Tuesday, December 2, 2014

Supreme Court appears unlikely to protect Facebook threats

Four years ago, a Pennsylvanian man was sentenced to prison for threatening his ex-wife and, later on, an FBI agent on Facebook. He argues that he was merely ranting and blowing off steam. The case has been appealed to the Supreme Court. However, none of the justices seem to side with the poster. This is the first case to test the limits of free speech in regards to social media. Should those who make threatening statements on the Internet without serious intent be held responsible under federal law or hould prosecutors have to prove malicious intent when someone is charged with making a threatening statement? Does the increasing popularity of social media and the Internet warrant a redefining of what constitutes free speech?

13 comments:

  1. This needs to be taken seriously as a threat. Just because it's through social media, doesn't mean it isn't as real and threatening as a verbal threat. If we don't prosecute people who make these threats just because we can't tell if they mean it or not, then are we supposed to wait around until they take their threats into action and murder/hurt the other person? I get the freedom of speech argument, but if prosecuting someone prevents a possible murder, then it's obvious they should be prosecuted. Not only can online threats lead to murders, but also suicides. Threats over social media should be taken just as seriously as a real threat.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Threats over social media shouldn't be taken seriously at all. Nine time out of ten its just some little kid messing around. Other times it may simply be hyperbole. The police should use more discretion in order to figure out who is serious and who is not before they decide to arrest someone.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I feel that any dangerous threat should be taken very seriously, whether on social media or otherwise; Elonis definitely deserved to be convicted for such terrible threats. Seeing as his wife left with their children, it seems that these gruesome posts were serious and meant to scare others. Threats like this go beyond just freedom of speech, and should definitely be handled seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Threatening messages on Facebok and other social media need to be taken seriously. It is ridiculous for someone to post threatening and violent messages and think they are not going to be held responsible for their actions. This man definitely deserved to be punished for what he posted online.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If someone posts a threat on social media it must be taken seriously. Every single student has been told "Be careful what you post." Why would this not apply to adults also? You must be held accountable for what you post because no matter what your intent was perception trumps intent.

    ReplyDelete
  6. A threat is a threat, regardless of the means by which it's presented. Comparing a Facebook threat to a non-electronic threat is like comparing a spoken threat to a written threat. Yes, I understand where those arguing for freedom of speech are coming from, but the safety of US residents should be prioritized here.

    ReplyDelete
  7. If you're going to post a threatening message on social media, I do feel that it should be taken seriously. As Americans, we do have the right to freedom of speech, but if what is being said regards a matter of life or death (or even injury) for another person then it should not be swept under the carpet.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Social media is not a excuse to make any sort of violent threat to another person. It should be taken as seriously as a spoken threat to someone else. It doesn't matter if the person is being serious or not, there is no excuse for threatening to murder your ex-wife or carrying out a school shooting at a kindergarten on social media. It is the same as if you shouted those things out to a room full of people and expected that nobody would call the police. These threats should be taken seriously no matter what medium they are expressed through.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I don't think that social media should be a way to simply "blow off steam" let alone blow off steam about killing an ex-wife and cutting the throat of an FBI agent. This should be taken very seriously. You need to be aware of the consequences of posting on social media. Like Mike said, as kids and young adults we are always told to watch what we post so why wouldn't that apply to adults. They can be held just as accountable for their posts as we can.

    ReplyDelete
  10. A threat is a threat. Words hinting at harming another human being should not be considered free speech. Violent and gruesome threats should not be protected under the first amendment. We need to be looking out for the safety of those involved. While we cannot get inside of the speakers' head to discern what he was thinking, he was obviously unstable when writing the comments and should be helped before the situation escalates. I think it was right to detain him until the situation could be better understood.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I agree with everyone except Emmanuel. The internet is not something one should be messing around with. If someone is sending threats on social media but is doing it as a "joke"...how is that even funny? It's a privileged to be able to communicate with other people on social networking cites. People should think what they post on the internet and not be dumb about it. This threats should be taken seriously not matter what.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Seems to me that Facebook is an even less "protected" zone than actual speech. If this guy had said what he posted on Facebook in a bar, or in his living room, only a handful of people would have heard him and would have been able to tell if he was "joking" (not likely) or not. Posting on Facebook has two massive disadvantages: it is public for anyone to see, and permanent.
    This should not be protected, and should be treated as the serious threat that it seems. Just imagine if it were said about you, or about your mother.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Emmanuel, lets say that your idea that " 9 out of 10" threats on the internet arent actual threats, is true. By not treating every case as a serious threat, you allow that 1 out of 10 threat to become a tragedy. I feel that every threat on the internet should be considered the same as a threat delivered via a letter or face to face.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.