Author Topic: Could a statute be drafted that would establish "stochastic terrorism"  (Read 344 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dutch508

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12521
  • Reputation: +1646/-1068
  • Remember
Quote
Star Member Atticus (14,997 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217756727

Could a statute be drafted that would establish "stochastic terrorism" as a crime while
not infringing on freedom of speech?


Can't intent to cause violence be proven with as much certainty as it is for other offenses?

Quote
WarGamer (8,262 posts)

1. Well...

So that a future GOP DoJ can arrest Left leaning folks for bullshit.

Doesn't sound good.

Just FYI, the goal here isn't to "out-authoritarian" the GOP...

Give the Fed Gov't that kind of power with a Trump behind them and the George Floyd protests would have resulted in thousands of heavy prison sentences for vandalism and burning down that police precinct.

"unintended consequences"


See Patriot Act.

Quote
Star Member Atticus (14,997 posts)

3. I asked a question. You respond with an attack. nt

 :thatsright:

Quote
Star Member Atticus (14,997 posts)

10. Uh-huh---accusing me of trying to "out-authoritarian" the authoritarians is not an attack? I have

yet to read anything you fear about mis-use of a "new" law that is unique. ANY EXISTING laws "could" be mis-used by "the other side" and sometimes have been.

I could go on, but I see no real prospect of productive discussion or knowledgable comments and that was the motive for the OP.

 :mental:

Quote
RockRaven (12,351 posts)

2. When considering expanding the power of law enforcement and diminishing freedoms of citizens

ask "how would a POTUS as evil as TFG, but highly competent, having staffed the DOJ entirely with corrupt disingenuous turds like Bill Barr, misuse this power?"

Quote
Star Member Fiendish Thingy (12,193 posts)

12. How would you go about proving someone's state of mind?

Sounds like a slippery slope to me…why wouldn’t existing laws on incitement suffice?

Quote
Star Member Atticus (14,997 posts)

14. Prosecutors are required to prove a defendant's state of mind every day in prosecutions where

intent is an element of the charged offense.

I may be wrong, but I believe the current laws making "incitement" a crime contemplate a specific person or group being encouraged to commit an offense against a specific person or group.

In stochastic terrorism, the speaker addresses the public at large in an effort to encourage one or some of them to harm a specific person or a large class of people, such as a race or a religion or a political party.

Quote
Zeitghost (2,386 posts)

21. Proving intent

With regards to actions is different than proving the "true" intent of their speech. It also doesn't come with the same potential to infringe on the free speech rights of everyone. That is why the Brandenberg Test exists; criminalizing vague speech because "We all know what they really meant" is a very slippery slope.

The torch of moral clarity since 12/18/07

2016 DOTY: 06 Omaha Steve - Is dying for ****'s face! How could you not vote for him, you heartless bastards!?!

Offline Delmar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5182
  • Reputation: +523/-40
Quote
Response to WarGamer (Reply #1)Fri Mar 24, 2023, 03:57 PM
Star Member Atticus (14,997 posts)
3. I asked a question. You respond with an attack. nt
WarGamer's reckless attack constitutes stochastic terrorism and is liable to get Atticus killed--there ought to be a law against that.
"I sat down, and I said, 'America's back' and Mitterrand from Germany — I mean from France — looked at me and said … "Well, how long are you back for?"
Crooked Joe Biden

Offline FlaGator

  • Another Pilgrim
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5279
  • Reputation: +925/-31
  • Democracy can survive anything except Democrats
Seems to me they just admitted that the DOJ has been weaponized by the liberals.
"My enemy's enemy is the enemy I kill last."
Klingon Proverb.

Offline DUmpDiver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1461
  • Reputation: +493/-5
All of those people who knelt in 2020 would be a lot of people to jail.




Offline Ralph Wiggum

  • It's unpossible that I'm a
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18544
  • Reputation: +2037/-49
Apparently "The Party" talking points of the Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) have gone out:

"Stochastic terrorism"

Don't watch PMSNBC nor mainstream news, but noticed this "stochastic terrorism" has been repeated ad nauseum by the DUmmies as of late.
Voted hottest "chick" at CU - My hotness transcends gender


Offline freedumb2003b

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6053
  • Reputation: +821/-72
Quote
WarGamer (8,262 posts)

1. Well...

So that a future GOP DoJ can arrest Left leaning folks for bullshit.

Doesn't sound good.

Just FYI, the goal here isn't to "out-authoritarian" the GOP...

No, that is EXACTLY the goal.  When modern democrats get power they immediate forget the FIRST rule of legislating: never take on a power you do not want used against you.

The fact is the democrats want to rule by dictatorial fiat.
Measure with a micrometer, mark with chalk, cut with an ax

Hello to the Baizuo lurkers from DU, DI, JPR and Huffpo

DUmmies can no more understand the "Cave" than a rat can understand a thunderbolt, but they fear it just the same. Fear the "Cave", DUmmies. Fear it well. Big Dog 12-Jan-2015

Proud charter member of the Death Squad Hate Force! https://conservativecave.com/home/index.php?topic=112331.msg1386168#msg1386168

Ted Kennedy is the only person with an actual confirmed kill in the war on women.

Online Muddling 2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 752
  • Reputation: +285/-4
Apparently "The Party" talking points of the Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) have gone out:

"Stochastic terrorism"

Don't watch PMSNBC nor mainstream news, but noticed this "stochastic terrorism" has been repeated ad nauseum by the DUmmies as of late.

Does that mean we can arrest Bernie Sanders for the attempted murder of Steve Scalise?

Asking for a friend.
You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.
Robert A. Heinlein

Offline USA4ME

  • Evil Capitalist
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14565
  • Reputation: +2277/-76
Jim Atticus Harvey would have made a great Judge Roland Freisler.

.
Because third world peasant labor is a good thing.

Offline DefiantSix

  • Set Condition One throughout the ship
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17420
  • Reputation: +1715/-189
  • Captain, IKV Defiant
To answer Flatulus' original question...

Quote
Star Member Atticus (14,997 posts)

Could a statute be drafted that would establish "stochastic terrorism" as a crime while
not infringing on freedom of speech?


Can't intent to cause violence be proven with as much certainty as it is for other offenses?

In simple words even a DUm'Rat should be able to understand, NO. Mostly because there IS no way to what you
want without trampling somebody's 1st Amendment guarantees, but also because

THE LAW SHOULDN'T GIVE A **** ABOUT ANYBODY'S TENDER FEELINGS.
"Stand your ground. Don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here."
-- Capt. John Parker

"I'm not looking for forgiveness, and I'm way past asking permission"
-- Capt. Steve Rogers

"In this present crisis, government in not the solution to our problem, government IS the problem."
-- Ronaldus Magnus