Here's what I don't get:
If you want to reduce threats nationwide, why do we need to determine intent?
Why aren't ALL threats simply treated as if they were realistic, and ensure that those making threats are prosecuted?
If you want to reduce threats nationwide, why do we need to determine intent?
Why aren't ALL threats simply treated as if they were realistic, and ensure that those making threats are prosecuted?
If a reasonable person thinks that a statement is a threat of physical or psychological harm, made either directly to a potential victim, or regarding a third person/class of individuals, and that potential victim wishes for that individual to be held responsible, they should be.
If we start prosecuting these offenses, the message that online threats are federal crimes in and of themselves - especially threats intended to manipulate the threatened person's behaviour (extortion) - will vastly reduce the chaff analysts need to sift through...
which will help recenter online discourse around civility, and will reduce the ability of extremists to use threats of violence to convey strength, bravado and supremacy as aspirational tools for the recruitment and radicalization of those susceptible.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
