8 ms·

> Ige, in his speech, deplored the fact that employees of the emergency management agency were getting death threats since the events of Saturday. Sounds like

> Ige, in his speech, deplored the fact that employees of the emergency management agency were getting death threats since the events of Saturday. Sounds like they need to prosecute some people for terroristic threats to the fullest extent of the law. I understand being pissed off about the false alarm, but sending death threats should be an automatic jail sentence at minimum.

evfanknitram 9y ago
Why do you see that as terrorism?
- bovermyer 9y ago
  Because that's literally the law: > TERRORISTIC THREAT > > (a) A person commits an offense if he threatens to commit any offense involving violence to any person or property with intent to: > > 2. place any person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury;
  - bagels 9y ago
    The operator did not threaten to commit violence.
    - dsnuh 9y ago
      The OP was referring to the people threatening the operators for the mistake.
  - jpindar 9y ago
    That's a fucked up law. If some guys in a bar start arguing about a spilled drink and one says "I'm gonna punch you!", that shouldn't be considered terrorism! Terrorism used to mean violence or a real threat of violence committed for political reasons. Now it just means any crime committed by someone whose motives (or whose ethnic group) the speaker disapproves of.
    - vpribish 9y ago
      it's not "terrorism" it's a "terroristic threat" - same root, but different words and very different meaning as commonly used. no one is equating a drunken bar confrontation and suicide bombing, except you.
      - evfanknitram 9y ago
        He didn't equate them though, that was his whole point.
        vpribish 9y ago
        he says he thinks the words mean the same thing to the authorities -- which they do not; that would be crazy.
  - 794CD01 9y ago
    The intent of most death threats these days, almost certainly including these, is simply to express dissatisfaction, not to "place any person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury", even if that's how an outside observer unfamiliar with cultural context might interpret it.
    - lutorm 9y ago
      That is ridiculous. While it may be done out of dissatisfaction, it is most definitely made for the purpose of "placing the person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury."
      - 794CD01 9y ago
        It is ridiculous because it is an accurate statement about modern internet culture, which is ridiculous.
    - theandrewbailey 9y ago
      > The intent of most death threats ... is simply to express dissatisfaction Are they? There are plenty of other ways to do that without (pardon me) going nuclear. Many death threats go so far as to include someone's family, friends, and other acquaintances. If it's mere dissatisfaction being expressed, why go that far if not to put someone in fear?
      - 794CD01 9y ago
        For the same reason different populations might complain by calling the customer support hotline on the back of the box or by submitting a pull request. That's how this group has learned is "the way" to do this.
macintux 9y ago
Somehow we've landed in a world where death threats, swatting, etc don't generally have any real consequences, and that makes me very sad.
getpost 9y ago
The state sent out a death threat! People are just letting the government know how they feel. The design of this system is grossly negligent, which IS a management problem. It does look like a web page. How is the page served? An internal secure setup on a private network? Is the browser ever updated? Is there javascript? The number of failure modes on this type of setup is unconstrained. How are updates tested? It appears to me that somebody just put something together without any design or validation process at all. This is fine in many settings, but not for critical public safety infrastructure.
- mannykannot 9y ago
  A warning, whether mistaken or not, is not a death threat, and a death threat is not just a complaint.
  - jaclaz 9y ago
    >A warning, whether mistaken or not, is not a death threat, and a death threat is not just a complaint. I don't think there is exactly the same crime in all the states of the US, but there is in some states (as well as in many other countries) the crime of "false public alarm". Example, you start crying "Fire!" in a crowded cinema or public place: http://mollolawfirm.com/resources/criminal-law-resources/false-public-alarm/ http://mollolawfirm.com/resources/criminal-law-resources/fal... P.S.: Meantime in Japan: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/first-hawaii-now-japan-sends-a-false-alarm-about-incoming-north-korean-missile/2018/01/16/d8961ef4-fac1-11e7-b832-8c26844b74fb_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/first-hawa... but this was not the governemnet, it was the NHK and they were very fast to send a correct message.
    - kevindqc 9y ago
      There's a difference between crying "Fire!" to willingly cause panic over nothing (ie: intent to cause harm), and a mistake... Text from your first link even says that: > A person is guilty of a crime of the third degree if he knowingly causes such false alarm [...]

evfanknitram 9y ago

Why do you see that as terrorism?

bovermyer 9y ago
Because that's literally the law: > TERRORISTIC THREAT > > (a) A person commits an offense if he threatens to commit any offense involving violence to any person or property with intent to: > > 2. place any person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury;
- bagels 9y ago
  The operator did not threaten to commit violence.
  - dsnuh 9y ago
    The OP was referring to the people threatening the operators for the mistake.
- jpindar 9y ago
  That's a fucked up law. If some guys in a bar start arguing about a spilled drink and one says "I'm gonna punch you!", that shouldn't be considered terrorism! Terrorism used to mean violence or a real threat of violence committed for political reasons. Now it just means any crime committed by someone whose motives (or whose ethnic group) the speaker disapproves of.
  - vpribish 9y ago
    it's not "terrorism" it's a "terroristic threat" - same root, but different words and very different meaning as commonly used. no one is equating a drunken bar confrontation and suicide bombing, except you.
    - evfanknitram 9y ago
      He didn't equate them though, that was his whole point.
      - vpribish 9y ago
        he says he thinks the words mean the same thing to the authorities -- which they do not; that would be crazy.
- 794CD01 9y ago
  The intent of most death threats these days, almost certainly including these, is simply to express dissatisfaction, not to "place any person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury", even if that's how an outside observer unfamiliar with cultural context might interpret it.
  - lutorm 9y ago
    That is ridiculous. While it may be done out of dissatisfaction, it is most definitely made for the purpose of "placing the person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury."
    - 794CD01 9y ago
      It is ridiculous because it is an accurate statement about modern internet culture, which is ridiculous.
  - theandrewbailey 9y ago
    > The intent of most death threats ... is simply to express dissatisfaction Are they? There are plenty of other ways to do that without (pardon me) going nuclear. Many death threats go so far as to include someone's family, friends, and other acquaintances. If it's mere dissatisfaction being expressed, why go that far if not to put someone in fear?
    - 794CD01 9y ago
      For the same reason different populations might complain by calling the customer support hotline on the back of the box or by submitting a pull request. That's how this group has learned is "the way" to do this.

macintux 9y ago

Somehow we've landed in a world where death threats, swatting, etc don't generally have any real consequences, and that makes me very sad.

getpost 9y ago

The state sent out a death threat! People are just letting the government know how they feel. The design of this system is grossly negligent, which IS a management problem. It does look like a web page. How is the page served? An internal secure setup on a private network? Is the browser ever updated? Is there javascript? The number of failure modes on this type of setup is unconstrained. How are updates tested? It appears to me that somebody just put something together without any design or validation process at all. This is fine in many settings, but not for critical public safety infrastructure.

mannykannot 9y ago
A warning, whether mistaken or not, is not a death threat, and a death threat is not just a complaint.
- jaclaz 9y ago
  >A warning, whether mistaken or not, is not a death threat, and a death threat is not just a complaint. I don't think there is exactly the same crime in all the states of the US, but there is in some states (as well as in many other countries) the crime of "false public alarm". Example, you start crying "Fire!" in a crowded cinema or public place: http://mollolawfirm.com/resources/criminal-law-resources/false-public-alarm/ http://mollolawfirm.com/resources/criminal-law-resources/fal... P.S.: Meantime in Japan: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/first-hawaii-now-japan-sends-a-false-alarm-about-incoming-north-korean-missile/2018/01/16/d8961ef4-fac1-11e7-b832-8c26844b74fb_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/first-hawa... but this was not the governemnet, it was the NHK and they were very fast to send a correct message.
  - kevindqc 9y ago
    There's a difference between crying "Fire!" to willingly cause panic over nothing (ie: intent to cause harm), and a mistake... Text from your first link even says that: > A person is guilty of a crime of the third degree if he knowingly causes such false alarm [...]