BoatBanter.com - OT Thanks for Homeland Security

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)

- General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)

- - OT Thanks for Homeland Security (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/44889-ot-thanks-homeland-security.html)

thunder wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 11:18:47 -0700, atl_man2 wrote:

I just KNEW I'd have to explain it ad nauseum to YOU!! The charge!!!!
The CHARGE!!! It is a charge that is NOT a state law, BUT IS a Federal
charge under the DHS. Jeesh......like trying to get a cat to understand
the theory of relativity.

Sorry, but many states have a "Terroristic Threat" Law. Most are related
to terrorizing a person, and predate Homeland Security. New Jersey's is
typical:

Terroristic threats

2C:12-3. Terroristic threats
a. A person is guilty of a crime of the third degree if he threatens
to commit any crime of violence with purpose to terrorize another or
to cause evacuation of a building, place of assembly, or facility of
public transportation, or otherwise to cause serious public
inconvenience, or in reckless disregard of the risk of causing such
terror or inconvenience.

b. A person is guilty of a crime of the third degree if he threatens
to kill another with purpose to put him in imminent fear of death
under circumstances reasonably causing the victim to believe the
immediacy of the threat and the likelihood that it will be carried
out.

L.1978, c. 95, s. 2C:12-3, eff. Sept. 1, 1979; L.1981, c. 290, s. 15,
eff. Sept. 24, 1981.

http://www.jfrlaw.com/criminal_statutes/2c123.htm

Georgia isn't New Jersey.

Tim wrote:
They were sitting on a small
hill by a state hwy. and took a couple of shots at passing cars with a
Daisy BB gun!

No big deal unless that BB hit you, right?

Hell, we used to have BB gun wars on my uncle's farm!

John Jay wrote:
Kevin,
I know you know people could be prosecuted for terrorist acts way before
their was a Homeland Security Act. What makes you think this crime and the
prosecution of this crime has anything to do with the Homeland Security Act?

It's simple, try to follow along, okay? The Homeland Security Act
simply made it easier to convict persons. Do you HONESTLY think that
before the act, that they would arrest a couple of kids sitting on a
hill with a damned BB gun shooting at the sides of cars with
TERRORISTIC acts? Come on!!!!!

You must make liberals cringe whenever you open you mouth. You are an
embarrassment to liberals all over the world.

And because of your narrow mindedness, you're an embarrassment to
yourself! But, the Right Wing Circle Jerk Club will love you for it!

Kevin,

Do you feel silly not understanding Terroristic Threat Laws have been around
for years before 9/11? Here is the Georgia Law concerning Terroristic
Threats, and the law has been in effect for many many years before the
Homeland Security Act.
Terroristic Threats in the Official Code of Georgia Section 16-11-37:

(a) A person commits the offense of a terroristic threat when he or she
threatens to commit any crime of violence, to release any hazardous
substance, as such term is defined in Code Section 12-8-92, or to burn or
damage property with the purpose of terrorizing another or of causing the
evacuation of a building, place of assembly, or facility of public
transportation or otherwise causing serious public inconvenience or in
reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror or inconvenience. No
person shall be convicted under this subsection on the uncorroborated
testimony of the party to whom the threat is communicated.

(b) A person commits the offense of a terroristic act when: (1) He or she
uses a burning or flaming cross or other burning or flaming symbol or
flambeau with the intent to terrorize another or another's household; (2)
While not in the commission of a lawful act, he or she shoots at or throws
an object at a conveyance which is being operated or which is occupied by
passengers; or (3) He or she releases any hazardous substance or any
simulated hazardous substance under the guise of a hazardous substance for
the purpose of terrorizing another or of causing the evacuation of a
building, place of assembly, or facility of public transportation or
otherwise causing serious public inconvenience or in reckless disregard of
the risk of causing such terror or inconvenience.

(c) A person convicted of the offense of a terroristic threat shall be
punished by a fine of not more than $ 1,000.00 or by imprisonment for not
less than one nor more than five years, or both. A person convicted of the
offense of a terroristic act shall be punished by a fine of not more than $
5,000.00 or by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than ten years,
or both; provided, however, that if any person suffers a serious physical
injury as a direct result of an act giving rise to a conviction under this
Code section, the person so convicted shall be punished by a fine of not
more than $ 250,000.00 or imprisonment for not less than five nor more than
40 years, or both.

(d) A person who commits or attempts to commit a terroristic threat or act
with the intent to retaliate against any person for: (1) Attending a
judicial or administrative proceeding as a witness, attorney, judge, or
party or producing any record, document, or other object in a judicial or
official proceeding; or (2) Providing to a law enforcement officer, adult or
juvenile probation officer, prosecuting attorney, or judge any information
relating to the commission or possible commission of an offense under the
laws of this state or of the United States or a violation of conditions of
bail, pretrial release, probation, or parole shall be guilty of the offense
of a terroristic threat or act and, upon conviction thereof, shall be
punished, for a terroristic threat, by imprisonment for not less than five
nor more than ten years or by a fine of not less than $ 50,000.00, or both,
and, for a terroristic act, by imprisonment for not less than five nor more
than 20 years or by a fine of not less than $ 100,000.00, or both.

wrote in message
oups.com...

thunder wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 11:18:47 -0700, atl_man2 wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...
Hell, we used to have BB gun wars on my uncle's farm!

Why does that not surprise me?

Kevin,

Yes they would have arrested anyone who shot at passing cars with any gun,
they would have arrested anyone who dropped something off a bridge on
passing cars. The law they charge the person with is "Terroristic Threats".
They have arrested and charged and people have been found guilty of such
crimes for many years. I can remember in the 60's when kids were arrested
and charged for Terroristic Threats for dropping pebbles off a bridge onto
passing cars. I can also remember a time in the 70's when people were
convicted of shooting a BB gun at the LI express.

The fact you do not believe the police would charge kids or anyone else for
shooting at cars with a BB gun speaks volumes about you. Anyone with a
brain are glad the police do not allow kids to shot BB guns at passing cars.

wrote in message
oups.com...

John Jay wrote:
Kevin,
I know you know people could be prosecuted for terrorist acts way before
their was a Homeland Security Act. What makes you think this crime and
the
prosecution of this crime has anything to do with the Homeland Security
Act?

It's simple, try to follow along, okay? The Homeland Security Act
simply made it easier to convict persons. Do you HONESTLY think that
before the act, that they would arrest a couple of kids sitting on a
hill with a damned BB gun shooting at the sides of cars with
TERRORISTIC acts? Come on!!!!!

You must make liberals cringe whenever you open you mouth. You are an
embarrassment to liberals all over the world.

And because of your narrow mindedness, you're an embarrassment to
yourself! But, the Right Wing Circle Jerk Club will love you for it!

wrote in message

Whew, you ARE stupid, aren't you?

Am I? You're the one who lives in Georgia and thinks Mark Morford is a
legitimate commentator.

:-)