3 ms·
This is called fedposting and it's basically the message board version of what the FBI does to entrap Muslim terrorists and white supremacists IRL. The problem
by defen 4y ago
This is called fedposting and it's basically the message board version of what the FBI does to entrap Muslim terrorists and white supremacists IRL. The problem you're going to have with making it a crime is, where do you draw the line?
If someone gets in front of a big crowd and says "Donald Trump is a fascist, he's the next Hitler", and then one of those people takes the matter into his own hands - do you think the speaker should be found guilty of a crime?
- XorNot 4y agoThe speaker is pretty obviously guilty of incitement to violence if they were inciting violence. Which my parody above is demonstrating pretty clearly. Now, is one incident sufficient cause? Probably not. What if I launched a sustained campaign across multiple media against that HN user? What if that user starts receiving harassment and death threats? I am running a sustained campaign of making specific, targeted references to how desirable "doing something" about that user is with specific violent imagery, but stopping short of directly declaring that I want something to happen. You're far too comfortable pretending this can't be a crime, or shouldn't be a crime, because in reality you're pretty comfortable it won't happen to you.
- defen 4y agoIf someone actually does something, then yes, they should be guilty of a crime. I don't think it's possible to come up with a definition of "stochastic terrorism" in the way that you want, which doesn't result in a massive curtailment of civil liberties. How many acts of speech are necessary to make it into a crime? How many listeners / readers?