4 ms·
Most people are wise enough to know you don't mention the B word in an airport, just as it's not a good idea to make sarcastic remarks to immigration officers w
by dazc 8y ago
Most people are wise enough to know you don't mention the B word in an airport, just as it's not a good idea to make sarcastic remarks to immigration officers when they are checking your passport.
The guy deserved to be inconvenienced for stupidity, if nothing else.
- geofft 8y agoInconveniencing people for their stupidity is not a legitimate use of the government's monopoly on violence. It might be an acceptable side effect in pursuit of a legitimate end, but it is not an end in itself.
- orf 8y ago> Inconveniencing people for their stupidity is not a legitimate use of the government's monopoly on violence. It absolutely and very clearly is, especially when that stupidity ends up costing the taxpayer money. Not wearing a seatbelt is stupidity, and people not wearing it should be inconvenienced.
- icebraining 8y agoAre you serious? What money does making a joke on Twitter cost? The money was spent because they chose to prosecute it, not the other way around.
- orf 8y agoIn what world don't the police spend any time or money investigating bomb threats?
- netsharc 8y agoA world where any sane person would realize the "threats" are made in jest and not to be taken seriously. But oh well, that's not this world, where there is a lack of sanity and too many humorless absolutists like you, who obviously are dead certain that "You can't joke about that!".
- orf 8y agoNext time you are at an airport, go up to the sanest looking person and threaten to blow the place up. See if they laugh.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- icebraining 8y agoSounds like you're inciting the parent poster to commit a crime.
- netsharc 8y agoIf I do that I don't mind being detained, interrogated, and have my apartment searched, because doing that without context would not allow the sane person to realize that my threat have been made in jest and not to be taken seriously. Meanwhile the tweet "Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!!" is (at least to me) obviously a joke. But oh well, seems like a lot of the world (you included) have self-imposed Asperger's and operate with brains only capable of only working in binary. The saying "If only more people in the world were like you" needs to have an inverse...
- icebraining 8y agoYes. And also potential terrorists. So they'll have to investigate the stupid people who happen to access such propaganda. And so they'll be convicted for wasting the taxpayer's money. Hence why we dislike this law.
- geofft 8y agoAvoiding wastes of taxpayer money is a legitimate goal for which to use the powers of government. Penalizing the stupidity that led to it is not, and this distinction matters because there may be other, more effective ways to avoid wasting taxpayer money than penalizing stupidity. (For instance, as the other reply mentions, maybe the government could be more cautious about what they choose to spend taxpayer money on.) So setting your goal appropriately matters.
- dazc 8y agoBe careful though else 'just being stupid' becomes a legitimate defence for all manner of misdemeanours?
- geofft 8y agoBeing stupid is not a crime, so it is therefore also not a defense. If, through your stupidity, you threaten or injure something for which it is a legitimate purpose of government to defend, the government may take action to defend it, and your stupidity is irrelevant. If your stupidity is harmless, then the defense is that you didn't harm anything, not that you were stupid in doing so.
- icebraining 8y agoHe wasn't in an airport.
- dazc 8y agoForgive me. Working from a sketchy memory of how the incident was originally reported.