US and A is dumb, you should all be in jail.

[abbud]

In an online world where anyone can hide behind a mask of virtual anonymity, it can be easy to get carried away and do things deemed unconscionable in real life. However, one Mississippi man is facing up to ten years in jail after a half-hearted threat made in a game brought the federal authorities to his door.

- See more at: http://www.opposingviews.com/i/socie....Rt82Lwsy.dpuf

[abbud]

This kid, Josh Pillault went on a drunken rage and replied with death threats (seem familiar, anyone?)

Recently got sentenced to 72 months of prison after 9 months in custody.

First ammendment - nay, Murrica - YAY!

[Eslade]

Wow, that is bill shit. 85%of this community is going to jail.

[Sektor]

Hopefully Maximillen gets arrested for his crimes. =P

[mostbitter]

Originally Posted by Sektor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Hopefully Maximillen gets arrested for his crimes. =P

nah cant touch this

[HippoNipple]

Originally Posted by abbud [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This kid, Josh Pillault went on a drunken rage and replied with death threats (seem familiar, anyone?)

Recently got sentenced to 72 months of prison after 9 months in custody.

First ammendment - nay, Murrica - YAY!

Yeah our forefathers fought for a country where you had the freedom to threaten the lives of innocent families.

[mostbitter]

they kind of did if you think about it since back in the day speaking your mind was considered dangerous and actually did put families at risk but i digress cus u trollin

[HippoNipple]

Originally Posted by mostbitter [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

they kind of did if you think about it since back in the day speaking your mind was considered dangerous and actually did put families at risk but i digress cus u trollin

This is the complete opposite situation though. You are saying people were threatened for speaking their mind. If speaking your mind is threatening others lives then it has backfired and destroys the whole point of the amendment.

The end goal is that no one should fear for their safety. If someone is seriously threatening another's safety they should be punished.

[mostbitter]

if you read the article it clearly states the threats where not serious and they did not possess the means to act upon them

[HippoNipple]

Did not read, was just responding to Abbud's comment.