Slashdot Mirror
"Terrorist" Lyrics Land High Schooler In Jail
An anonymous reader writes "A Methusen, Mass. high schooler, who goes by the rapper name 'Cammy Dee' has been arrested after posting lyrics that police felt were 'communicating terrorist threats.' This wouldn't be the first time rap lyrics were investigated, but if formally charged for 'communicating terrorist threats' this would a set a chilling low bar for terrorist investigations."
Really, if the police have time enough to deal with this, then clearly all the more important crimes have been resolved.
Welcome to the USSA where freedom of speech means freedom to praise your government, where the right to bear arms means the right to go hunting, where the right to not be searched without a warrant doesn't apply, where due process can be ignored if the president wants you dead.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
but if formally charged for 'communicating terrorist threats' this would a set a chilling low bar for terrorist investigations."
Please. It's already chillingly low. How many christians have publicly said gays "should burn in hell" ? How many famous celebrities have said they would shoot government officials if they came to take their guns away? I could come up with dozens of examples of more volatile speech by talking heads on television... and god help us if I decide to include examples from that cesspool of humanity called the internet.
Being called a terrorist or avoiding that label all comes down to who and what you are. It is, and always has been, about that -- not what you say. Look at the boston bomber -- muslim. Terrorist. But the Aurora shooting? Not a terrorist. Those people that blew up a shiite church in Wisconsin? Not terrorists. In fact, as long as you aren't black, or a muslim, you can probably avoid the "terrorist" label.
The 'terrorist' label is just like the 'communist' label, and before that the 'fascist' label, and before that... you get the idea. Every generation has had their government-sponsored boogieman. Terrorist is ours.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
From looking at the story, it seems like some prosecutor here wants to come off as tough on crime and terrorists to further their political career. This is Aaron Schwartz all over again. This person in question is just some 18 year old who did something stupid. A reasonable punishment seems like 500 hours community service and a $1000 fine. No reason for 20 years in prison for doing something stupid that harmed no one.The average sentence for rape is around 20 years.
The very same day, the head of the NRA said that all americans should be trained in automatic weapons for the eventual day when we have to take over our government.
That was actually a multi-billion dollar statement in terms of cost to the US.
Why? because now all those people who hold security positions and had to sign that they had never belonged to an organization that advocated the violent overthorow of the US govt will have to be re-investigated if they continue to belong to the NRA.
It's basically sedition.
where the white house gets attacked. why dont we lock those fillmakers up? or at least those actors spewing those hateful lines.
Kids who want to be bad listen to rap music and buy into that way of gang life early on. Bill Cosby said it best when he said,"The kids listen to the rap music and get brain damage." Rap music didn't invent crime, but it doesn't discourage it. Between advocating a criminals life, and disrespect for women, much rap music is bad for society in general. Kids get seduced by a life of crime to get their way, and end up trying to live it. They just end up screwing up other people's life and their own. If rap artists were really interested in the well being of their audience, they'd rap about how a kid should take the hard road, study in school, be cool to everyone, respect yourself, and others. There's no street cred when it comes to taking the hard road though. People who buy rap music want to be told they're oppressed, and they should take the easy road out.
Dystopian fiction has always been an interesting topic for nerds. I mean, I'm pretty sure all of us have at least read one or two good dystopian novels that have changed our ways of thinking (1984, Brave New World, We, Anthem, The Time Machine, A Clockwork Orange, etc.) and so when we see the dystopian future that we hoped only existed in the realm of fiction (or at least somewhere other than the US and Western Europe) happening in our backyard, it becomes a discussion point.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
A couple questions:
When in US history has the government been taken over by rogue elements? In these cases did an Armed Citizenry actually stop said rogue elements?
In the numerous cases where the government has actually oppressed it's people (slavery, segregation, etc.), can you name a single instance of the armed citizenry stopping them?
If its ok to plot killing the president if its for a book?
I am sure most people are ok with people making an alternate reality that may be terroristic in nature if its for the purpose of a piece of art or whatever.
I am no rap fan, but if those are rap lyrics he is as guilty as a writer that wrote a terrorist plot.
Its not impossible to carry a serious message, but it is very possible and likely that its intention is not to be a bomb threat.
Armed citizenry is kind of how we broke free and ultimately formed the nation. Just because it wasn't specifically against the US government, it isn't any less valid.
The Armed citizenry was part of it, but you're missing a lot. The Prussian Drill Washington instituted under Baron von Steuben was the antithesis of Armed Citizens, and even with an Armed Citizenry and an actual army Washington couldn't win until after Admiral de Grasse delivered the historic coup de grasse at the battle of Chesepeake. Armed citizens could make it difficult for the British to hold territory, but they simply could not drive the British out.
And that was in the days when 100 guys with hunting rifles were better-armed then 100 combat troops with military-grade weapons. Nowadays military technology has moved on. A guy with a rifle is not a threat to any modern Army. What they fear are roadside bombs, IEDs, and similar devices.
Do you mean 1776? Because the change in government in 1774 was the creation of Congress, and if Congress is the "rogue element," that an Armed Citizenry is supposed to fight then the Armed Citizenry lost.
If you're trying to refer to 1776, as I mentioned in another post we couldn't have won that war without a professional army, the French Navy, and French money to pay for it all.
Even if you give the Armed Citizenry 100% credit, you have to ask how they'd beat the US Army today?
The Taliban have weapons orders of magnitude better then anything that has even been legal in the US because they have RPGs. Their backup weapon is better then anything currently street-legal in the US (fully auto AKs are not street legal). And yet most of their successful attacks are IEDs.
Military technology is changed. As a weapon today the rifle is where the sword was in 1860-65. It's useful militarily in certain tactical situations, but basing your entire tyranny-prevention policy on rifles...
In these cases did an Armed Citizenry actually stop said rogue elements?
46 years ago
But the unarmed citizenry was far more effective (MLK & Co.).
And in this day and age, it takes much less skill to build things that go boom than it does to learn to shoot well.
This.
The thing that will prevent tyranny is an educated populace, and the political faction most associated with the NRA is the same faction that is trying to gut education in this country.
They want everyone ignorant and afraid, so they can sell more guns.
"Remember, there never were pineapple-almond cookies here."
The thing that will prevent tyranny is an educated populace.
This simply can not be stressed enough.
And apologies for being a doofus and not actually reading what you wrote. Doh.
Life needs more saving throws.
A guy with a rifle is not a threat to any modern Army.
Yeah, cause we haven't lost any troops to guys with rifles in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Check the casualty figures.
IEDs are responsible for roughly 60% of our casualties. Every non-IED incident where we had multiple casualties is either a) an RPG, or b) a car bomb.
I didn't say rifles were useless. You can kill people with them. But if the people of America start taking potshots at marines with their rifles the people of America will get their asses kicked. Body Armor exists.
What they fear are roadside bombs, IEDs, and similar devices.
So explosives should be legal?
That would be a valid conclusion to draw if one believed an armed citizenry was a good idea.
I don't.
I grew up in a black area. In the black experience Armed Citizens are the ones who decide that a) they have a Constitutional right to oppress their neighbors, and b) the Federal government has no jurisdiction to stop them. About half the time they actually convince said Federal government of this fact. At various times this has led to actual slavery, KKK terrorism reducing the black population of various southern states by 20 points (in other words: genocide), segregation, etc.
As far as I can tell all an Armed Citizenry has ever done is a) get killed by the Army protesting taxes, and b) got rid of one corrupt Southern Sheriff. In modern times there are perfectly effective methods of protest that don't get anyone killed, so really all you've got is b). And trading one Sheriff for Segregation does not seem like a very good trade to me.
Not just educated, but educated in tyrannical regimes and systems from abusive relationships to cults to dictatorships which all share common elements apart from scale. Sociology of coercive persuasion in should be taught. 1984, Farenheit 451, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's nest and many others should all be required reading in school. It's not enough to teach math, science, and so forth. The Soviet Union and their satellites had fantastic educational systems when it comes to the sciences.