TexasCHLforum.com

Two junior high students at a Katy ISD school were arrested Friday in connection with making terroristic threats. Administrators became concerned after reading a comment about damage to the campus and harming other students on a Facebook page.

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?secti ... id=8060576" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am beginning to wonder about these "terrorist threat" arrests stemming from internet postings.

WildBill wrote:Two junior high students at a Katy ISD school were arrested Friday in connection with making terroristic threats. Administrators became concerned after reading a comment about damage to the campus and harming other students on a Facebook page.

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?secti ... id=8060576" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am beginning to wonder about these "terrorist threat" arrests stemming from internet postings.

Junior high does seem a little early for such an extreme intervention, but society always responds to pressures brought against it. It is never a good time for students to contemplate violence at schools, even if it is merely an exercise in imagination.

There is a growing awareness (read advocacy) regarding the importance of monitoring social media to detect abuse, violence, bullying, and potential threats. The FCC has entertained numerous proposals in recent months to extend 'hate speech' legislation to cover such abuse (real and/or perceived).

It is a bit disconcerting--especially when weighed against 1st Ammendment rights. But then again, the 'virtual sticks and stones' that kids today deal with weren't even elements of fiction when the 1st Ammendment was written.

Pug wrote:It is a bit disconcerting--especially when weighed against 1st Ammendment rights. But then again, the 'virtual sticks and stones' that kids today deal with weren't even elements of fiction when the 1st Ammendment was written.

In his wildest dreams, I don't even think that Ben Franklin could have thought about this. Congress shall make no law abridging the right to make cyber threats or bullying.

I think that my major issue is arresting children, without exploring other methods of trying to curb this type of behavior. To me it is analogous to expelling children from school for drawing a picture of a gun. It reeks of other "zero tolerance" policies which I find odious.

WildBill wrote:

Pug wrote:It is a bit disconcerting--especially when weighed against 1st Ammendment rights. But then again, the 'virtual sticks and stones' that kids today deal with weren't even elements of fiction when the 1st Ammendment was written.

In his wildest dreams, I don't even think that Ben Franklin could have thought about this. Congress shall make no law abridging the right to make cyber threats or bullying.

I think that my major issue is arresting children, without exploring other methods of trying to curb this type of behavior. To me it is analogous to expelling children from school for drawing a picture of a gun. It reeks of other "zero tolerance" policies which I find odious.

Parents must teach the children that some things just ain't acceptable and actions have consequences. If the children don't get the message, arrest the parents.

I am sick and tired of excuses and molly-coddlin' miscreants...of all races, creeds and ages.

Oldgringo wrote:Parents must teach the children that some things just ain't acceptable and actions have consequences. If the children don't get the message, arrest the parents.

I am sick and tired of excuses and molly-coddlin' miscreants...of all races, creeds and ages.

Children can't make cyber terrorist threats without access to a computer and most children don't make enough money to buy their own.

WildBill wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:Parents must teach the children that some things just ain't acceptable and actions have consequences. If the children don't get the message, arrest the parents.

I am sick and tired of excuses and molly-coddlin' miscreants...of all races, creeds and ages.

Children can't make cyber terrorist threats without access to a computer and most children don't make enough money to buy their own.

Rather than being given a computer, etc., maybe the children should {GASP} earn their computer, etc.?

It all goes back to parenting and expectations set...or lack thereof, IMO. Actions have consequences; the sooner that lesson is learned, the better for the parent unit as well as the offspring...and the rest of humanity.

But then again, the 'virtual sticks and stones' that kids today deal with weren't even elements of fiction when the 1st Ammendment was written.

The ability to deliver anonymous messages existed back then as well.

Children can't make cyber terrorist threats without access to a computer and most children don't make enough money to buy their own.

Public libraries, and many schools, offer access to both computers and the "innernets", free of charge.

Parents must teach the children that some things just ain't acceptable and actions have consequences.

IMO, the failure to hold individuals accountable for their actions, and to suffer the consequences of their failure, is the largest problem we face as a society today. This problem exists in EVERY facet of our society, and will only grow worse.

Texas Dan Mosby wrote:
...IMO, the failure to hold individuals accountable for their actions, and to suffer the consequences of their failure, is the largest problem we face as a society today. This problem exists in EVERY facet of our society, and will only grow worse.

Totally agree!

Everything is not someone else's fault. We all, regardless of race, creed or age, must be held accountable for our actions. It is the American way, er...uh, well, it used to be the American way.

Pug wrote:It is a bit disconcerting--especially when weighed against 1st Ammendment rights. But then again, the 'virtual sticks and stones' that kids today deal with weren't even elements of fiction when the 1st Ammendment was written.

This argument bothers me. It's exactly the same argument you hear from antis when discussing the 2A and modern weapons.

The other side to the coin is there are kids this yung following through with these threats...

Kinda like - why do you carry at the grocery store it is in a safe neighborhood? = guess right or carry 24/7

Why did you arrest that kid for making the threat on the internet - just blowing off steam = guess right or take them all seriously.

JMPHO

If someone made a terrorist threat to you, could you shoot them? I don't think that you could.

WildBill wrote:If someone made a terrorist threat to you, could you shoot them? I don't think that you could.

I think the bigger question here is, 'could you get away with it'?

G192627 wrote:

Pug wrote:It is a bit disconcerting--especially when weighed against 1st Ammendment rights. But then again, the 'virtual sticks and stones' that kids today deal with weren't even elements of fiction when the 1st Ammendment was written.

This argument bothers me. It's exactly the same argument you hear from antis when discussing the 2A and modern weapons.

Not an argument -- just an observation. The fact is the anonymity provide via the internet and social networking leads to greater irresponsible behavior (read 'lack of appropriate boundaries'). It is a fact, observable, and a concern. Does it implicate that 1st Ammendment rights should be in any way altered? Not in my perspective. It does suggest, however, that there should be a leveraged responsibility and accountability for both one's words and one's actions -- regardless of the medium.

Just sayin' . . .

Oldgringo wrote:

WildBill wrote:If someone made a terrorist threat to you, could you shoot them? I don't think that you could.

I think the bigger question here is, 'could you get away with it'?

I'm not sure I understand. Get away with what?