UK Teen Banned From US Over Obscene Obama Email

British teenager Luke Angel has been banned from the US for sending an email to the White House calling President Obama an obscenity. The 17-year-old says he was drunk when he sent the mail and doesn't understand what the big deal is. "I don't remember exactly what I wrote as I was drunk. But I think I called Barack Obama a p***k. It was silly -- the sort of thing you do when you're a teenager and have had a few," he said. The FBI contacted local police who in turn confronted Luke and let him know that the US Department of Homeland Security didn't think his email was funny. "The police came and took my picture and told me I was banned from America forever. I don't really care but my parents aren't very happy," Angel said.

Comments

Now that's just stupid.

[ScrewMaster]

But I think I called Barack Obama a p***k.

So what? I mean ... so what? A lot of Americans feel the same way and we don't have to be drunk to say it ... free speech and all that. Or do we believe that people in other countries shouldn't be able to express negative opinions about our leaders? What kind of example are we trying to set here?

Low hanging fruit, I guess. As if a drunken teenager's ramblings constituted some credible threat against the President. Besides, I'm a little confused on how a kid gets banned from the United States forever for performing an action that isn't illegal in this country, probably isn't illegal in his, and should have been entirely beneath law enforcement's radar anyway? Why didn't his local cops tell the FBI to go pound sand? What if he'd been visiting the United States when he wrote that? Would we have imprisoned or deported him? Does the FBI use lead plumbing?

Yeah, I'm kinda embarrassed by this. Don't try to tell me that every President since the we starting having them hasn't received thousands of messages a year calling him all kinds of names. It's part and parcel of the job: if you don't have a pretty thick skin you have no business being a politician in the first place. So, what made them single this kid out from the rest of the pack? Does the FBI ban every foreigner who expresses a negative opinion of the President from ever setting foot in our country?

Personally, I'd like to know what Obama thinks of this silliness, what he thinks has been accomplished here. It sounds to me like a couple of Federal agents need to have their wings clipped, or at least should be assigned duties more suitable for their temperament. Reading obituaries, maybe.

Re:Now that's just stupid.

[Pojut]

Love the fact that you cite lack of free speech, yet cite burning the flag and protesting as things that you can legally do in this country.

I swear, most Americans don't realize how good we actually have it.

Re:Now that's just stupid.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think there's more to it. According to the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-11296303) his email was "full of abusive and threatening language". The 'threatening' part is the problem. All threats aimed at the white house get investigated, regardless of who makes them. If you're in the US, they'll come visit you (a relative-of-a-friend of mine had it happen to them several years ago). Outside of the US, apparently they just ban you. This isn't new to this President.

Yes, it does seem a lot of fuss over not a lot though.

Re:Now that's just stupid.

[Music2Eat]

According to the BBC article he also threatened the President. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-11296303 Of course mentioning that in the summary wouldn't have gotten the /. Free Speach RAH RAH RAH cheerleaders dancing.

In case you were unaware, threatening the President of the United States is against the law in the US. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000871----000-.html If he'd done it in the US, my guess is he would have been arrested and deported.

Re:Now that's just stupid.

[Haffner]

Let me put my opinion into a mathematical analogy (it'll make sense). Let's say there's a big graph. Y Axis is "How great your country is" in some sort of measurement. X Axis is time. We move right on the graph as time moves forward. Right now, the US function may be at/near the top of the graph. However, the derivative of the US function is negative. In fact, if the derivatives of all the nation's position functions were graphed, we would be pretty close to the bottom. Sure, there are some countries (like African ones that just had a coup, or something) that may be falling faster than us, but our derivative is negative and big. And more importantly, our second derivative is negative, and it's also very negative. We are going to get worse faster than we have been, is basically all that means.

Some analysis of that: Position (where we are right now) we rank 1st, let's say. Speed (what's being done right now) we are going in the wrong direction, and we are heading there quickly. Acceleration (what's going to happen to the speed) is also headed in the wrong direction, and its also getting more negative quickly. To translate this to the real world, position is our current set of laws. Speed is the laws that are getting passed that are dropping our position (right to privacy, open government, etc), and acceleration is really public opinion - a positive acceleration with a very negative speed means that the population realizes things are bad, and they are trying hard to change it for the better. An acceleration of zero means people are happy with the direction the country is going in, or at least they don't care enough to change it. Negative acceleration means people are actively setting the stage for the next batch of politicians to be even worse than the current ones.

It may be lengthy, but I like using these three criteria as a means of rating government. When people tell me America is the greatest, I agree, but then explain how it won't be very soon. Most people disagree at first, but after some arguing, most people agree with the acceleration argument, and probably half (democrats, mainly) agree with the speed.

Re:Now that's just stupid.

[Deviate_X]

The whole thing is fake you twat. http://gizmodo.com/5637203/drunk-email-to-obama-gets-british-teen-banned-from-america-for-life.

and i call you a twat cause its my freedom of speech and because you should check your facts before spewing

What did he call him?

[Conspiracy_Of_Doves]

A prick?

The first article I read about this just showed it as p****, so I thought it might be pussy.

Just show the fucking word, people. It's not that big of a deal.

Re:What did he call him?

[Pojut]

"Remember son, if an upper-classman calls you a pussy, just respond 'I am what I eat'" -Advice from my Dad on my first day of high school

Original article is from the Sun, and not true.

[abqaussie]

Um, the original article is from the UK Sun, which is pretty much equivalent to the Weekly World News or any other made up tabloid. Gizmodo linked to it and has since retracted their reporting because the article is false. http://gizmodo.com/5637203/drunk-email-to-obama-gets-british-teen-banned-from-america-for-life Way to believe everything you read on the internet.

Re:So, when?

[bluefoxlucid]

EVERYONE in Britain is rude. Have you ever been there? Hell, look up Wii Fit Plus on Youtube...

American Wii Fit trainer chick: That's it. Focus on your breathing. Let's try to do ten. One... two... three... you're doing good so far... four... five... six...

British Wii Fit trainer chick: Let's do ten now! One.. two... come on can't you put some muscle into it?! Three... four... just five more ya fat lump! Six... seven... eight... nine... come on now... ten! There, thought ye were gonna cry for a minute there!

Bad Slashdot summary

[Futurepower(R)]

The usual: Bad Slashdot summary. The facts: Police said the e-mail to the US president was full of abusive language.

Re:Bad Slashdot summary

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

Fox News is often full of abusive language towards the President. Can we ban them? :)

Re:Bad Slashdot summary

[StikyPad]

Well, it depends on what the e-mail said exactly. Ironically, the poster who complained about a poor summary neglected to mention this part: "Bedfordshire police, who then visited Luke, said the e-mail was full of abusive and threatening language."

Making threats against the President, credible or otherwise, IS a crime in this country and it IS typical to bar criminals from entry unless we plan to request extradition and prosecute them domestically. Visiting here is a privilege (in the legal sense of the word), not a right.

All in all this is basically a slap on the wrist for a slap-on-the-wrist-worthy offense. I'm sure this young man can appeal the decision should he really care, though it appears he does not. Nothing to see here, move along.

Re:Bad Slashdot summary

[BobMcD]

Fox News is often full of abusive language towards the President. Can we ban them? :)

Not only is this not funny, nor informative, but shockingly dangerous.

Suggesting we ban press outlets is decidedly anti-American, whether you personally consider them of any value or not. Change the channel, not the law.