I think she’s guilty (you can’t be making threats like that on the heels of someone actually committing an act of violence) but even that is too much time. IDEK if she deserves jail time at all. I’d rather see her get a fine and maybe a month or two of community service.
I don’t believe that “You people are next.” is a direct threat.
Sounds pretty direct to me, especially in the context of recent events. I don’t fault the CS rep at all for reporting it to her superiors and the police. Totally reasonable to be wary of copycat crimes or just similar acts of violence against healthcare insurers in general.
“you people are next” doesn’t sound direct to me because “next” for what? Next for a random vigilante to shoot, next to die in general, next to face bad PR?
My interpretation also leaves no room to imply I’ll be the one actioning whatever the “next” thing is. I’d use “you’re next” in the same use case as “karma will get you” or “the universe will balance out your luck” it’s more of a cosmic wish than a rise to action.
She made a direct reference to the slogan used by the guy who murdered an insurance company’s CEO, then said, “you people are next.” That absolutely can reasonably be construed as a direct threat of violence. Whether or not you think the person making the threat will actually do it is another question, but the context and grammar the direct threat interpretation totally logical.
I can see how it’s directly linked to “people are out there shooting CEOs for this, you’re next” is threatening, but I dont see how the language of the threat implies that the person saying the threat has any intention to also be the shooter, and not just that they wish and believe that a shooter is out there with this CEO on their hit list.
I don’t think she was actually making a threat, but she sure chose to sound like she was, which was fucking stupid on her part. Given how the rest of the evidence makes it clear the threat wasn’t serious, I don’t think she should be charged as such, but perhaps a lesser charge that affords her a fine or something. Can’t let people get away with that shit, but charging her like she’s making a serious threat of violence is a waste of taxpayer money.
I think she’s guilty (you can’t be making threats like that on the heels of someone actually committing an act of violence) but even that is too much time. IDEK if she deserves jail time at all. I’d rather see her get a fine and maybe a month or two of community service.
I don’t believe that “You people are next.” is a direct threat.
What’s the cool-down timer on the free speech special ability ?
Asking for a friend.
Sounds pretty direct to me, especially in the context of recent events. I don’t fault the CS rep at all for reporting it to her superiors and the police. Totally reasonable to be wary of copycat crimes or just similar acts of violence against healthcare insurers in general.
“you people are next” doesn’t sound direct to me because “next” for what? Next for a random vigilante to shoot, next to die in general, next to face bad PR?
My interpretation also leaves no room to imply I’ll be the one actioning whatever the “next” thing is. I’d use “you’re next” in the same use case as “karma will get you” or “the universe will balance out your luck” it’s more of a cosmic wish than a rise to action.
She made a direct reference to the slogan used by the guy who murdered an insurance company’s CEO, then said, “you people are next.” That absolutely can reasonably be construed as a direct threat of violence. Whether or not you think the person making the threat will actually do it is another question, but the context and grammar the direct threat interpretation totally logical.
I can see how it’s directly linked to “people are out there shooting CEOs for this, you’re next” is threatening, but I dont see how the language of the threat implies that the person saying the threat has any intention to also be the shooter, and not just that they wish and believe that a shooter is out there with this CEO on their hit list.
I’m sure you don’t, but it’s a reasonable interpretation of what she said.
What do you mean by “special ability”?
I don’t think she was actually making a threat, but she sure chose to sound like she was, which was fucking stupid on her part. Given how the rest of the evidence makes it clear the threat wasn’t serious, I don’t think she should be charged as such, but perhaps a lesser charge that affords her a fine or something. Can’t let people get away with that shit, but charging her like she’s making a serious threat of violence is a waste of taxpayer money.