• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comment

Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

I can agree in today's world it was not the best time to post such comments on facebook.
However, since the lol, etc was added at the end and taking the post in context, is was sarcasim.

It is a shame the US has evolved to the point it is in. A few bad apples makes everyone a suspect.

I for one am tired of the political correctness and having to watch what you say because you may offend someone, or what you say is taken as a literal threat.

LE should have talked to the teens and parents. End of case.

Yep, we are also a country of its always someone elses fault.

I agree that is was probably just sarcasm. He wanted a reaction and, boy, did he get one.

Exactly. There have been cases where people have made threats online and carried out those threats, but they were initially ignored because people assumed they were joking or being sarcastic and they didn't want to "take it too seriously". The guy probably should not have been arrested, but taking his comment seriously and investigating it is not out of line.

Yeah, he probably shouldn't be in jail but I have no problem with authorities looking into the potential threat. I imagine the thinking right now is to take all such threats seriously, at least, initially.
 
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

I wouldn't arrest him, but I don't think it'd be too far out of the question for a black-and-white to do a quick drive-by that day, unless they're just strapped on time.
 
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

Posting "lol" after such a comment could just as easily indicate psychopathy as it could indicate sarcasm. The problem is that you're looking at this from the perspective of knowing that the guy wasn't serious. If the guy had been serious, we'd be looking at the same post and saying, "what a psychopath. I can't believe he laughed about it."

I never said LE should not investigate. It seems that if they did a proper one, it was clear the teenager had no criminal intent.
 
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

I think the addition of eating their still beating hearts pushed this into the realm of "obvious satire".

When we said 'rip out your still beating heart and make you eat it' or 'I'll eat your still beating heart' you'd best hope it was satire...

You couldn't be 100% sure, it is a classic macho line from my grunt days. just saying without knowing someone in person, what is said on the interwebz can easily be taken the wrong way.

Who knows the full history of this 'innocent' kid. I doubt he never resorted to 'who-ahh' crap talk like that before. :roll:

Quite a few 'patriots' in here get carried away with loose talk of revolution and the like. Most are just blowing smoke out of their 4th point of contact, but ya never really know...
 
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

Convicting for that kid's remark is inconsistent with the laws and courts cases that that have established the parameters of an illegal threat.
 
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

I never said LE should not investigate. It seems that if they did a proper one, it was clear the teenager had no criminal intent.
Fair enough. I just wanted to comment on other potential meanings for "lol" and other seeming signals of non-malicious intentions.
 
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

I've always been opposed to restrictions on free speech simply because the speech either offends someone, or carries the possibility of harm.

For example:

Sexual harassment; as the video report provided in post #2 states, has been determined to be whatever someone who feels "offended" considers offensive. This leads to some really drastic outcomes. Case in point, I attended a recent "training session" where one example used was a man who had a picture of his wife and kids at the beach, where the wife was wearing a bikini. If a female co-worker passing his desk was offended, he would be required to remove the photo and face a counseling session on sexual harassment.

Offensive speech: I've personally experienced the kind of reaction shown on college campuses where radicals think only their speech should be protected. After leaving the Army I attended a university to get a graduate degree, and was elected to the student government as a graduate senator. A group called "Citizens in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador" [CISPES] held a peace conference. I attended as a visitor, not a speaker, but was asked my opinion of the low turnout for the event by a local newspaper. I merely stated that I thought it would have attracted more notice if the program included more controversy through debates between opposing viewpoints. CISPES immediately reacted by trying to get me impeached. When that failed they would come to senate meetings and disrupt them whenever I spoke, then tried to impede my re-election by disrupting public debates I had with my opponents. (I actually got re-elected by the highest vote for the position in 15 years.) :lol:

I've always felt that words only have the power that each person gives to them. Take the word “nigger;” when a White uses it toward a Black it is “hate speech” and grants the Black the right to strike back with near-impunity due to “incitement.” However, the same word used by a Black against another Black in a violent beat-down…perfectly okay even though it is being used to denigrate the person being beaten.

You cannot shield people from ideas, nor prevent or even inhibit evil thoughts or deeds by stifling free speech rights. The ideas will simply go underground and people with evil intent will still act regardless. But by allowing laws that limit expression due to offense or fear of the mere possibility of harm, you are only serving to severely restrict your own freedom.

Freedom of speech is not freedom from the consequences of what you say. It is merely the freedom to say it.
 
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

Freedom of speech is not freedom from the consequences of what you say. It is merely the freedom to say it.

True, but why make so much speech "illegal" simply because it offends or holds the mere possibility (not probability) of harm?
 
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

True, but why make so much speech "illegal" simply because it offends or holds the mere possibility (not probability) of harm?

I didn't say anything about making speech illegal or limiting it any way. You have me confused with someone else.
 
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

I didn't say anything about making speech illegal or limiting it any way. You have me confused with someone else.

As long as the consequence are: ignoring you, avoiding you, or debating you, no problem.

But if the consequences include criminal punishment because others think you have offended them (ex. "sexual harassment" law) or may possibly commit harm (i.e. publish a book someone might use as a guide to blow people up), no way.

Nor if the consequences include assaulting you, battering you, or any other violent response, again, no way.

After all, no one has to listen to you, read your work, or watch your movie. They can just move on....
 
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

We're talking about Texas here. I wouldn't live in Texas because it seems the insane is running the asylum in that state.

Don't mess with Texas!

rodeoclown.jpg
 
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

True, but why make so much speech "illegal" simply because it offends or holds the mere possibility (not probability) of harm?

To be successfully sued for sexual harassment in the workplace it needs to be proven that the speech and/or behavior created a hostile work environment for the co-worker by reasonable standards. I susepct that you might disagree with the outcome of certain specific cases, but I think you would have to agree that is possible for speech based harassment to happen. If you worked at a job where all your co-workers and supervisors were black and constantly seriously suggested that stupid white honkies should be deported or killed and made jokes about how they would enjoy raping you, wouldn't that constitute actionable harassment?
 
Last edited:
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

To be successfully sued for sexual harassment in the workplace it needs to be proven that the speech and/or behavior created a hostile work environment for the co-worker by reasonable standards.

Did you watch the video I posted? It only requires that the person "thinks" it is. All they have to do is say that they are offended and BAM, you're being successfully sued. Examples were given in the video.
 
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

Did you watch the video I posted? It only requires that the person "thinks" it is. All they have to do is say that they are offended and BAM, you're being successfully sued. Examples were given in the video.

I have attended numerous training sessions on harassment. One incident, unless extremely severe, is not enough for a successful harassment complaint resulting in workplace, criminal or civil punishment.

A good discussion overview of harassment laws, with examples is at: Work Place Harassment Law & Legal Definition

"Workplace harassment is any unwanted or undesirable conduct that puts down or shows hostility or an aversion toward another person at the workplace. It is an act done by any person at the workplace intending to make the other uncomfortable. Harassment may be by the employers, co-workers, or customers. Workplace harassment may be based on an individual's race, sex, color, national origin, age, religion, disability, marital status, medical condition, pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity, family, looks or other characteristics protected by law.

The following is an example of a state law dealing with harassment:

"2 CCR § 7287.6. (b) Harassment.

(1) Harassment includes but is not limited to:

(A) Verbal harassment, e.g., epithets, derogatory comments or slurs on a basis enumerated in the Act;
(B) Physical harassment, e.g., assault, impeding or blocking movement, or any physical interference with normal work or movement, when directed at an individual on a basis enumerated in the Act;
(C) Visual forms of harassment, e.g., derogatory posters, cartoons, or drawings on a basis enumerated in the Act; or
(D) Sexual favors, e.g., unwanted sexual advances which condition an employment benefit upon an exchange of sexual favors. [See also Section 7291.1 (f) (l).]
(E) In applying this subsection, the rights of free speech and association shall be accommodated consistently with the intent of this subsection.
(2) Harassment of an applicant or employee by an employer or other covered entity, its agents or supervisors is unlawful.
(3) Harassment of an applicant or employee by an employee other than those listed in subsection (b)(2) above is unlawful if the employer or other covered entity, its agents or supervisors knows of such conduct and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective action. Proof of such knowledge may be direct or circumstantial. If the employer or other covered entity, its agents or supervisors did not know but should have known of the harassment, knowledge shall be imputed unless the employer or other covered entity can establish that it took reasonable steps to prevent harassment from occurring. Such steps may include affirmatively raising the subject of harassment, expressing strong disapproval, developing appropriate sanctions, informing employees of their right to raise and how to raise the issue of harassment under California law, and developing methods to sensitize all concerned.
(4) An employee who has been harassed on the job by a co-employee should inform the employer or other covered entity of the aggrievement; however, an employee's failure to give such notice is not an affirmative defense.
(c) Physical Appearance, Grooming, and Dress Standards. It is lawful for an employer or other covered entity to impose upon an employee physical appearance, grooming, or dress standards. However, if such a standard discriminates on a basis enumerated in the Act and if it also significantly burdens the individual in his or her employment, it is unlawful.
(d) Reasonable Discipline. Nothing in these regulations may be construed as limiting an employer's or other covered entity's right to take reasonable disciplinary measures which do not discriminate on a basis enumerated in the Act.
(e) Seniority. (Reserved.)...."
 
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

To be successfully sued for sexual harassment in the workplace it needs to be proven that the speech and/or behavior created a hostile work environment for the co-worker by reasonable standards. I susepct that you might disagree with the outcome of certain specific cases, but I think you would have to agree that is possible for speech based harassment to happen. If you worked at a job where all your co-workers and supervisors were black and constantly seriously suggested that stupid white honkies should be deported or killed and made jokes about how they would enjoy raping you, wouldn't that constitute actionable harassment?

The problem is a suit, successful or not, still costs a business time and money as well as bad press. To prevent even a threat of that, they act internally. Watch that video on post #2...listen to then CEO and NOW Mayor of NYC Bloomberg say he would fire a person rather than get sued. Listen to the "paid consultant" say it is determined by the person who feels offended. Read my post explaining what we were recently taught regarding a picture of a man's wife and kids on a beach...

It does not matter if there is real grounds for a suit, the employers don't want to deal with the problem. Besides, you are talking about a hostile work environment in your scenario. Different kettle of fish, and if there were no regulations the boss could just fire people until he got a group who could work together without that kind of grief. Nothing to do with racism, just workplace cooperation.
 
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

1. The problem is a suit, successful or not, still costs a business time and money as well as bad press. To prevent even a threat of that, they act internally. Watch that video on post #2...listen to then CEO and NOW Mayor of NYC Bloomberg say he would fire a person rather than get sued. Listen to the "paid consultant" say it is determined by the person who feels offended. Read my post explaining what we were recently taught regarding a picture of a man's wife and kids on a beach...

It does not matter if there is real grounds for a suit, the employers don't want to deal with the problem. 2. Besides, you are talking about a hostile work environment in your scenario. Different kettle of fish, and if there were no regulations the boss could just fire people until he got a group who could work together without that kind of grief. Nothing to do with racism, just workplace cooperation.

1. Its a job. They pay you to be there and do what the employer asks. If they ask you not to say or do things that bother another employee, you are obligated to do it. It is also the ethical, polite and considerate thing to do. The employer is obligated to make sure that employees are not harassed or discriminated against. It is rarely a genuine violation of free speech.

2. I was responding to the claim that speech is illegal, which is not true, it is discrimination and harassment that are illegal in the workplace.

These laws have been in effect for many years now, with relatively few outrageous decisions. In most cases, understanding the whole story, not just the headline, shows why the decision was reasonable. Business interests looking to save money or avoid risk promote anecdotes about outrageous court decisions to make these laws seem worse than a closer look at the statistics and the big picture would show.
 
Last edited:
Re: Teen Justin Carter Jailed In Texas After Making Sarcastic Threat In Facebook Comm

As long as the consequence are: ignoring you, avoiding you, or debating you, no problem.

But if the consequences include criminal punishment because others think you have offended them (ex. "sexual harassment" law) or may possibly commit harm (i.e. publish a book someone might use as a guide to blow people up), no way.

Nor if the consequences include assaulting you, battering you, or any other violent response, again, no way.

After all, no one has to listen to you, read your work, or watch your movie. They can just move on....

The consequences of speech are what they are. All I said was there is freedom of speech, not freedom from consequences and that is the way it is.
 
Back
Top Bottom