Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

http://reason.com/blog/2015/06/05/monta ... peech-case" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Spandos, I'd stay out of Montana until the SCOTUS gives them the assraping they deserve

http://m.missoulian.com/news/local/susp ... touch=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Typical hateful Donk

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:http://m.missoulian.com/news/local/susp ... touch=true


Typical hateful Donk

They need to charge him with threats and/or assault.

Not "speech" crimes

I hear they're not fond of the Jews down in Lake County either.

Love how Reason tried to spin a "douche-loser threatens to kill schoolchildren" into an anti-Semitic free speech oppression cause.

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:http://m.missoulian.com/news/local/susp ... touch=true


Typical hateful Donk

No shit, and a transient piece of shit too. Just moved to Montana 45 days before.

travelinman67 wrote:Love how Reason tried to spin a "douche-loser threatens to kill schoolchildren" into an anti-Semitic free speech oppression cause.

That's exactly what this is.

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:http://m.missoulian.com/news/local/susp ... touch=true


Typical hateful Donk

Nope, just another paranoid gun fuck like you and 93.

Obama Will Try to Take Our Guns in His 2nd Term!” (parts one and two).

Grizalltheway wrote:

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:http://m.missoulian.com/news/local/susp ... touch=true


Typical hateful Donk

Nope, just another paranoid gun fuck like you and 93.

Yep, your typical Occupy Wall Street Conk.

In 2011, Lenio participated in and made cellphone videos of the Occupy Denver protests, according to Hutson, posting them online to his YouTube account under the alias “David Dave.”

“He expressed anger at law enforcement officials for disbursing the Occupy Denver tent city across from the steps of the Capitol,” Hutson said. “He stated that homeless people should be able to camp for free on public lands.”

I know and a certain poster stupid enough to believe that this guy is a gun Conk is still trying to act like Obama didnt make several runs at taking our guns. but as usual he and Obama failed miserably.

travelinman67 wrote:Love how Reason tried to spin a "douche-loser threatens to kill schoolchildren" into an anti-Semitic free speech oppression cause.

Reason does take a chicken little approach to this - but on the defamation charge they are correct in principle.

There are laws against making threats of bodily harm - defamation isn't one of them. If we start taking a broader view of the very limited speech statutes that are already in existence, it isnt a very long leap before we have people criminalizing criticisms they dont agree with

this is called fishing for charges trying to get something to stick - similar to what the Baltimore DA is doing. If you have to twist and turn to find something to charge this guy with then your state laws against threats and assault are not sufficient and need to be looked at

CID1990 wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:Love how Reason tried to spin a "douche-loser threatens to kill schoolchildren" into an anti-Semitic free speech oppression cause.

Reason does take a chicken little approach to this - but on the defamation charge they are correct in principle.

There are laws against making threats of bodily harm - defamation isn't one of them. If we start taking a broader view of the very limited speech statutes that are already in existence, it isnt a very long leap before we have people criminalizing criticisms they dont agree with

this is called fishing for charges trying to get something to stick - similar to what the Baltimore DA is doing. If you have to twist and turn to find something to charge this guy with then your state laws against threats and assault are not sufficient and need to be looked at

Agreed. I've voiced my disagreement with "hate speech" laws MANY times. Whether anti-gay, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, even Rascist...words critical ( but not threatening or overtly endangering the safety of others) of anything cannot be viewed as criminal.
This shitbag's threats should have been suffecient. Just as a threat against the POTUS, minimally, the responsible becomes an honored member of the Quarterly Interview club, otherwise they get a vacation at Club Fed.

Lesson learned...keep your fucking mouth shut.

This idiot is no McVeigh, when Tim talked................oh wait he didnt talk, he walked the walk.

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:This idiot is no McVeigh, when Tim talked................oh wait he didnt talk, he walked the walk.

And he wouldn't have been caught dead at an Occupy protest.

This guy was at an occupy rally.......see my previous post directed at you in another thread.

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:This guy was at an occupy rally.......see my previous post directed at you in another thread.

I was talking about McVeigh. And I've never required hormone therapy!

Grizalltheway wrote:

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:http://m.missoulian.com/news/local/susp ... touch=true


Typical hateful Donk

Nope, just another paranoid gun **** like you and 93.

Obama Will Try to Take Our Guns in His 2nd Term!” (parts one and two).

He's trying right now. Posted today, Obama's most recent proposal threatens gun blogs, videos, web forums.

".....In updating regulations governing international arms sales, State is demanding that anyone who puts technical details about arms and ammo on the web first get the OK from the federal government — or face a fine of up to $1 million and 20 years in jail.

According to the NRA, that would include blogs and web forums discussing technical details of common guns and ammunition, the type of info gun owners and ammo reloaders trade all the time.

"Gunsmiths, manufacturers, reloaders, and do-it-yourselfers could all find themselves muzzled under the rule and unable to distribute or obtain the information they rely on to conduct these activities," said the NRA in a blog posting......

......At issue is the internet. State is updating International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), which implement the federal Arms Export Control Act (AECA). The rules govern everything from guns to strategic bombers.

The NRA said that the rules predate the internet, and now the federal government wants to regulate technical arms discussions on on the internationally available web.

State's proposal is highly technical. It took 14 pages in the Federal Register to explain. But the NRA boiled it down for gun owners with this warning:......." (Continues on for a page or 2 of details).
http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/nra-gun ... le/2565762" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's gonna be awesome when the people that own no guns get dealt with.

Typical hateful conk.
Reporting that threat to the FBI, btw.

Good, then I can explain the difference between a threat and an observation.