Hacker News Reader

Comment by colinplamondon | Hacker News Reader

He made a threat.

I think it's in bad taste to make public bombing threats, even as a joke. It's just not respectful to the people who have to dig through this shit and interdict the real bad guys. As societies, we have limited resources with which to investigate threats that are made, and our governments have an obligation to investigate each and every threat that's made, even jokingly on Twitter.

The reaction is totally over the top, granted, and I'd rather they spend their time interrogating trust fund Nigerians recently returned from a Yemenese vacation, but there should be a penalty for making joking bombing threats, in the same way that you shouldn't go around yelling 'fire!' in a movie theater.

Criminal prosecution is ludicrous, though.

View on HN

He never made a threat, he made a joke.

One that you may think in poor taste but I thought it was well within the acceptable. Blow up an airport because they don't have their planes landing on time ? Sounds very realistic to me.

We've had a guy executed because of these overzealous clowns http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Charles_de_Menezes

I think to investigate is fine, to arrest is way across the line. If these guys can't tell the difference between a legitimate threat and a bloody joke then we have other problems than terrorism.

I'm mad enough about this to write about it in a way that I possibly shouldn't but I am seriously past caring:

http://jacquesmattheij.com/I+am+a++terrorist%2C+and+so+are+y...

Let's see who is brave enough to turn me in.

Something doesn't feel right in all of this case. Like we are missing something. I suspect there was some otherp particular reason the police were worried he may take extreme action secondary to the tweet; it would explain things more clearly.

There us also a double standard with some of the people outraged over this. Hundreds of people are reported eah month as veiwing kiddy porn. The majority are innocent but you will struggle to find too many people who will disagree With them beig investigated.

If a concerend indvidual, perhaps someone who knows he guy, as worried by what he read and reported it what do the police do? They just have to have a look; I mean ok they went much too far (assuming the story is accurate and this guy wasn't, for example, difficult or refused to cooperate etc.)

as I said, I can't help feeling there is a touch more to this than a busy body stalking Twitter :-)

I'm ac

> Something doesn't feel right in all of this case. Like we are missing something.

I have a very hard time imagining anything short of this guy having a history of blowing things up that would be reason enough for an arrest.

> I suspect there was some otherp particular reason the police were worried he may take extreme action secondary to the tweet; it would explain things more clearly.

Because you would hope that that would be the case ?

That's just wishful thinking on your part I'm afraid, I have absolutely no problem in believing that it happened the way it has been described, by now the police is well aware this thing is going to blow up in their faces if there was even a remotely plausible reason they would have trotted it out on a leash for display by now.

> Hundreds of people are reported eah month as veiwing kiddy porn. The majority are innocent but you will struggle to find too many people who will disagree With them beig investigated.

Being investigated for the possession of child pornography because of anonymous tips makes it far too easy to smear people and to use the police as attack dogs in personal vendettas.

It also basically gives the authorities carte-blanche to go and investigate anybody at all claiming there was an anonymous tip, and I think that for that reason alone this ia a bad development.

I realize you may probably disagree but if a person is 'so concerned' about this that they would report you but not concerned enough that they would make that report without being anonymous then it is most likely a sick prank being pulled on someone.

If it weren't then there would almost always be someone in the vicinity of the individual being reported that would have the balls to face the perp over this and make a non-anonymous report.

The lucky few child pornographers that only have cowards in their circle of acquaintances we'd have to learn to live with.

> If a concerend indvidual, perhaps someone who knows he guy, as worried by what he read and reported it what do the police do?

I would think that even a personal visit is one step too far, a simple letter that would state that the guy is because of this 'flagged' and if there is any indication that there is more to it then it might be time for doing something about it. Until then make sure that when he gets on a plane that his luggage gets some extra tlc.

> as I said, I can't help feeling there is a touch more to this than a busy body stalking Twitter :-)

You have a lot of faith in the law, which is nice. I've seen tons of incompetence far worse than this so I'm very much on the side that has absolutely no problem believing the story as it is told.

> because of anonymous tips makes it far too easy to smear people and to use the police as attack dogs in personal vendettas.

I never said anonymous. (actually it was somewhat a bad analogy because the Police are pretty much legally bound to investigate even if they feel it is a personal grudge etc. particularly if the accuser is a child).

Anyway; I am not aware this was an anonymous tip. In a way those might be treated even more seriously.

> but not concerned enough that they would make that report without being anonymous

I think that is naive. People get scared; especially if the threat is real! But as I said Im not aware this was anonymous.

> a simple letter that would state that the guy is because of this 'flagged' and if there is any indication that there is more to it then it might be time for doing something about it. Until then make sure that when he gets on a plane that his luggage gets some extra tlc.

:( you really think that is a better approach. Firstly can you sere the media outcry about watchlists and targeting innocents without bother to investigate :) and I agree, it's very wrong.

I think that would be a massive OTT step. Go round, knock on his door and talk to him about it - i.e. establish if you need to investigate or drop it.

But I can see what might have happened (and I might have revised my opinion here); at some stage a police man was sat there and suddenly realised "shit, Im responsible for deciding if this guy is a threat" - and then the fear sets in that he might get it wrong and end up killing people. It's pretty irrational but people are like that :) so this copper makes a mistake - and needs to be disciplined ofc.

Im still not convinced there isn't a little more to this than meets the eye; something to convince them either this guy might go ahead with this threat or that he had the capacity to bring it off (even if it is something simple like he works in a job associated with explosives etc. - say a chemistry teacher).

7 hours questioning is very excessive; either they were treating this as a really serious threat - or more likely he was non-cooperative (in which case he doesn't get any sympathy from me :P)

"our governments have an obligation to investigate each and every threat that's made, even jokingly on Twitter."

No they don't. They have an obligation to investigate legitimate things.

I'm not disagreeing with what you say, but I think it's a stretch to interpret that as a threat.

I also think that if a threat is determined to be a misinterpreted joke, then the government should stop wasting time and money investigating it.

Suppose someone says something like: "The party is really gonna blow up" or "The roof will be on fire!" Are these threats? What if some paranoid idiot reports one as a threat--should the person that wrote it be fined or prosecuted because it wasted police time? The authorities repeatedly show themselves to be morons...is it okay to rely on their discretion?

These are things I think society needs to start talking about.

He made a threat ... there should be a penalty for making joking bombing threats

Did you read the article? The author says (and I totally agree) that refraining from tasteless jokes while at the airport is a small price that we we pay without concern, but the freedom to make bad jokes on the internet in your spare time is something else entirely. It's the thin end of the "censorship of all speech" wedge, really.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com