Re: Student Arrested for zombie attack plan
Rodney Blackwell wrote:
> Right, however, in this case, we don’t know which is which. Are you claiming
> to know all the facts and to know for certain what was going on in this kids
I’m claiming to know enough that I know our government shouldn’t have
> Do you know what his true intentions were?
This is EXACTLY my point. No one knows for sure what his intentions
are/were. No you, not me, not the school, not his parents, not the
government. For anyone to assume they understand what this kid was
thinking is wrong. To be suspected of a crime because the government
believes they have the right to guess what is going on in your mind, is
against every principle upon which this country was founded.
We are feel to think, feel, speak, write, publish, and believe as we
wish. That is the definition of freedom and liberty as we know it. What
we are not free to do is act as we wish. And this kid committed no
punishible act. Yet he has been labeled as a suspected “terrorist” by
his government. If you believe that that is rational, legal, and
acceptable; I’m sorry, but I can’t agree. Nor could the founders of this
> Actually, the kid did break a law, which is why they arrested him.
> At what point does it stop becoming “literature” and start becoming a
> “threat”? Once the kid has already shot up the school?
Yes. That’s the sad reality of it. That’s exactly when it stops becoming
a thought, and when it becomes a crime. We are not only constitutionally
protected from the so-call “thought police”, the UN re-affirmed those
basic human rights in 1948.
It’s sad that some people can’t understand that every person is free to
think, speak, believe, write, and publish as they wish; no matter who
disagrees with it. Freedom of speech is an absolute. It’s either
completely free, or it’s not at all.
>>Our entire judicial system is predicated on the notion of precendents.
> I don’t agree that precendents set the final word, or that our system is
> predicated on it.
I don’t claim to have a law degree, but it is a basic fact that our
legislative and judicial systems are predicated on the notion of precedents.
> New precendents are created all the time, and old precendents are thrown out
> for irrelevancy all the time.
Agreed. But once the precendents are set, it’s a long, hard fight to
have them reversed. In that time, irreparable damage is usually done.
>>The fact that this child can be labeled a suspected criminal (and much
>>worse, “terrorist”) for writing a story about zombies, is not only
>>outrageous, it’s downright preposterous.
> Again, we don’t know the facts here, only the few snippets that were
I’m not speaking only specifically about this one case. I’m speaking
about the general case of our government currently overstepping their
bounds, in order to control the way we think, speak, and act.
> If it is just story though, I don’t see the harm in at least investigating
> it (not necessarily arresting the kid), just to make sure that he had no
> intentions behind it.
Investigating, maybe. So far as “investigation” means the school and the
child’s parents review the literature, then ask him about it. Instead,
this kid was arrested, his home was searched, and he was labeled as a
“terrorist” (charged with “terroristic threats”) in his community.
>>We’re trying to protect these children. Falsely turning them into
>>suspected criminals has the opposite effect of protection. It is a
>>dangerous and careless harm to these children, their families, their
>>peers, and their communities.
> We don’t know if it was false or not.
I believe it was, based on the small amount of information I have. If
the “writings” at all contained mention of “zombies”, how could one