Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 577 posts

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#541

Post by BobbyJo »

vel0city wrote: post #514
BobbyJo wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My point is, its not illegal to just generally be an anarchist. Generally being an anarchist shouldn't be related to evidence of one assaulting a government facility. Let's say someone is obsessed with classic cars, and their neighbor's classic car goes missing. It then turns up in a storage unit owned by the guy obsessed with classic cars. Do you think their obsession with classic cars is relevant to the case? Kee…

> Do you think their obsession with classic cars is relevant to the case? I'd say no, just generally liking classic cars isn't material to the case. I've got tons of classic cars on my fridge from Rock Auto. Does that mean I'm likely to steal a car? Would someone removing those magnets from my fridge and giving it to a friend be hiding evidence if I were to steal a car? Are people having a bible likely to bomb an abo…

> I'd say no, just generally liking classic cars isn't material to the case.

Every lawyer would disagree, but you do you.

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#542

Post by stale2002 »

TurdF3rguson wrote: post #363
stale2002 wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it was illegal to go somewhere "lookin for trouble" I think that you would see a whole lot of people arrested from certain groups that you likely wouldn't want to be in prison.

I already made the self-defense concession. I'm just hoping for a "he's not a hero" concession from your side.

Counter protesting people who are destroying a community seems like a perfectly laudable goal to me.

He certainly wasn't expecting to have to shoot someone, but that's the case for most examples of self defense.

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#543

Post by bandofthehawk »

MSFT_Edging wrote: post #445
bandofthehawk wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

He traveled across state lines to attend a protest with a gun he didn't personally own. If that was self defense, so was this case.

> He traveled across state lines

Why would you think this is even relevant? He lived close to the border, and stayed within the same metro area.

> attend a protest with a gun he didn't personally own

This was not illegal.

> If that was self defense, so was this case

So were the judge and jury just corrupt? Did you watch the videos of him being threatened and attacked, including by someone (Grosskreutz), who also had a gun?

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#544

Post by bandofthehawk »

ks2048 wrote: post #281
bandofthehawk wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess you don't believe in the concept of innocent until proven guilty?

One can believe in this concept and believe a decision (or the law) was wrong.

One can also let themselves be misled by the media for political reasons.

If you actually watched the trial and reviewed the publicly available evidence, and still think the jury made the wrong decision, then I agree, you have a right to that opinion.

However, if you only believed he is guilty because your favorite media figures told you this, then I would say you don't actually believe that a person is innocent until proven guilty.

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#545

Post by s1artibartfast »

TurdF3rguson wrote: post #540
s1artibartfast wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I agree people should not go to protests with the objective to harm or destroy. I dont think that is really the major party dividing line tho. I dont think most of the right thinks they went there with intention to harm, but to "defend". I also think many people on the "left" take issue with someone putting themselved in a situation that could require lethal self defense, particularly over property.

If someone on the left killed right wing protestors that person would not be treated like a celebrity. The reason why not is simply that violence isn't celebrated on the left like it is on the right. With the exception of Luigi and I think that's more generational than left vs right.

In the interest of shedding light, not fire - I dont think the right view the deceased as protesters. They view them as attempted murderers and people destorying their community. I think this is fundamental and explains a lot.

I think if you reversed the roles, you would get much the same reaction.

Lets say you get some militia marching in the street, lighting cars on fire, vandalizing schools and businesses. Then one of the marchers chases down a counter protesters saying "im going to kill you", corners them, but gets blasted.

I think there would be a lot of rallying around the shooter if people wanted to try them for murder. People would say they were just taking out the trash and the deceased FAFO'ed.

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#546

Post by bandofthehawk »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #505
jayGlow wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

he drove to a town he worked in that's not out of the way. 2 of the 3 who attacked him drove similar distances or further and one of them had an illegal fire arm, were they all putting themselves in a situation to murder someone?

The evidence presented at trial was that they spent the morning before the protest in Kenosha cleaning grafitti off a local school.

Who are you referring to? For clarification it was Rittenhouse who cleaned graffiti, not any of the victims, which seems to support the grandparents argument.

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#547

Post by alterom »

9x39 wrote: post #306
alterom wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>murder by an armed group Oh yes, how could we have forgotten the crucial detail that every single person in the group had their hands on the trigger . Wait, that's because it didn't happen. One individual fired their weapon. (And whether that's a murder is very questionable, but let's set that aside). Nobody else should've been facing prosecution in this case.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.41... I only have the .gov version, but 20-30 rounds were fired, Song was convicted as the attacker apparently and Baumann and Morris were evidently armed as well (the woods gunmen). It wasn’t the whole group but doesn’t appear to be just one individual. They were successfully tied together by the prosecution as conspirators to the satisfaction of juries by th…

> 20-30 rounds were fired

By whom?

> Baumann and Morris were evidently armed as well

And, did they fire any of the shots at the scene?

> It wasn’t the whole group but doesn’t appear to be just one individual.

So, it was one individual beyond reasonable doubt.

The rest is pure speculation.

>They were successfully tied together by the prosecution as conspirators to the satisfaction of juries

Yes, you are saying the same thing we already know: that there was a mistrial.

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#548

Post by s1artibartfast »

bandofthehawk wrote: post #546
s1artibartfast wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The evidence presented at trial was that they spent the morning before the protest in Kenosha cleaning grafitti off a local school.

Who are you referring to? For clarification it was Rittenhouse who cleaned graffiti, not any of the victims, which seems to support the grandparents argument.

rittenhouse

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#549

Post by joe_mamba »

like_any_other wrote: post #368
ipython wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No the jan6 rioters just used poles and batons and such to beat the shit out of police- some who died afterward. https://youtu.be/DXnHIJkZZAs?si=zDKJcly9KMBY_GgJ I mean - seriously? It’s ok to do this?

Zero police died due to injuries sustained on Jan 6: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_6_United_States_Capito...

Let's not let facts stand in the way of some good ol anti-Trump FUD

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#550

Post by tkel »

blockmarker wrote: post #412
tkel wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Lure police into an ambush" is quite a stretch. It's quite normal to do noise demonstrations outside jails/prisons to show solidarity with the captives, the captives will often times knock on the windows to communicate back. In fact there were noise demonstrations outside the Delaney Hall ICE jail in New Jersey just this month, which you may have heard about. The mischaracterization of fireworks as "explosives" is a…

Fireworks are explosives, and people are hurt by misusing them. Just because they are less harmful than grenades doesn't mean that they are harmless, and throwing them at someone is clearly with the intention of harming them. And well, shooting them with rifles is also clearly intended to harm them.

All this hypothetical grandstanding is so obnoxious. Have you seen the video? There was just a few fireworks, regular ones purchased from a roadside stand. They went into the air, FAR from the facility. There was no damage. It's called a noise demonstration. The prisoners were watching from inside and cheering in response. Please go outside on the 4th of July while people are setting off fireworks and touch grass.
Post reply on HN