of my posts mimic your "reading" of the DSM
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:46 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
Which part specifically?
“You will never know peace.”
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:47 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
Lol some people shouldn't be allowed to use the internet. What violence did he threaten?
Your ignorance gets called out and a Supreme Court case is cited…yet you still arrogantly attempt to belittle the person who is just trying to educate you. You’re a caricature.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:47 am to Robin Masters
quote:
Me thinking it vs me threatening them with that condition is where the distinction lies
You can interject the word "threatening" as much as you can. Doesn't mean its a "threat."
If I looked a convicted serial rapists who just got sentenced to life in the eyes and said "you will never know peace,"-- am I commenting on his prior actions or threatening his life?
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:48 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
Bonds, its been quite some time since I've made you look foolish. Behave or that may change.
You have cited the “legal definition of threat” many times. List it.
You don’t have the IQ to make anyone look foolish.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:48 am to BBONDS25
quote:
“You will never know peace.”
=/=
threat.
Thanks for playing
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:49 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
When did I say that? Your reading comprehension of my posts mimic your "reading" of the DSM
oh my. This is just pathetic. Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:49 am to shinerfan
quote:
"You will never know peace" is a pretty clear threat
Meh... that's not a threat, he's telling the guy he'll never know peace within himself. Everything he writes in the parts posted on X is speaking about the ICE director conscious about what he's doing.
Im not agreeing with the email guy at all.
But there's no direct threat.
Posted on 7/7/26 at 11:50 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
f I looked a convicted serial rapists who just got sentenced to life in the eyes and said "you will never know peace,"-- am I commenting on his prior actions or threatening his life?
What about one that just got released?
See, context matters.
Page 5 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News