After reading the article about the twitter anarchist, I just believe he is insane. He had no moral obligation to let the people protesting to know through twitter to “avoid heavily-armed cops". I nowhere in the article see any arguments that this twitter anarchist has any moral obligation. After looking through the pictures of what they seized in this awkward looking mans house, it’s easy to see he is a whack job. Political posters, books on “recipes for disaster, an anarchists cookbook”, gas masks with replaceable containers, and other masks to cover the mouth and nose, it’s easy to see this guy should be in a nut house. I know in my house I do not own things like that, and I’m pretty sure it’s safe to say my friends don’t own any of those things either.
In Andrews’ post, he is absolutely correct that this guy has way too much time on his hands for listening in on a police blotter. The police have every right to arrest the twitter anarchist. The guy was listening in on a confidential meeting, and his intentions seemed to not be the best. I say this because, 1) He had a book on how to make recipes for disaster an anarchist cookbook, I’m guessing like homemade bombs, 2) he had a poster that stated “I love the Bicycle Bomber”. And 3) I’m pretty sure that all would agree with me that this guy did not have the best intentions with whatever his plans were, after he twitted the protestors about the armed cops.
Where is the moral obligation?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with many points you have, Jim. This man's actions were illegal as he was listening in on a police scanner and transmitting police whereabouts. This man was attempting to dismantle the police riot control. Although charges have been withdrawn, this man should certaintly be found guilty of a crime as he intended to disrupt public order and safety.
ReplyDeleteI don't think this has anything to do with a moral obligation, but in a realist's opinion I believe that this man should NOT be arrested based on the first amendment, this is a precedent that can be easily used to predict future outcomes of trials, and if I was his lawyer, I believe I would very easily be able to obtain an acquittal or even have the charges removed before going to trial.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you this guy has way to much time on his hands. I think what he was doing was disruptive for the police and could cause safety issues. I think he should have been charged for interfering with a police investigation.
ReplyDeleteThe anarchist doesn’t seem like his intentions were pure. The materials in his house were shady. He was wrong for listening in on confidential meetings, but you can’t judge someone for having weird objects in his house. If he did have a book on homemade bombs that is not illegal, unless you can prove that he was going to make these bombs and use them for dangerous activities. I don’t think it is a crime to own anarchist paraphernalia such as bumper stickers. Is it illegal to talk about police activities in a public forum or maybe even warn others about police activites? Maybe he can be charged for that? But at this point, it sounds like you are condemning him for being weird.
ReplyDelete