OT: Open note to Sarah

Nov 02, 2008 79 Replies

Please don't attribute the "lily-white Midwest" comment to me - it was not mine - I was quoting previous posts.

MelissaD

I thought you had written me privately off list. Since you didn't, I will repeat what I said. The snipped quote I used indicates that you were replying to another post--right after "Melissa wrote" it says "lewmew wrote" Dawne

No, absolutely not -- the mere wishing is NOT punishable. But ..... it could be the catalyst for an investigation.

By regulation and duty, ANY threat is to be investigated. Whether that regulation (and I do use the term quite loosely) is actually acted upon is another thing entirely. Several variables play.

Such as the person making the threat (even if only "wishing"). Do they have a history of mental problems? Is that person undergoing any "severe" stressful situations (either personal or professional), since many, many, MANY otherwise normal people can "snap" due to stressors in their lives. Mass and/or spree killers often have a stressor as a "trigger" that sets them off. You see that often in situations where someone shoots innocent people simply eating lunch at a McDonalds. Usually they blame their actions on political figures or situations ("I HAVE to do this because politician X or policy Y ruined my life" -- it's quite common for mass/spree killers to scapegoat others).

The context of the threat. Was the threat made in a conversation? Or did it come out of the blue? Was there a lead-in to the threat (such as this thread)? If there's a conversational/informal context to the threat, it's usually discounted (unless the above situation applies).

And lastly, the credibility of the complainant (rather, the person reporting the threat).

(Several other variables apply, but they're a bit on the esoteric side)

In my profession, I deal quite often with those who've made threats and done nothing in terms of follow-up. However, I've also dealt with those who DID follow-up and either make good or nearly did (one stock-piled firearms and had plans drawn up to blow up a schoolbus on an afternoon run). The former obviously gets jail-time and the latter gets intensive therapy. Usually on an involuntary basis.

So while a "wishing" threat against a public (or private) person may not result in punishment or prosecution, depending on the situation, it often does lead to some sort of investigation. Speculating on whether or not a wishing threat made online in a newsgroup is just that: speculation.

I hope I didn't get too .... rambly. It's a bit of a "fit" with my daily grind. So I tend to get a bit ... pontific. ;)

Fine. Give me something to Google! I don't care!!! ;)

We'll see if I can't dig SOMETHING up. Perhaps the Prime Minister kicks puppies when no one's watching. Or (worse, horror of horrors) watches soap operas when he's REALLY supposed to be working! ;)

I agree. That statement is pure piffle.

It's always seemed to me to be more of a condemnation based on perceived class - not racism. If you have a well-dressed, dapper, black man enter a store and a dirty, disheveled, white woman in threadbare jeans and a filthy t-shirt enter as well, who do you think the shop owner will be more suspicious of? The person who seemingly has no NEED to steal or the one who might?

"Just about dumped him off?" Why are you being judgemental of what a woman did to make sure her child would have the best life she could give him?

Did you read his books?

Elizabeth

It wasn't a landslide, Vic. It's a landslide in terms of the electoral college, but the popular vote was very close.

Elizabeth

Thanks for the reference.

Elizabeth

Luxembourg

Elizabeth (only partially kidding)

Right, but there's certainly a difference between "wishing for someone to murder the President" and "making a credible threat against the President." Vic made it seem like the first is punishable.

According to a colleague of mine who does research on such things, this happens all over this country, not just in "red states."

Elizabeth

oh, come on, now. California hasn't had a race riot in at least a couple of years. Might even be a decade.

Elizabeth

Lol I remember arriving in the large appliance department wanting to pay for a 'fridge I had earlier chosen and have it delivered.

I arrived there (in my jeans of course) at the same moment as a fur coated expensive looking woman. She was served first but it became clear that she was just wasting time until her husband arrived for her

- meantime a much younger man came back from his supper break and I did the buying through him - served the older man right (they worked on commission) - I found it very satisfying, people should not judge by what their eyes see, one of the reasons for my love of radio over television.

I remember working retail (putting myself through college) and the department store I worked for had the "Legend of the Barefoot Heiress:

-- supposedly, in our VERY store (LOL), the owner's daughter, wanting to make a statement on "class perception" came into the store, dressed horribly shabby. When she wasn't waited on and was treated derisively, news of the discrimination against her went right to the top and everyone in the store was promptly fired.

(Urban legend of course)

It was supposed to teach us that we are not to discriminate against shoppers based on their outward appearance, of course. But my manager at the time put it best "We don't discriminate against black, white, rich, poor -- their money all folds the same."

He was, of course, quick to add that if the shopper DID look rich, to sell them MORE. :/

Ok - we noticed, now settle down. You are beginning to put me off him lol

Obama - unless Christ is resurrected you are painting him just too holy for words. Let people take time and see whether they like him, what sort of job he can do etc etc.

According to the research, in your scenario, the black person is still more likely to be followed.

Elizabeth

Melissa -

I actually wasn't responding to you, I just hit Reply on one of your posts, my apologies. My comments were directed to the general tone of the conversation.

Linda

No problem - I had simply started my part of the conversation by stating that race was not part of my voting decision....I just don't want to have to wear asbestos underwear on here :P

MelissaD

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required