Should QAnon be labeled as a terrorist organization?

[postman1782]

I am well aware of that, as I already said so previously.
Arrested != convicted though.

Good luck trying to argue that in court, when someone says all of this stuff on platforms like Parler, saying they are going to hang Mike Pence, and goes to the Capitol with a fucking gallows waiting for him. Yeah, totally no intent to follow through.

[Kellhound]

I take that, as no one wants to join my club? I see how it is...

- - - Updated - - -



What’s the legal term for murder without intent?

By definition, murder requires intent. If you kill someone without intent it is involuntary manslaughter.

[Felya]

Good luck trying to argue that in court, when someone says all of this stuff on platforms like Parler, saying they are going to hang Mike Pence, and goes to the Capitol with a fucking gallows waiting for him. Yeah, totally no intent to follow through.

When they posted those threats... they intended to say that they are very frustrated with the situation life has settled them with and this is the only way they can have control. We are ignoring the real issue here... that these men and women are just afraid to cry... to show their real feeling...

- - - Updated - - -

By definition, murder requires intent. If you kill someone without intent it is involuntary manslaughter.

Oh.., so they still go to jail for killing someone... It’s called manslaughter, not murder... gotcha... So... about needing intent to commit a crime? How you doin?

[Kellhound]

Freedom of speech, where Trump and his supporters are free to chat with people?



Why is QAnon being kicked off social media any different?



How about... dangling from my shoulder?

I have not said that they had a right to remain on any platform against the desire of the owners of said platform.

It isn't, but I am not arguing it should be.

No, see slung.

[Felya]

I have not said that they had a right to remain on any platform against the desire of the owners of said platform.

It isn't, but I am not arguing it should be.

No, see slung.

What the fuck does this even mean?

[Antiganon]

What do you mean I havent gotten my way? What are you talking about????

Your club your rules, duh....

Point it at you? A slung/holstered gun in not a threat.

- - - Updated - - -



No I wouldn't, in and of itself.

So it's not a threat because they didn't succeed? Like how much more credible does a threat have to be than assembling a fucking gallows while calling for hangings?

[Felya]

No I wouldn't, in and of itself.

To show intent... do they have to point their gun at the monitor or the PC?

[Kellhound]

Good luck trying to argue that in court, when someone says all of this stuff on platforms like Parler, saying they are going to hang Mike Pence, and goes to the Capitol with a fucking gallows waiting for him. Yeah, totally no intent to follow through.

No that does not show intent to kill anyone.

[Draco-Onis]

No that does not show intent to kill anyone.

Totally you can't show intent until the hung body hits the floor /s

[Felya]

So it's not a threat because they didn't succeed? Like how much more credible does a threat have to be than assembling a fucking gallows while calling for hangings?

I think pointing the gun at them... but, meaning it... it can’t be like... oh they saw a burglar behind them and were actually the good guy... to have intent... they must draw the gun, point it at the person they are going to shoot, say they intend to kill the, specifically... if 2 witnesses can confirm this... that’s intent...

[Kellhound]

When they posted those threats... they intended to say that they are very frustrated with the situation life has settled them with and this is the only way they can have control. We are ignoring the real issue here... that these men and women are just afraid to cry... to show their real feeling...

- - - Updated - - -



Oh.., so they still go to jail for killing someone... It’s called manslaughter, not murder... gotcha... So... about needing intent to commit a crime? How you doin?

We were discussing intent being needed for a threat, not that intent was needed for any crime.

[postman1782]

No that does not show intent to kill anyone.

Sure, it doesn't. Meanwhile they are in the capitol building literally less than 100 feet from Pence, screaming Hang Mike Pence, and looking for AOC and Pelosi. Sure, there wasn't any intent there.

Not fucking surprising you are defending fucking terrorists.

[Kellhound]

What the fuck does this even mean?

Exactly what it says....

[Felya]

Totally you can't show intent until the body hits the floor /s

No, they can say... ‘I intend to shoot you, pikachu’... as long as they shoot pikachu, that’s intent... if they hit someone else... no... just pikachu... the thing is adorable, I don’t know what his problem is...

- - - Updated - - -

Exactly what it says....

Could you be more verbose and clerify?

[Kellhound]

To show intent... do they have to point their gun at the monitor or the PC?

That would demonstrate a possible intent to shoot the computer, part of the "don't point a firearm at something you don't intend to shoot".

- - - Updated - - -

Totally you can't show intent until the hung body hits the floor /s

That is incorrect.

- - - Updated - - -

I think pointing the gun at them... but, meaning it... it can’t be like... oh they saw a burglar behind them and were actually the good guy... to have intent... they must draw the gun, point it at the person they are going to shoot, say they intend to kill the, specifically... if 2 witnesses can confirm this... that’s intent...

Pointing a loaded gun at someone would reach the point where ability and threat combined would allow for a reasonable conclusion that the threat to inflict bodily harm is true.

- - - Updated - - -

Sure, it doesn't. Meanwhile they are in the capitol building literally less than 100 feet from Pence, screaming Hang Mike Pence, and looking for AOC and Pelosi. Sure, there wasn't any intent there.

Not fucking surprising you are defending fucking terrorists.

You cannot prove intent to actually kill anyone with that level of evidence.

I think every single one of the people who entered the Capitol should face criminal charges, just as any rioter that causes damage or trespasses should.

- - - Updated - - -

No, they can say... ‘I intend to shoot you, pikachu’... as long as they shoot pikachu, that’s intent... if they hit someone else... no... just pikachu... the thing is adorable, I don’t know what his problem is...

- - - Updated - - -



Could you be more verbose and clerify?

Uhhh... You no stay on platform if owner say you go.

[postman1782]

You cannot prove intent to actually kill anyone with that level of evidence.

I think every single one of the people who entered the Capitol should face criminal charges, just as any rioter that causes damage or trespasses should.

So, building a gallows, carrying a gun, and storming the capitol looking for Mike Pence, while shouting Hang Mike Pence, doesn't show intent? Jesus Christ, simp for terrorists more.

[Kellhound]

So, building a gallows, carrying a gun, and storming the capitol looking for Mike Pence, while shouting Hang Mike Pence, doesn't show intent? Jesus Christ, simp for terrorists more.

Beyond a reasonable doubt without a confession? No it doesn't. I would say the same if it had been Antifa that had done it.

[jonnysensible]

Beyond a reasonable doubt without a confession? No it doesn't. I would say the same if it had been Antifa that had done it.

“We broke into the Capitol…we got inside, we did our part. We were looking for Nancy to shoot her in the friggin’ brain but we didn’t find her.” — Dawn Bancroft, arrested in Pennsylvania today, along with Diana Santos-Smith.

[Kellhound]

“We broke into the Capitol…we got inside, we did our part. We were looking for Nancy to shoot her in the friggin’ brain but we didn’t find her.” — Dawn Bancroft, arrested in Pennsylvania today, along with Diana Santos-Smith.

Post event confession of intent, no issue with him being charged accordingly.

[Endus]

Intent has no bearing?

When it comes to threats of violence or death and their legality, the concept of "intent" is in relation to the issuance of the threat, not intent to act upon that threat.

You might have absolutely no capacity to execute that threat, because you're sitting in a basement 2000 miles away from your victim. But if you lead your victim to reasonably believe you're watching them and able to act on that threat, that is what makes it criminally actionable. And your intent is only considered in relation to your choice to send those threatening messages, not your capacity to act. That is only measured in determining whether the target would have reasonable grounds to feel the threat was legitimate, so it has nothing to do with your actual capacity or intent to act, solely the target's reasonable beliefs to that effect.