This one doesn’t sound like she was serious
Quotes from the voice mail she left. (what a fucking idiot to give a voice recording of this)
"You are in our sights, we want to kill you,"
"If Trump doesn't get elected in 2024, we are coming to kill you, so tread lightly, b---h. ... You will be targeted personally, publicly, your family, all of it."
Sounds serious to me.
Serious or not, the target won't know and the harm done by them is real either way. The criminal needs to be locked up and hopefully rehabilitated. If the latter isn't possible, at least she won't be able to follow through on the threats from a jail cell.
She's also been charged with the same time three other times just this year; and there's no mention of the number of times she just got a warning for pulling this stuff. In fact, she was out on bail for similar messages when she did this. This is not a person who is able to handle her emotions who is slowly getting driven over the edge by reich-wing media. She may not head to New York or DC to kill a judge as but she is absolutely capable of shooting a bunch of black people at Walmart or driving through a group of Hispanic workers.
She also said she was going to kill every LGBT+ person and every Democrat. I really don't think she was serious. Crazy, but not serious.
Honestly, I don't care. I'm sick of death threats for a giggle. Take it as seriously as a hilarious bomb threat at an airport.
I don't disagree there.
I'm sick of slightly-not-threats in general. I'm always amazed at people for listening to a few interactions between police and crooks and figuring out exactly what they can say and get away with while leaving the victim with no uncertainty that they'll be targeted. It seems like a majority of the population will happily scream at someone over something small. It's no surprise that we are seeing escalations into real death threats, regardless of intent or seriousness.
This whole fucking handbasket seems to be in flames already.
These yahoos literally threaten our lives and then act like we are trying to feed them to lions when we say happy holidays.
Fuck them, like literally. I wish they were half as put upon and persecuted as they think they are.
Literally? Are you sure you've seen their pictures?
So, mixed signal time, while not actually advocating for rape, it is usually not about sexual attraction, but more about assertion of power and intimidation.
So, in the hyperbolically sarcastic “literal” sense of fuck them, their looks are irrelevant.
I know. I wasn't trying to be pedantic or even serious, but I couldn't pass up calling out the use of "literal" on that occasion
Is all good, mate
I honestly can't see why you think this.
Someone who is willing to make a recording of threats has to be taken seriously.
Would you feel the same and let it slide if this was directed at you and your family?
I didn't say it shouldn't be taken seriously. There's a difference between saying someone is not being serious and saying they shouldn't be taken seriously.
What does "not being serious" mean in this context, according to you?
That she wasn't actually going to do it. I think they were empty threats. But it still needs to be treated as if she was a real threat.
Thinking this shit isn't serious is why the US has multiple mass shootings per day
But how do you know she wasn't serious?
And no, "because she threatened to kill all the gays" ain't good enough.
I don't know. I never said I knew. Hence my saying it should be treated as serious.
Also worth noting... even if we knew for a fact she had no serious intend to carry out her threat - like if there was a recording before and after she hung up the phone laughing about this "prank" - threats on the lives of government officials are crimes. It can influence their behavior. There is no situation where it's not serious, just like standing up on a plane and yelling "I have a bomb!" is a crime and serious whether a joke or not.
Thanks for the clarification.
I really don’t think she was serious. Crazy, but not serious.
For a person being shot dead it makes no difference if the killer was sane or mad, sober or drunken.
Which, for the god knows how many times I've said it, is why it should still be taken seriously.
How many more times do I have to say it?
People are playing by Reddit/echo chamber rules here. Anything that goes even slightly against the grain is jumped on and tried to silence.
FTR: I heard your intent and don’t think you said anything even remotely wrong. This is a human being who needs to be held accountable, but can also at the same time still require our help, even if it’s just simple human empathy.
Edit: but to answer your question… 5 more times should do it. :)
Crazy like the nazis who wanted to kill all the Jews, right?
If the Nazis were incapable of doing so on their own, yes. But they weren't.
So setting an unrealistic goal means no progress will be made, and she wouldn't kill a single person.
Which, yet again, is why I said it should still be taken seriously.
Oh well in that case, just a prank bro!
/s just in case
Not even trying to imply that.
Yeah I know, I don't disagree with what you said, just sick of some of the things people seem to get away with sometimes.
Seriously crazy
she, herself, might not be a serious threat. but one must assume that the "we" includes other people who have proven in the past to be serious.
Who makes threats over voicemail? How stupid is that to use your voice and phone number as obvious evidence to police if you were actually planning to do it? Imagine posting to Twitter about going to rob a specific bank in 2 days with your personal Twitter account, then posting a selfie with a name tag and facemask and gun in front of your actual house, hashtagging it #ThisIsAStickUp so more people see it. Anyone who makes semi public threats with identifiable information is either a complete moron and shouldn't be taken as able to be dangerous in any capacity or was never really intending to do anything in the first place and is all bark and no bite. Not serious. Probably just planning to break stuff and yell real loud like on January 6. These people thrive off of intimidation. I doubt anyone would be that completely idiotic to document a murder spree.
Imagine being so blind, so stupid, to not only be a republican, but further be compelled to commit blatant crimes for trump, without regard to evidence.
Because Trump is their temper tantrum for us electing an "uppity" Black man twice.
I miss him
I miss when W was our worst president.
Imagine making threats over Trump. It's baffling
She was a raving kook who talked smack on someone’s voicemail, but the next one would follow up their words with actions (and we don’t want that).. The patient cat can’t catch all the mice, but he can catch some and take their fury out on it. The others with soon get the message quite clearly at that point
she was "charged four times in the past year" over similar allegations and that she was out on bond on Aug. 5
This person needs a serious mental evaluation. Not to mention she willfully threw away her freedom to do this stunt. Serious or not she is messed up in the head, like most maga trumpers.
doesn't sound like she was serious
FAFO
And another and another and another ones bites the dust.
"Abagil Jo, twat are ew dewin?"
"Just callin' death threats to that there judge, cousin daddy!"
"After that go to the store and pick up some Lucky Strikes. I'm feelin' frisky and want to make sweet loveins with yew tanight!"
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.