Tweet
Was this legal? (Crofton MD Potential Mass Shooting Plot)
WUSA reported the suspect called a former co-worker with threats to shoot his boss and workers. The co-worker reportedly called police.
-
So first let me say this guy should when the dumbass gun owner of the week award. he called some a work friend and said a bunch of dumb **** but as he knew he was about to get fired might have just been blowing off steam. But i don't get how they can raid you home and take your weapons all off the word of some person who i bet over reacted.It sounds like he only made the threats to the one co-worker and then that guy/girl freaked and called the cops. -
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Making threats of violent criminal action, especially when you have the means to carry out those threats is often criminal in itself. We don't have all the facts from such a short article but I don't see any reason to think that what the police did wasn't legal.Originally posted by wildhawker
-
My friend was accused of saying "I'm going to shoot you" by a girl in his high school class. He was pulled from class, and driven to his house by the police where they searched his room for a gun. My friend doesn't have guns, nor did he say ANYTHING remotely related to "I'm going to shoot you", but the girl didn't like him, and that's all it took...
I would personally tell them to get a warrant, or proof that I said the statement."The purpose of living is to find something worth dying for"Comment
-
That's what i kind of wonder, did they just know he had firearms and got worried about what would happen when they fired him.
Looking at one of the quotes
Who talks like that? if you're crazy enough to let words like that slip out of your mouth you've been saying crazy **** the whole time you've worked there. Not sticking up for the guy and if they stopped a mass shooting GOOD FOR THEM, but if they got "gun shy" and reported an innocent man they should be put in jail."I'm a joker, and I'm going to load my guns and blow everyone up."Comment
-
It may be legal, but what morfeeis is bringing up is a valid concern. This is all going on the hearsay of someone reporting they "heard" something, which everyone knows is steeped in problematic issues of simply hearing it wrong, going on a bad interpretation, and of course personal bias up to and including intentional falsehood. Not that it was recorded, not that anyone in LE actually witnessed\heard this themselves. So the issue is that one person reports a concern, and then a search warrant is issued and SWAT team is given a go to "raid" this person's home based on only this, their name then is all over the news.
Read the article. Words like "reportedly", "allegedly", "We think...". Don't get me wrong, if this person is a threat we need to do what we can. But when only words are being expressed and all you have is one person just saying this is what they "heard" - this is a slippery slope of paranoia and fear, over individual rights being easily dismissed.Last edited by odysseus; 07-29-2012, 1:43 PM."Just leave me alone, I know what to do." - Kimi Raikkonen
The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.' and that `Property is surely a right of mankind as real as liberty.'
- John Adams
http://www.usdebtclock.org/Comment
-
Ask any of the of pedophiles in jail because they took their film to some 1 hour photo shop. Not saying it is right, but when you do stupid stuff and make threats and have the ability to act on those threats, expect the consequences. If the police had not acted and he had carried out his "threats" would the cops be crucified in the media? Sort of damned if you do damned if you don't scenario.Comment
-
Yes, searches based on hearsay are cause for concern, but this article is very short and we clearly aren't being given all the info for the sake of brevity. The only conclusion we can draw is that we don't know enough to come to any conclusions.
Words like "reportedly" and "allegedly" are common reporter speak, don't interpret them to mean anything. Reporters write like that to protect themselves and their employers from libel suits. Check out recent articles on the Aurora shooting and you'll notice they use the same words and describe him as the "accused" shooter even though there is no reason to question his guilt.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk 2Originally posted by wildhawkerComment
There are currently 4716 users online. 36 members and 4680 guests.
Most users ever online was 65,177 at 8:20 PM on 09-21-2024.
Comment