Page 1 of 1

Assault on 1st Ammendment Next

Posted: Sun May 05, 2013 4:42 pm
by RuralEngineer
Hooray, hooray, the police state's on it's way!

http://news.yahoo.com/teenagers-social- ... 20139.html
“The greatest mystery in life is the human mind. We don’t know what other people do until it becomes known. Our job is to figure it out, but we need indicators to know something’s not right,”? says Sgt. Ed Mullins of the New York Police Department, who is also president of the Sergeants Benevolent Association, the city’s second-largest police union.

Using a zero tolerance approach to track domestic terrorists online is the only reasonable way to analyze online threats these days, especially after the Boston Marathon bombing and news that the suspects had subsequently planned to target Times Square in Manhattan, Mullins says. The way law enforcement agencies approach online activity that appears sinister is this: “If you’re not a terrorist, if you’re not a threat, prove it," he says.

This is the price you pay to live in free society right now. It’s just the way it is,”? Mullins adds.
Emphasis added is mine.  The first because that's as Orwellian a name for a police organization as I've seen, the "Benevolent Association"...awesome.  The rest is obvious.

EDIT: I will say that I don't know what this kid actually said, it just looks like he didn't make any specific threats against someone, which is the threshold for getting arrested in my understanding.  Talking about jihad didn't used to be illegal.  Talking about bombings didn't used to be illegal.

Re: Assault on 1st Ammendment Next

Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 1:05 pm
by smurff
RuralEngineer wrote:
Emphasis added is mine.  The first because that's as Orwellian a name for a police organization as I've seen, the "Benevolent Association"...awesome.  The rest is obvious.
This 19th century style of nomenclature for employee associations predated Orwell, but you're right, it sounds hilariously ludicrous these days, considering the kinds of cruel stuff police sometimes  find themselves doing (often on tape, no less.)
EDIT: I will say that I don't know what this kid actually said, it just looks like he didn't make any specific threats against someone, which is the threshold for getting arrested in my understanding.  Talking about jihad didn't used to be illegal.  Talking about bombings didn't used to be illegal.
Except at airport security checkpoints.  I remember seeing signs in airports years ago (before the current anti terrorism hysteria) that promised an arrest if someone in line even joked about a bomb.  Before, few Americans could spell a word like jihad, but now everyone is supposed to know it's a forbidden concept, too.