5 ms·

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.

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.