8 ms·
Next person who tries that will likely end up in jail.
by memracom 10y ago
Next person who tries that will likely end up in jail.
- yladiz 10y agoJoking? You can't be jailed for naming your phone or wifi Galaxy Note 7.
- joshmn 10y agoCreativity knows no boundaries, especially (unfortunately?) in America's legal system.
- jayajay 10y agoThis is true, but people don't want to hear it. Some sheeptard might flag your comment. I've had experience with restraining orders. Do people realize that you can literally be sent to court for harassment if whatever you do, X, is considered harassment by the victim? X can literally be anything, as long as the victim sees it as harassment, and is smart enough to feign (or be in) distress. If your action, X, can somehow be considered as terrorism or boy-who-cried-wolf, you can be detained by the Government. It's funny because people don't wanna hear that they "can be jailed for pretty much anything", even if it's more-or-less true. Even less so do they want to hear that their sorry asses are responsible for giving permission to the government to do this. Just remember the video of ISIS burning two Turks to a crisp. If that's not bad enough, which it isn't (our government doesn't give a shit about those two soldiers), remember 11am September 11, 2001, when two jets destroyed our tallest creations and killed so many people. In 2001, they fucked with us on our own turf. This is the reason why you're fucked if you make an Allah Akbar joke on a plane.
- Natsu 10y agoNot for naming it that, but for falsely implying the existence of an explosive device on the plane.
- user5994461 10y agoI am puzzled by how the headline switched from holding a random smartphone in one's pocket to wilfully carrying a dangerous explosive device.
- penagwin 10y agoIt's barred from flight by the FAA, presumably because it's known to... you know... explode... So I guess it would count as carrying a dangerous explosive device.
- simplexion 10y agoExcept they don't explode by definition and it is just the persistence by the media plus fear and ignorance that continues this stupidity. This Galaxy Note bullshit needs to die.
- crististm 10y agoThe Galaxy Note 7 will be outlived by stupidity and ignorance (not that it doesn't catch fire - you know what I mean)
- Natsu 10y agoI called it an explosive device because we now know that they literally explode. I grant that basically any large lithium batter can do the same (or be induced to do the same), but this one was both common and could go off accidentally, making it a more common and therefore likely threat.
- yarou 10y agoIt could very well be an honest mistake. Maybe whomever named it was trying to find the network on their Note 7. Suggesting that someone go to jail over "SSID naming convention contains Note 7" is absurd.
- Avernar 10y agoIf you announce verbally on a plane you have something that can explode even if you do not you will still get arrested/jailed. What difference does it make that you decided to do so electronically?
- jayajay 10y agoYou can be jailed for anything. That's what you accept when you give up your rights to a sovereign state, controlled by people who use fear.
- chrsstrm 10y agoThe scenario described is almost literally a modern interpretation of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. [0] Speech used to incite panic or create a riot can absolutely land you jail. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_theater https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_the...
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- jakeogh 10y agoA bad decision and a scapegoat for all kinds of nonsense. Where does it end? If everyone is afraid of X and someone says X! do they lose their 1st and not pass go? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyoOfRog1EM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyoOfRog1EM
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- harryf 10y agoI would suggest we start by blacklisting certain Emojis from being used in Hotspot names such as "️ ... ... ... 🇮🇷" ( image for those with clients that don't support those glyphs - http://i.imgur.com/hvz8yHY.png http://i.imgur.com/hvz8yHY.png )
- mdrzn 10y agoThanks for the image.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- metaphor 10y agoI was actually wondering the same thing. Hoping resident lawyer types chime in to discuss whether Schenck v. United States precedent is applicable.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- danaliv 10y agoI was going to say you can be jailed for interfering with a flight crew (and you can), but in this case you'd probably only incur civil penalties (fines).
- joshmn 10y agoCan we crowdfund this?
- asadlionpk 10y agoI can see some crazy youtuber attempting this soon.