Slashdot Mirror


Webcomic Author Deemed a Terrorist Threat

CaptainCarrot writes "Writer/IT contractor Matt Boyd, formerly the man who made up the words for webcomic Mac Hall and who now does the same for his and Ian McConville's new comic Three Panel Soul, was recently fired from his government job. His conversation with a co-worker about a gun he intended to buy for target shooting was overheard by someone in a nearby cubicle. As it was unfortunately the day of the Virginia Tech shootings, the eavesdropper panicked and reported him to management. That was bad enough. But when he used the comic to document the meeting where the reason for his firing was explained, he was visited by representatives of local law enforcement investigating him on suspicion of making a "terroristic threat" using the Internet. No charges have been filed. Yet. FLEEN interviewed Matt about the incident."

9 of 486 comments (clear)

  1. "Terroristic threat" != "terrorist threat" by daveschroeder · · Score: 5, Informative

    The term "terroristic threat" has been around a long time, and has nothing to do with "terrorism" or a "terrorist threat", as it is used in the vernacular.

    The term and legal notion of "terroristic threat" has been around for a long time, and has nothing to do with the "war on terror", 9/11, the Bush administration, or censorship.

    Also, he is a contract employee who can be released at any time for any reason, even moreso than a normal at-will employee who also can be released at any time for any reason.

    Even Boyd himself in his interview correctly notes that "a terroristic threat is an old legal concept".

    He is also not charged with any crime (though technically he could be), but that's always true. He says the "detectives at least seem satisfied" that he was "harmless", and showed samples of his work to one of the detectives.

    It would be better to read his interview, instead of believing someone thinks this has anything to do with "terrorism" or a "terrorist threat" (no one does; remember, "terroristic threat is a legal concept that has been around a long time).

    Actually, I take that back. There are people painting this as allegedly being thought of as "terrorism". It's people who want to get all indignant about it.

    By the way: anyone who thinks Virginia Tech could have "prevented" this shooting somehow, this is exactly what you get.

    1. Re:"Terroristic threat" != "terrorist threat" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      'By the way: anyone who thinks Virginia Tech could have "prevented" this shooting somehow, this is exactly what you get.'

      That's ridiculous. And I'm even pro-2nd amendment.

      The comic writer didn't threaten anyone. The impetus for the investigation was an overheard conversation about a gun purchase. Neither is cause for an investigation of this level and a firing.

      Compare that to the VA Tech horror--if you remove entirely Cho's writings (which is not a good level of judgment anyways), he should have been stopped during the purchase of his one gun at a gunshop, as he lied about being mentally incerated and such info is in the state's own judicial system which could have been cross-checked with answers when purchasing that gun. In fact, this past week, I believe the legislature of VA removed that roadblock; the law was fine, the implementation sucked.

      Second, imnsho, and this isn't popular, I think the police HUGELY dropped the ball in the VA Tech situation (and by that opinion, the University is far less contributory through indifference in the 2nd shooting site deaths). If a police officer had been shot in the foot, they would have gone after that guy wholeheartedly, just as they did earlier in the year with a person who allegedly shot a deputy upon escape. The police dropped the ball--even they admit they were investigating another person who they "knew" had killed the first 2...oops, except he didn't. See, if a couple of kids get shot, you're not part of the FOP, it's thrown into a "domestic dispute" craphole where they go after the nearest; investigation is separate from correctly ascertaining threat, which comes full circle in demonstrating why the handling of web comic thing is so incorrect.

      btw, I've never understood the whole firing thing in any case--besides clearly not a threat, you want to make the person even more out of their luck and prone to do something? Amazing how the US becomes more and more like China these days (China is far worse, but the approximations seen over the past 6 years in stories makes that gap narrower).

  2. On a scale from one to ten by noidentity · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Fleen: Okay, on a scale of one to ten, are you more a) pissed; b) surprised; c) depressed by this turn of events?

    Boyd: Gonna have to go with b) surprised."


    I'll go with d) confused...err... 4) confus... 10) conf.. I dunno

  3. One word : S U E by unity100 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Additional words : t h e H E L L o u t t a t h e m

  4. I got it figured out.... by 3seas · · Score: 5, Funny

    everyone is a terroristic threat, except those who aren't.

    Oh I feel so much safer now....

  5. Re:So...? by dltaylor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    His "interview" with the detectives will now show up on every background check, which are common with job applications, whether disclosed or not, so his ability to earn a living has been compromised. He will also end up flagged for airline travel, be abused and humiliated by TSA every time he flies, so his freedom to travel has been compromised. It is possible that his passport, if any, could be revoked or refused renewal, as well. The grounds for that are not disclosed, so it's hard to tell. Apartment rental agreements also often include background checks, so he may not be able to live where he chooses. This man will be "punished" for the rest of his life, regardless of whether he is ever arrested, or not. Even if he is arrested and is judged "not guilty", the record of his arrest is not expunged, nor is his cost of defense reimbursed, so he is still punished. Meanwhile, the persons who set this upon him walk unimpeded. If there were any justice, they would rot in hell for violating the Commandment against false witness.

    "Better safe than sorry" is an expression of cowardice. Life is a series of risks beginning with the genetic selection at conception. Given the odds that some child conceived, somewhere, will have a genetic defect (not to mention prenatal difficulties, post-natal trauma, disease, ...), should we all stop having them? Get over it.

  6. Gently down the slippery slope by Original+Replica · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Like many other crimes these days, it is the implication that you might do the crime that is becoming illegal, or in this case punishable. Like the virtual rape in second life http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/04/15 25222. Or things like prosecuting someone who thinks they are flirting with a minor. Sure things like murder, pedophilia and terroism aren't going to have any vocal champions, but it grows into things like outlawing marijuana flavored candy.

    http://www.reason.com/news/show/119442.html "Several jurisdictions, including Chicago, already have banned cannabis-flavored candy; Georgia is on the verge of prohibiting sales to minors; and legislators in other states have proposed their own restrictions or bans. Before the whole country is overwhelmed by the urge to prohibit anything that tastes like pot, let's pause to consider the aim of such legislation. Ban proponents do not claim the candy itself is dangerous. Rather, they object to the ideas it represents."

    Let's face it, ideas and presumed intentions are becoming criminal. George Orwell called it.
    --
    We are all just people.
  7. Re:Also by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A very level headed post, and mostly correct.

    My only disagreement is with you claiming that the employer acted correctly. Traditional HR policies are mostly geared around doing everything possible to keep the company from being sued, even if that isn't the 'correct' thing to do morally or ethically or even rationally.

    I think lending validity to hypersensitive reactions based on overheard conversations is not a good thing for a company's long term workplace environment. And in the broader sense, pretending that things like this make us safer detracts from real issues that actually would make us safer if we had time or inclination to address them. Firing everyone who verbalizes something that someone might feel is threatening won't get us any closer to figuring out the differences between all those people and the VT shooter.

    --
    "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
  8. Re:Hoplophobes by florescent_beige · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have no fear of guns at all. Terrified of bullets though.

    --
    Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller