Boots and Sabers - The blogging will continue until morale improves...

Case Against McGee Gets Even Stronger | Home | MJS Story on Arrested B&S Commenter

Friday, November 30, 2007

B&S Commenter Arrested

An Oak Creek High School teacher who allegedly praised the actions of the Columbine School shooters and threatened local teachers on a Web site blog was arrested Thursday. The 46-year-old Cudahy man was arrested with the assistance of Oak Creek and Cudahy police departments after West Bend police were notified of a threatening post on Nov. 16.
The actual blog, posted at 6:50 p.m. and provided in a release by the West Bend Police Department, states: “Looking at those teacher salary numbers in West Bend made me sick. $60,000 for a part time job were you ‘work’ maybe 5 hours per day and sit in the teachers lounge and smoke the rest of the time. Thanks God we won on the referendum. But whining here doesn’t stop the problem. We’ve got to get in back of the kids who have had enough of lazy, no good teachers and are fighting back. Kids like Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold members of the Young Republicans club at Columbine. They knew how to deal with the overpaid teacher union thugs. One shot at a time! Too bad the liberals rip them; they were heroes and should be remembered that way.”

The man, who admitted to posting the message, was arrested and a search warrant was served at his home. He is in custody at the Washington County Jail and charges of disorderly conduct and unlawful use of computerized communication systems will be referred to the Washington County District Attorney’s office. The Cudahy man has no previous arrest record that the police department is aware of, according to a statement.

Yes, the comment in question was posted in a comment thread on B&S. Let me fill in the details…

Late on the evening of Friday, November 16th, Jed and I received an email from a detective with the West Bend Police Department asking me about the above comment. Do you remember what was happening that weekend? Yep. Gun deer season.

I saw the email at about 7:30 AM on the 17th while I was sitting in my deer stand. I promptly called the detective and consequently woke him up. He asked if we would provide the IP address of the commenter. Since I wasn’t anywhere near a computer and wouldn’t be for some time, I emailed Jed who sent the information in a matter of minutes. I guess Jed was let out of the bunker for a while.

The next week the detective called and we spoke about it. At no time did the detective even so much as hint that the proprietors of B&S were at fault. He asked us to remove the comment if we could preserve a permanent record. He also revealed that the complaint was filed by a member of the West Bend school administration.

The next thing I knew about this was when I read this news story saying that the commenter had been arrested. In case you were wondering, you are not anonymous on the internet. I have received several calls from reporters with various news organizations seeking comment. I haven’t returned any calls yet, because I wanted to write out the story in full form before somebody misquoted me.

This evening I called and spoke to the detective. He did confirm that no other evidence was found at the man’s home and that the charges are based on the comment he left here at B&S. It’s an ongoing investigation, so he couldn’t say much, but between him and some other sources, I think I have the majority of this story put together. The paperwork for the investigation was finished this afternoon and it will likely be referred to the District Attorney as soon as tonight (which probably means Monday, in reality).

What do I think?

At first blush, I think it’s a gross overreaction for a comment left on a blog. Yes, the comment was idiotic and over the top, but it hardly constitutes a direct threat to anyone. It was explained to me that it was not believed that the commenter had any intent to harm anyone, but that the mere presence of a comment appearing to condone such violence had to be punished because it might encourage someone else to engage in violence against schools. I don’t buy that argument. In fact, let’s put it in context with the commenter’s next comment on that thread.

I am NOT advcting shootng teachrs. I agree with Mark belling when he said that theese kids were pushed into doing this by the stupid union teachrs at Colmbine. belling said that to bad only one teachr got it and lots of kids. shuld have been the other way. belling hates teachrs I like belling

It appears to me that the commenter is attempting to do one of two things. Option 1: the commenter is a right wing whack job that isn’t violent, but likes to engage in outlandish rhetoric. Option 2: the commenter is a liberal who is trying to discredit conservatives by acting like option 1.

As you can see from the story, the commenter is actually a union teacher from Oak Creek, but it gets more interesting than that. The commenter was also once the president of his local teachers’ union. This leads me to believe that Option 2 is the truth. This commenter is just a liberal union teacher who was trying to make conservatives look bad by pretending to be one and acting like an imbecile.

That being said, I still believe that the arrest was unwarranted. I realize that in a post-Columbine world that everyone is hypersensitive about any mention of Columbine or school shootings. But this comment was clearly just talk. When I gave the detective the IP address, I assumed that they would find him, chew him out a bit for being an idiot, and leave it alone. The fact that the West Bend Police decided to actually arrest him in the absence of any additional evidence of this guy being a threat is out of line.

I encourage the District Attorney’s office to promptly no bill this matter. Yes, we need to be concerned with statements like this and it was appropriate for the police to look into it. But once they found out that he was no threat and once the comment had been removed, thus eliminating the likelihood that the comment would encourage anyone else to commit violence, they should have dropped it.

I guess I’ll call those reporters back now…

(325) Comments

Posted by Owen at 1827 hrs

Culture + Law + Politics + Politics - Wisconsin + The Blog

Reading your perspective, I guess it would be hard to impute any kind of “criminal intent” on the part of the actor, but I do get a certain sense of satisfaction in seeing such a troll “outed”. I feel sorry for good teachers who might be smeared by this.

What makes this blog unique is that comments are immediately posted & don’t have to wait for administrator approval - this is a privilege that we should appreciate. Imagine how the “oxygen” would be sucked out if all the dynamic give and take between the commenters had to wait on hold until they could first be reviewed before showing up. Would have to shut down while Owen goes deer hunting, earns a living, takes care of family, etc.

Not to be too stupid about this, but did Mark Belling really say anything remotely similar to what was attributed to him, and was there a Columbine Young Republicans connection?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 30, 2007 at 2055 hrs

Most importantly, what did they arrest him for? Being an idiot?

I’m pretty sure everything he wrote (while wrong headed) is constitutionally protected speech.

There was no overt threat. No incitement to violence.

If this guy has a good lawyer, the police in West Bend might have a problem on their hands.
Posted by elliot on November 30, 2007 at 2113 hrs

Let’s see if the ACLU jumps all over this one.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 30, 2007 at 2132 hrs

I agree that option #2 was more likely the truth. It was a liberal posing as a conservative in order to get some folks into trouble.

I wonder what the West Bend school administrator is thinking, now that they know the threat actually came from school teacher.

Better yet, I wonder what WEAC will do, knowing what this teacher said. Will they protect the teacher’s job?
Posted by K. Carpenter on November 30, 2007 at 2210 hrs

No, Mark Belling NEVER said anything that!!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 30, 2007 at 2211 hrs

I just saw this story on WITI-FOX 6 Milwaukee. Just to let you know, I live in Sheboygan, Wisconsin, and I’ve visited this blog a few times early this year. I think this is a fine blog!

Asher Heimermann, WI
http://www.ASHERHEIMERMANN.com
Posted by Asher Heimermann on November 30, 2007 at 2217 hrs

Let’s clear up the vocabulary for the newsfolks:

This site: blog.

Stuff Owen and Jed write: posts.

Stuff other folks write on this blog in response: comments.

People who comment: commenters.

Arrested person: commenter who was not a regular.

Other commenters: in general, good people.

So in other words: The arrested commenter posted a comment under a post on the blog, Boots and Sabers.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 30, 2007 at 2250 hrs

Yeah, Fox6 seemed a bit confused. As if Owen were arrested. Now, being a Cowboys fan in West Bend, I’m sure that’s grounds enough…but they were referring to the former union official’s comment, not Owen’s post.
Posted by Fraley on November 30, 2007 at 2315 hrs

Protected speech? What’s that?

Down here in St. Louis, after a particularly sordid incident where mean words exchanged through the tubes and pipes of the Internet led to a girl’s suicide, municipal governments are scrambling to enact ill-considered, nebulous legislation to make Internet harassment illegal.

So anyone who feels that the Internet is a “hostile environment” will have criminal recourse in the future.

See story here.
Posted by Brian J. on December 01, 2007 at 0025 hrs

Considering some of the threats I have seen issued in the comment sections of other blogs, this was obviously a spoof. Makes me wonder though, with all the explicit threats (out of consideration of B&S;and its readers, I will not repeat them or link to them) that have been put out there, and nothing done about them, why did the cops really pursue it as far as they have, or are they just doing a CYA job?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 0048 hrs

I saw the news coverage and was bothered by their misuse of the terms “post” vs. “comments”.Thanks, Wendy for your clarifying. You’d think the news people would know the difference in meaning of these blog terms. Anyways,as my husband pointed out, this comment would probably be “protected speech” if it were printed in a book. He wasn’t hurting or harassing anyone.However, the police may have received a complaint, or have to investigate into his mental stability or assess any risk to others. My guess is he won’t be found guilty of much, and he’ll get a slap on the wrist.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 0738 hrs

Hoisted on his own politically correst petard. This is karma in its purest form. planned mispellings and the type of hyperbole you see more at the daily cos then on most conservative blogs. This is what the left wing nuts think about conservatives, So he thought he would just make this crud up and make the site look bad.
Conservatives on the whole use their heads and make reasoned arguements about bloated salaries, but the teachers cant stand the criticism and through their liberal feely filter it all sound like the kind of stuff this idiot pretended to really think.

I dont think he should be arrested and go to jail. but I wont shed a single tear if he does
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 0815 hrs

That’s a good question, capper, and I am probably not going to like the answer no matter what it is.

We are talking about three suburban police departments that usually have nothing better to do than run radar traps (of course, I don’t advocate the alternative of an overworked department like Milwaukee’s).
Posted by steveegg on December 01, 2007 at 0853 hrs

capper -

I think they chose to pursue this one because somebody in the West Bend School District administration decided to file a complaint. I wonder how many complaints are actually ever filed about website comments? Unfortunately for the WBSD, they didn’t realize that the commenter in question was one of their own who probably thought he was doing the district good by posting this. That’s grape-lady karma at its finest.
Posted by Fuzz on December 01, 2007 at 0917 hrs

If we reported all the threats we have seen put up on blogs we could tie up the police department for months. I hope this is a lesson to the morons that think it is funny or acceptable to threaten (even jokingly) through your keyboard.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 0934 hrs

they didn’t realize that the commenter in question was one of their own who probably thought he was doing the district good by posting this

Damn, when I saw the Oak Creek Super on TV6 last night, my first thought was, now the West Bend Super has to make nice and send a gift basket or at least pick up a round at Starbucks, for all the extra trouble this has caused everyone.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 0954 hrs

Conservatives on the whole use their heads and make reasoned arguements about bloated salaries, but the teachers cant stand the criticism and through their liberal feely filter it all sound like the kind of stuff this idiot pretended to really think.

Aside from the grammar errors and the comment “liberal feely filter ... one can only say:

Irony lives on!

Having said that, I think most people understand that there are morons on both sides of the debate. This guy made a foolish decision. One hopes the consequences will not be severe, but also that he will have learned a lesson.
Posted by Tim on December 01, 2007 at 1035 hrs

Given both the explicitly filed concerns of a school district administrator and the extremely cautious environment surrounding school violence, how close do Buss’s comments come to yelling “Fire!” in a crowded theater (i.e. unprotected speech)?

This is an interesting question.

I think Owen’s initial feelings that the WBPD detectives were gonna chew the guy out for being an idiot were reasonable.
Posted by Mike on December 01, 2007 at 1057 hrs

Absolutely agree with you, Mike.
Posted by Tim on December 01, 2007 at 1100 hrs

Maybe this will be the issue that brings decorum back to boot and sabers.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 1125 hrs

Owen, while I agree that you acted in good faith, I suggest you get an attorney - the sooner the better. You should not be publically commenting on this case, especially on your personal involvment in this case.

A union president has been arrested for making non-threatening public political speech. That’s a 1983 action I would give my eye teeth to represent. The main target will be the city, of course, but you may get caught in the crossfire.

(See USC title 42 section 1983, 1985 and 1986, also title 18 section 241 and 242.)
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 1357 hrs

Owen,

I think you left out the other options: 3) “off his meds” and 4) moron. 4 is, of course, implied in 1 and 2. ... and by Kurt’s comments.

hiho
Mp
Posted by Mpeterson on December 01, 2007 at 1435 hrs

Another vocabulary item is perhaps needed here:

What makes this blog unique is that comments are immediately posted & don’t have to wait for administrator approval

“Unique” is completely inappropriate here, since approximately a zillion other blogs also allow unapproved comments.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 1446 hrs

E-mail in your deer stand?

I love Wisconsin.
Posted by HeatherRadish on December 01, 2007 at 1458 hrs

Heather, that line cracked me up, too (in an otherwise sad post).

“Only in Wisconsin” was all I could think. And deer stands may never be the same.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 1504 hrs

Richard, the arrest is related to the threat perceived by teachers who viewed the comment and called police, purporting to feel threatened. Owen can’t be responsible for the arrest decision, or blamed for cooperating with law enforcement.

The threat perceived might have been genuine, and many teachers might actually feel some alarm if a nut went around hinting that teachers needed killing.
But it might well have been feigned; either a collusion with the commenter for cynical political gain and discrediting of people who opposed union goals, or not, but a happy irony that a reader also wished to draw negative attention to the blog owners and the arguments put forward here, and saw an opening to make trouble.

But bottom line, Bloggers are broadly immunized by section 230 of the CDA from liability for the suggestions or opinons or information provided by commenters.
Foolish persons who try to get bloggers “in trouble” by faking whacked comments and then complaining about them, or sock-somplaining about them, are mistaken about their chances of success.

What scenario are you imaging which could bring Owen under some dark scrutiny or trouble? Perhaps the inconvenience of having to give testimony?

Because so long as he did not relate any false information about the commenter or doctor his comment for content to change the meaning, makin it his OWN content, there isn’t any that could make him culpable.
Posted by SarahW on December 01, 2007 at 1509 hrs

(Regarding “posts” vs “comments”, look at the bottom of each, ah, “comment”.)

My inclination would be to stick the comment by the teacher somewhere prominent, and very prominently identify who made it.

No editorial comments. Just the bald and unadorned truth. Don’t respond to questions or comments, some will be trying to weasel an actionable comment from you.

You might add any letters the lawyers send you, with minimal comments.

“Let the sun shine in.”
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 1514 hrs

I googled it and found no connection of the Columbine killers and the Young Republicans, The arrested commenter was trying to smear the Republicans with this tragedy.
A perfect example of the liberal mentality: Project onto others all your prejudices and still maintain the holy high ground. He advocates, it can be argued, for murder, and justifies it by taking on the guise of some persona that reflects his amalgamation of those he politically reviles.
Liberal, Union Leader, Teacher. Is anyone really surprised?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 1531 hrs

Nothing like a Saturday Instalanche
Posted by steveegg on December 01, 2007 at 1551 hrs

As for why the police made the arrest, retired MPD Captain Glenn Frankovis made an interesting comment. He said, in part:
I haven’t discussed this with anyone from any of the law enforcement agencies involved, but based upon my own experience I think I can safely say that once the matter was brought to the attention of the law enforcement authorities, they were compelled to take action. I suspect they would have taken the same action even if the school officials had not expressed concern. No sane police administrator is going to handle this any other way and take the risk of being crucified if the writer actually follows through with even a thinly veiled threat. This is why we have mandatory arrest policies for Domestic Violence cases even when physical evidence is not always present. And after the Virginia Tech tragedy, law enforcement agencies are not going to error on the side of “free speech”.

He also adds:
As always, I’m only attempting to bring in the law enforcement perspective based upon my experience. I do understand the common sense argument however. Believe me when I say that lawsuits and the msm have taken common sense completely out of the decision-making picture. You wouldn’t believe some of the things that dictate a summary arrest.
Posted by BadgerBlogger on December 01, 2007 at 1558 hrs

Wow, a DougJ got arrested.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 1602 hrs

I am starting to think that Mickey may have been a plant as well.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 1612 hrs

To the extent that there’s a case to be had, I think that it’s the Young Republicans that have it. Now that the police have identified this unhinged individual, let the DA reject, then let the civil system do its best to keep him occupied for the next two to five years, culminating ideally in a settlement for the limits of his—and his school system, and the union, which clearly shaped his hateful attitudes’—wealth.

Side note: I personally don’t comment anonymously. Some people think they need anonymity because they vastly overrate their personal importance. Others think they need anonymity because they intend to say things they haven’t the nerve to say under colour of their own natural name.

People who truly need absolute privacy and security—an exceedingly small group—had best not comment at all. As our host points out, even if my name were not on this post, tracing the IP back to a block of IPs that I pay for every month is child’s play. All those IPs terminate in my home, office and network lab. I would be a fool to deny responsibility for traffic originating therein.

Only a chump thinks he’s anonymous on the internet. So this whole post is a tale of a chump, and a rather forlorn one at that. How many of you are surprised to hear of a stupid, and bitter, teacher? Not exactly a rara avis, is it?
Posted by Kevin O'Brien on December 01, 2007 at 1625 hrs

Imagine if the roles were reversed here and it was a Conservative poster that once was the president of a local NRA chapter “posing as a liberal”. This story would have been headline news all over the country. I might just throw this little tidbit towards the drudgereport to see if anyone is interested in how slimy certain liberal minded teachers can be.

Previous posters were exactly right. Instead of arguing their case on the merits “certain liberals” would rather use a campaign of smear to change the subject. Good for the police to at least arrest this moron in order to out his stupidity.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 1646 hrs

Er, there has been no proof yet this fellow was a liberal. Correct me if I’m wrong, Owen ... but you gave two possible scenarios regarding this person’s political leanings, but those were your guesses.

I know of at least one teacher locally who is staunchly conservative and writes about as well as this clown from Oak Creek.

And even I, a liberal, will not go so far to assume that Chris is a conservative, though his/her argument sure sounds simple-minded enough.

Not very nice, eh Chris?

Fact is, as I stated earlier, both sides have got their idiots. It’s best not to assume anything.
Posted by Tim on December 01, 2007 at 1700 hrs

Er, there has been no proof yet this fellow was a liberal.

I’ll give you 2:1 odds, max bet anything up to $1,000. Put up $1K to take $2K of my jack if you believe he isn’t with any level of confidence. Should be easy money, right?
Posted by Purple Avenger on December 01, 2007 at 1809 hrs

But that wasn’t the gist, was it. Should I assume another conservative who cannot stay on point?
Posted by Tim on December 01, 2007 at 1823 hrs

There is no proof you aren’t an idiot tim.

What are the odds on that one?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 1829 hrs

Now Althouse has picked up the story.
Posted by Tony Turner on December 01, 2007 at 1950 hrs

See, that was easy enough. No need to make an assumption. Judging from what Chris wrote, he’s conservative. They are the one’s whose argumentative skills eventually de-evolve into childish nonsense and name- calling.
Posted by Tim on December 01, 2007 at 1950 hrs

See, that was easy enough. No need to make an assumption. Judging from what Chris wrote, he’s conservative. They are the one’s whose argumentative skills eventually de-evolve into childish nonsense and name- calling.

Hahahaha… childish nonsense knows no political affiliation.
Posted by Fuzz on December 01, 2007 at 1957 hrs

Tim, he was president of the union, writing about how he supposedly hates unions. Clearly he was faking being a conservative.

What’s really funny about this episode is that 10:1 odds it was another union teacher who called the police and said they felt their life was threatened by this supposed wacko conservative, prompting the arrest of the lefty pretending to be a wacko conservative.

It’s like watching a snake eat itself.
Posted by TallDave on December 01, 2007 at 2002 hrs

#28 livermoron,

I noticed that attempt to libel the young republicans as well.
Anyone know what field this teacher works in? If it is government or history, don’t be surprised if he has been passing this garbage on to his captive audience(students). Someone should contact his students.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 2034 hrs

Hey Tim-
You’re pretty heavily invested in the “there’s no proof this guy s a liberal” canard.

Sorry pal. As it is neccesary to ignore the nose on your face in order to remain a liberal it is no surprise that you, a liberal, expect the rest of us to ignore the self-identifying projection the poster clued us to. Not to mention his gratuitous and false slur of the Young Republicans organization.

But wait, not only do we have to ignore the above to maintain, as you do here, that the violence fantacist was perhaps not a liberal, we also have to ignore that he actually is an ex-union activist and a public school teacher.

As for your claim to “know of” of a “staunch conservative” local teacher (who, by the way, is stupid) as an embellishment of your argument for denial…no dice, pinky.

Hee hee, I called you pinky.

The guy is a liberal. A librul. Oh, and he’s a liar, too. A liberal liar.

Vim Toot!
Posted by mica vim toot on December 01, 2007 at 2039 hrs

Well, I may be incorrect, but reading through this entire post and comments I believe that the gentleman that was arrested was a “former” president of the union. thus, I am assuming that, while he made comments about “young republicans” and tried to insinuate that any sort of conservative relation advocating eliminating teachers was simply hyperbole. His real issue with the union and teachers is much more likely to do with his personal situation and how he became the “former” president of the union.

In other words, he had a personal axe to grind, limited knowledge about Columbine or the two shooters associations and motives and had the misfortune to air those publicly on this blog as a comment.

any assertions as to his liberal or conservative leanings are meaningless. Further, this past history with the union probably played heavily into the complaint as well as reasons why the police felt the need to pick him up. Which is an indication of their current sensitivity to being blamed when they are unable to prevent people from doing terrible things to others.

I would be interested in seeing the complaint. It is possible this gentleman made other threatening statements to other people, had angry outbursts or otherwise harassed people. It is my experience that the police do not consider one off statements alone without context or previous acts or statements to be particularly dangerous.
Posted by Kat-Missouri on December 01, 2007 at 2044 hrs

Anyone know what field this teacher works in?

He taught chemistry.
Posted by Owen on December 01, 2007 at 2047 hrs

Tim,

Public school teachers will assure you that in order to climb up the ladder of the teachers’ union, your political views must be liberal on most issues. Otherwise, you would face the contradiction of joining a leadership group that promotes and funds many liberal causes with union dues.

You can verify my statement by examining the donation record of the NEA(National Education Association), which is not the most radical of the teachers unions.

This consistent trend has created a conflict with many individuals that were open to joining a teachers union but objected to having their money consistently donated to pro-abortion groups or to left-wing political groups such as the Democratic party.

The union leadership does not take a vote of the membership whenever they take such actions. A conservative or even Independent would be a fish out of water.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 2050 hrs

Even Owen didn’t come right out and say it. He suspected, and truth be told, his suspicion seemed correct to me. I just wanted to see how long it would take for conservatives to resort to name-calling and such.

Thanks for proving me correct. This was too easy.
Posted by Tim on December 01, 2007 at 2052 hrs

Owen
“He taught chemistry”

Tis speculation, but I’ve got a hunch this bozo has been preaching his bizarre political views to his hapless students. Not to mention distorting current events. He has shown a distinct proclivity towards hyperbole and vindictive slander on your blog comments.

The odds are good that he would show little restraint at indulging himself at venting within the classroom. He won’t be the first teacher departing from topics related to his field(Science) in order to attempt converting students.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 2104 hrs

Former president of the teachers’ union. Right. No possible indication he may be a liberal. And according to Tim, the vicious and ignorant comment he posted pretty much makes it a slam dunk he’s a conservative.

Good call, Tim. You smirt. You must be libburil.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 2135 hrs

“He taught chemistry”

So he had access to explosive and chemical weapons precursors.

And the laboratory equipment and knowledge to turn them into weapons.

This is gonna be fun to watch.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 2202 hrs

Yep TIM is a liberal. Using all of the typical narrow-minded arguments and tactics. First, you take an incredibly stupid argument that “hey he might not be a liberal”. You provide proof for this fact by reminding us “Hey I have a stupid conservative friend”. Finally when your stupid comments are blown out of the water by rational minds you fall back on “oh ya I was just kidding ha ha I wanted to see how fast you would name call”. Good work TIM keep reproducing we need more manual laborers…
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 2300 hrs

If you post something that directly or indirectly suggested violence to a person or specific group of people, and then that information gets in front of a member of law enforcement, you’re putting yourself in a position of suspicion. Especially in this day and age. More than likely, this idiot got arrested, questioned, and the charge will get dropped. Better that happens than some nut goes and shoots someone, and it comes out later that some internet threats were brought to the police and they chose to do nothing.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 01, 2007 at 2341 hrs

I’m currently a student at Oak Creek High School, and completed AP Chemistry last year with him as my teacher. Although he is a bit unorthodox as he does tell jokes and stories in class, he is in no way a threat to anybody. It’s a shame to see his reputation tainted by a comment on a blog. I’m not saying that Owen was wrong in reporting him, or that his comment should have gone un-noted, but it was clearly a ridiculous comment to get emotions flaring. It sickens me to read these comments and hear people talk about him as if he’s going to blow up the school as richard seemed to suggest. He never imposed any political views as Ragnell suggested. In fact any opinions he did mention in class, he clearly stated as being such.

The teacher plays basketball with the other teachers on a regular basis, and helps the other chemistry teachers in his department where he can. I have another teacher this year, who frequently quotes the accused as something funny he said, or that he found interesting. He is simply a well liked teacher, both by his colleagues and by any student willing to put up enough effort to succeed in his class.

The fact that he even went so far as to say that, even in joking or to get emotions flaring surprises me. Nevertheless, people are throwing this out of proportion. He goes out of his ways to help his students, even allowing himself to be available at home if anybody needs help.

The matter will be dealt with, and i go even so far as to hope he comes back within the school week. He has AP students who have a national exam in may and replacing him quite frankly is not an option.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 0232 hrs

Ok…All this is a little overwhelming considering he taught my AP Chemistry Class. He was a good person and a decent teacher. In government class they always taught the first amendment was freedom of speech, religion, etc. Was that just thrown out the window? He had an opinion, maybe one that not everyone agreed with, plus he never directly threatened anyone. Maybe he was trying to act as a “whatever” and discredit it but I could also see him as more or less joking about it. He had plenty of stories and jokes during class. I don’t know how exactly the legal terms of this situation work. I like how many have put up their speculations and you have never met the guy. I have sat in his class. I have taken his tests, done his homework, listen to his stories etc.

” So he had access to explosive and chemical weapons precursors.

And the laboratory equipment and knowledge to turn them into weapons. “
Richard

That’s outrageous to say that. Everyone that has had him as a teacher or has had a conversation with him knows he wouldn’t do that. Where do you come up with this stuff.

Ragnell, your comments about how his students should be contacted about how he passes his political views to his students. I am his student right here…For your information I am as surprised as anybody else that he would write something as he did. He has never talked about anything related to politics in class. Everything was chemistry. When we stray from the subjects it was usually telling random stories that he had that were funny. In fact before this incident I wouldn’t have known if he was liberal or conservative. I still don’t. If we all did that would somewhat answer the question of why he did what he did.

This is my point of view. I actually knew the man. You can all say my point of view is bias, it is but so is everyone else’s. But still there is an extent to making up stuff and way too much speculation. My information is true from my eyes, and plenty more of his students, peers, friends, and acquaintances. Police arresting him and questioning him probably isn’t the worst thing to do. What he said wasn’t the smartest thing to say. But if he actually gets charged and loses his job, then something is not alright. The loss of his job over this would be in my eyes totally. Last spring a principal got arrested and charged with DUI but still retained his job. The severity the case is there, you be the judge. For me I feel that this was an overreaction by everyone.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 0239 hrs

Seriously people. We all know that this is less about what he said. And more about how he was “pretending to be a conservative wacko” in order to discredit this blog site. Come on now people get a life this is obviously a very liberal Union Teacher that not only discredited himself but attempted to discredtit a republican group on the columbine campus and mark belling (a very conservative talk show host). The story isn’t that he is going to kill people. THE STORY is that he pretended he was something that is totally opposite of himself in order to discredit several credible people.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 0311 hrs

Seriously folks. I am surprised at your suggestion that this guy is a liberal. Anyone with a modicum of knowldge of the conservative movement should realize that he/she/it is probably a sleeper agent implanted into the union movement to spread disinformation.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 0400 hrs

Students of the Chemistry Teacher,
Thanks for sharing your experiences and viewpoints. A few points to consider:

Point One:
Owen did not report your teacher for issuing threats to teachers. The police contacted him AFTER someone reading the blog complained to them. If you read his post, he thought the police and the person making the complaint were overreacting.(This a general blogosphere consenses) Considering the frequency of that sort of language on the blogosphere, it seems silly to single out one individual while ignoring all the thousands(millions?)of over-wrought, ranting commenters one encounters on blogs. There is no law against making oneself look ridiculous.

Point Two:
I am glad to hear that he keeps his classroom atmosphere professional. However, raising an inquiry about his professionalism was a legitimate question.

A speculation is not a declaration of knowledge. Yes, you make a good point that is important to avoid over-reaching one’s speculations that could balloon in a serious accusation and spread as “fact”(such as “this person is capable of possibly making bombs”)

However, if the circumstances warranted it, speculation is often the beginning of the process to determine truth. Although preaching personal ideology to students is not a vast threat to national security, it was a natural question to ask, considering his lack of professionalism on this blog.

Specifically, he professed to be a conservative while threatening teachers and the teachers union; while also claiming the Columbine killers were Young Republicans. [I believe the term is “a MOBY”]. At any rate, a professional does not misrepresent themselves in order to smear their opponents.

It should not be a surprise that people wonder if his unprofessional behavior has crept into his classroom. There are myriad national cases reported of teachers preaching their personal political beliefs to their classroom. A good source for examples is the FIRE site. Unfortunately, this type of behavior has reached epidemic levels in academia.

Nevertheless, thank you for taking the time to clarify answers to my question.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 0404 hrs

A very civil reply, Ragnell.

But the students have a point. Where was your question? There is no question mark in your comment, including your conclusion:

“The odds are good that he would show little restraint at indulging himself at venting within the classroom. He won’t be the first teacher departing from topics related to his field(Science) in order to attempt converting students.”

You do preface those comments and others above it by saying it’s speculation. But what follows is given as statements. Period.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 0434 hrs

i understand, Ragnell, that they were opinions based upon knowing nothing about him, which is why i wanted to clarify his behaviors in the classroom, and other people in the school’s views of him.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 0914 hrs

In the interest of full disclosure, let me admit that Jim Buss is a friend of mine. He is a generous, selfless person who is passionate about issues he considers important. The blog attributed to him does not comport with the image I hold of him as a fellow professional educator.

But isn’t that the point? There are many examples of people who have adopted alter egos to make points they themselves wouldn’t feel comfortable expressing. The original SNL cast was notorious for doing that, Gilda Radner especially. Lilly Tomlin was another. Jeff Dunham, whose puppets include the dead terrorist Achmed and the sexist, anal Walter, gives voice through them to feelings many of us may share but, in this era of political correctness, cringe from when hearing them aloud.

Can you imagine the heat such characters as Bill Dana’s Jose Jiminez and Foster Brook’s nearly falling-down drunk would catch today? Even Lucille Ball’s brain-dead character on the I Love Lucy show would be villified by today’s feminists as stereotypically patronizing.

So you want to make a few points and you choose a sort of reverse, sarcastic approach. By way of overkill you pose as an analogy a particularly heinous event. What you don’t realize is, in this age of hypersensitivity, your points will be lost in the ensuing feeding frenzy by those whose sense of outrage you have just violated. If Jim made any mistake at all, it was not in recognizing the political climate of these times. And in that he should have known better.

Incidently, the word is commentator, not commentater.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 0952 hrs

No, the word is commenter, not commentator. And no “blog” has been attributed to him, a comment on a blog was attributed to him.

If you’re going to rip people on their vocabulary, get it right.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 1023 hrs

The student commenters (Thank you Wendy for the correction of he who thought the commentators blogged!!) have restored some bit of my faith in the quality of primary schooling within the present public education system.

Their succinct and nicely structured posts were as precise as efforts I would usually suppose to have been submitted by an adult or even, a professional educator!

Hmmm….

Vim Toot!
Posted by mica vim toot on December 02, 2007 at 1118 hrs

I am also a student at Oak Creek High School who came to regard Mr. Buss very highly. Unfortunately he has abandoned the trust of not only his peers but also his students through his expression. Whether his words were with sincerity is unknown. Being that it is almost certainly a satirical attack on conservatives, does not excuse his perverse thoughts. Anyone that would draw a comparison with the Columbine Nazis is clearly mentally unhinged despite his seemingly pleasant demeanor. This man has tarnished his reputation beyond repair and the consequences of his actions were known to him. His blatant disregard to the mass killings at Columbine and Virginia Tech illustrate not a disappointment to the school district but a disgusting attack on decency. After clearly crossing the threshold of freedom of speech with remarks that are beyond forgiving, he has lost the admiration and trust of his employers, the taxpaying parents of Oak Creek. Parents will not stand to have a teacher who incites such threatening ideas despite there satirical nature. Because his position of authority was compromised, I feel that he cannot continue to teach at OCHS with the distrust and shame he has brought upon himself. Society cannot abandon its principles by allowing acceptance of statements like these that post a threat to most parents and students living in fear of atrocity, to take precedence over responsibility for ones actions. Mr. Buss deserves to be terminated, but criminal sanctions are unnecessary.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 1206 hrs

crusader - what an outstanding comment! I don’t believe anyone could have summarized this issue better. My faith in the next generation has been restored.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 1315 hrs

Whew, the problem, of course, isn’t wingnut liberal or wingnut neocon…. the problem is wingnut. If, as is so often the case once the rhetoric gets cranked up, you automatically assume that anyone who disagrees with you is a wingnut—that conservatives or liberals are, by definition, wingnuts—then political discussion ends and howler monkeys flinging feces at each other begins.

Of course, sometimes the people we’re arguing with make it easy for us to make this assumption. :^)

For instance:

hey, Ragnell, surely you must have some theory about why so many teachers are what *you* call “liberals.” Why do you think that is?

hiho
Mp
Posted by Mpeterson on December 02, 2007 at 1331 hrs

Personally I would love for this guy to issue a statement and an apology. something like this would be good.
” I want to apologize to the West Bend Teachers who feared for their safety. Let me assure you that as a teacher myself My comments were only made to illustrate the hatred and the disgust that we face every day from those people want to destroy our schools. I have heard this kind of hate being spewed on this and other conservatives bloggers. But they try to hide this anger behind so called” rational thought”

this composite character that I created was mearly an attempt to show conservatives for what we all in the educational elite know that they reallly are.Knuckle dragging neanderthals
So my teachers friends please accept my apologies

And owen I bet you have a picture of dylan klebold above your computer. See I was right ”
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 1517 hrs

To call Mr.Buss’ comments ‘satire’ is ludicrous. It would be satire if the satirist were honest enough to present himself in that context. Jon Stewart is a satirist because you know who he is really and what his opinions actually are. This miscreant Buss was hiding his true identity, so he thought, and looked to smear people with a conservative belief system in general and the Young Republicans in specific. Hr told LIES not SATIRE and you would be well advised to understand the difference.
It is fitting and proper that his students are standing up so strongly and eloquently for him. My primary fear with him as a teacher of the young is that they are not experienced enough in critical thinking to be able to recognize ‘framing error’. The inability to recognize the difference between satire as a tool of illumination and falsehoods spoken to deceive and impugn is an example of that inability.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 1936 hrs

You stay classy, Kurt.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 1939 hrs

I think the point has been made that it was not Owen who brought Buss’ comments to the attention of authorities. Rather, teachers and administration officials who read the remarks on the blogs reported them to police as remarks that could be contrued as threatening.

They are the ones who either failed to recognize the “satirical” nature of his posts, and felt actually threatened, or possibly cynically assisted a plan to discredit this blog and/or persons who argued against positions they support.

I don’t think he was intending satire at all, but trying to make teachers look put upon, and prove that his views should be supported, as unsavory persons were associated with an opposing view. Though, he would have to supply the unsavory person himself.

I don’t understand persons who cannot directly argue a position, but feel they must gain sympathy and attention for grievances or goals by creating false attackers. Shouldn’t the truth be enough?
Posted by SarahW on December 02, 2007 at 2034 hrs

Mp,

I don’t have any statistics at hand, in order to give an opinion about where one would place the majority of teachers on the political scale. I don’t believe I stated that “most teachers are liberal”.

However, the teachers unions are an entirely different matter(see my earlier comment). Surely it is reasonable to label an organization that funds liberal candidates and other “left” organizations as “liberal”. Liberal groups support other liberal groups, just like the conservatives do. It is perfectly natural to do so.
If you want to understand why the teacher unions fund so many liberal candidates and causes, I’d suggest calling the NEA. They’ve never been shy about advocating their political agenda. If not, it isn’t difficult to check their record on political donations.

A more interesting question, however, would be to ask how and why the NEA developed into a left-leaning organization. I’d speculate on some possibilities, but I wouldn’t want to be accused of making statements of fact.

pacfandave,
Visit wikipedia or a similar site to learn proper blog terminology. The vocabulary is not the same as that found within the regular media. Media personnel need to familiarize themselves with the jargon.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 03, 2007 at 0010 hrs

#59Kay
“You do preface those comments and others above it by saying it’s speculation. But what follows is given as statements. Period.”

Kay,
If you’ve conducted research, you’ll recall that you state a hypothesis as a statement. Yet, a hypothesis isn’t considered a statement of fact; but rather, an advanced type of speculation. Neither does one include question marks in stating a hypothesis. At that stage it is only your speculation of what you intend to investigate and possibly prove as true. So, I’ll have to stand by how I worded my speculation.

#61Pacfandave:
I believe livermoron#68 has explained the difference between satire and duplicity. I’m sorry but his comments don’t strike me as satire.

I know it is difficult when our friends and people we respect get into hot water. Especially, if everything they have accomplished is ignored while a mistake morphs into their entire legacy. Unfortunately, the blogosphere brings out its own version of road rage.

To repeat my earlier comment; both the individual that reported him and the civil authorities appear to have overreacted. Or perhaps it is their inexperience with the nature of the blogosphere. If someone is not used to how commenters often vent their bile on the blogosphere, it is easy to take everything too seriously.

Btw Owen, have you ever had a commenter request you remove their remark after they took a moment to read what they posted? That’s an action more than one hothead has taken after they post before they think.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 03, 2007 at 1418 hrs

I have also taken AP Chemistry with Mr. Buss and irrelevant and am here to tell you that the comments he made are completely out of character. He was a hard working teacher and wanted the best out of his students. Mr. Buss played basketball with students and took those interested scuba diving in the school pool. Many students respect and should still respect him.
He was comical but never insane in the class room and always took the fullest measure to keep us from harm. Maybe that is the problem with today’s society, we are petrified of the bad that could happen and dont focus on the positives. His comments were quite extravagent, but I assure you there are many people, maybe some you know, who think worse thoughts about certain topics but dont write them down. That is the only difference between the two- Mr. Buss made his thoughts pulic. I am not backing or otherwise supporting his comments, but before you judge somebody make sure you know what they are all about.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 03, 2007 at 2245 hrs

Rags, actually I do research. And I do use hypotheses.

So yours was not a research question? Okay.

But if it was a hypothesis, then it ought to follow form for stating hypotheses—as this sentence does. I.e., a hypothesis is written with an “if,” followed by a then.

Instead, your form was, in research terms, for an argument.

But a researcher then follows an argument with evidence. You did not do so. Therefore, it became an unfounded argument.

And that’s not a question nor a hypothesis. It’s just a waste of virtual trees.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 03, 2007 at 2322 hrs

Here’s my take. I am a police officer of 11 years experience. As much as I understand the sincere concern of such comments, and as much as I understand the political forces demanding action by the PD, it is still my stance that this arrest is an uncontested violation of civil rights. Wait and see; even if the local court convicts, an appellate court will overturn. The teacher in question, who probably has a dozen attorneys knocking on his door right now, will probably file suit under USC Title 42, Section 1983 (Violation of Civil Rights). There will either be an out of court settlement (if the police agency is smart) or there will be a huge jury-award for his arrest. “Observer” made no threats, and made no attempt to incite violence against anyone. The statements amounted to nothing more than an individual’s opinion, which is most certainly protected speech under the first amendment. While I certainly don’t agree with the content of the message ( in fact, I find it disturbing, regardless of the intent!) I know, without a doubt, that this arrest will be found to be in violation of the fourth amendment, if indeed the contents of the message was the sole basis for arrest and search. I’ll be watching this case closely to see the outcome!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 0233 hrs

I think the cops probably could have figured out whether the guy was really dangerous simply by going to his house and questioning him for a while. They could then have told the complainants that they investigated the incident and found no cause for further action. I’m really not sure what they were thinking when they locked him up. Maybe this is just part of the “zero tolerance” trend in school security these days.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 1709 hrs

Owen, you seem to have forgotten to addressthe question that anyone posting on this blog would be concerned about. Did you give up information about the identity of the poster? And would you give up similar information? Needless to say, I’ll take my answer off the air.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 1742 hrs

What ever happened to freedom of speech? Oh I forgot…Dubya is still the reigning king. Hence the censorship and the arrest. If only people would look at this and be afraid. Amazing that the constitution and the bill of rights no longer means any to these people and this country as a whole.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 1756 hrs

Oh my. Hey I found this blog off of Yahoo! news. I always check for WI news. I definitely think that the arrest might have gone a titch too tar, but the police recieved a complaint and did right to follow up on it. Anyway, I can’t believe the people who can conceive of a conservative teacher who would ever become the president of a teacher’s union at any time, I thought that it was required to be a liberal even to join a union (that was a small joke, btw) That doesn’t speak to this man’s full character though, just a temporary lapse in judgement.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 1826 hrs

How sad, Did they have a search warrant for the IP Address? Tell me the site at least waited until they had a warrent. Search and arresting someone over this ranks as a pretty gross over reaction to an internet comment from someone who sounds as though he was simply trolling to get a rise out of someone. And some people were so offended that they were afraid and had the vapours and just HAD to call the police and complain about the big evil Troll.

I suppose no one here has heard of TOR as a first line of defense to maintain anonymity.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 1829 hrs

#78

What ever happened to freedom of speech? Oh I forgot…Dubya is still the reigning king. Hence the censorship and the arrest. If only people would look at this and be afraid. Amazing that the constitution and the bill of rights no longer means any to these people and this country as a whole.

Uhm. Since the first day of “freedom of speech,” you haven’t been allowed to shout “FIRE” in a crowded building - just as you can’t shout “COLUMBINE” in regards to “offing teachers.” Nice try, though, on the whole “King W” thing.

#80
How sad, Did they have a search warrant for the IP Address? Tell me the site at least waited until they had a warrent. Search and arresting someone over this ranks as a pretty gross over reaction to an internet comment from someone who sounds as though he was simply trolling to get a rise out of someone. And some people were so offended that they were afraid and had the vapours and just HAD to call the police and complain about the big evil Troll.

Why should Owen have waited for a warrant? What does HE have to hide? What do YOU have to hide that you need to maintain your anonymity so well? If you decide to be an idiot troll, sometimes you’re going to have to take responsibility for your actions. Internet ≠ anonymous. And, for the record, the people who filed this complaint are the same people who would be directly affected if this idiot went on a school-shooting rampage.
Posted by Fuzz on December 04, 2007 at 1854 hrs

This is a perfect example of our freedoms being slowly taken away from us due to the police state of the USA.Its time to vote for Ron Paul to restore our USA freedoms.
Posted by ron paul supporter on December 04, 2007 at 1942 hrs

Mr. Buss was my high school science teacher (back in 1994-1995 he taught Physical Science to us freshman). If you don’t believe me look me up in the year book (I’m the only Lewis). He was the best teacher that I had as a freshman (hands down), very encouraging, helpful, etc. One of his defining characteristics was that he had a quirky personality. Kind of almost like Ed Nuy the Science Guy x5. By and far though, Mr Buss was a great teacher—and is an asset to Oak Creek High School.

Having said that, personally I’d be shocked if he said these things in any other context than sarcas, — especially given the fact that he was the head of the teacher’s union. All I really have is a few tidbits and not the full context, so I can’t accurately make that determination. Secondly, even if he said it and meant it, there was no DIRECT threat.

These West Bend Cops have really overstepped their bounds. By and far police are wonderful people, but every once and a while in scattered locations there are bad apples. Having said that, these west bend cops have really overstepped their bounds. Kind of like those crazy tazer vids you see online. What Mr. Buss did was not a crime and I hope he sues the shit out of them.

Regards,
—Lewis
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2003 hrs

This is my last post here.most likely this site will be shut down by the guy that got arrested.im sure there will be a big lawsuit soon.this website owner will no longer be able to pay his hosting fees and will be subject to hunting in the woods for food an will be living in his tree stand.
Posted by ron paul supporter on December 04, 2007 at 2009 hrs

this site will be shut down by the guy that got arrested

Either the guy wasn’t smart enough to lawyer up before he talked to the cops (he even admitted to them that he posted the comment), or he knew from the get-go that he overstepped a line. And as of the moment, he has not been charged with anything either. Not much of a basis for any lawsuits as far as I can tell, but I’m not a lawyer, but then again, I haven’t seen anyone mention any similar situations where police have been sued for making an arrest where there is some factual basis.

Owen has nothing to worry about - a lot of people have “his back”. He good.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2045 hrs

I can’t believe anyone took what a blog commenter seriously. Let alone anything written on the internet to begin with. I mean, cripes, the Internet practically runs off porn and angst. There are hundreds of thousands of posts every single day across a million web sites of pissed off kids saying they’re going to kill you, or ticked off gamers who say they’re going to hunt down that guy who beat them in a game, to dips who just got dumped and post vile rants about women. Give it a rest. The internet IS NOT SERIOUS BUSINESS. Take everything you read on here with a HUGE grain of salt. If someone is posting that they’re going to stomp all over someones face, chances are, 99 times out of 100 they’re not. Get over it, and yourselves.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2050 hrs

I’ve seen posts like the one Buss posted on other conservative blogs. (A liberal who poses as a conservative and writes fake posts in order to discredit the blog is referred to as a “Moby” after the singer who urged lefties to do this.)

Liberal Mobys are easy to spot because they don’t sound like actual conservatives. They sound like what liberals think conservatives sound like. This teacher didn’t spell correctly and he praised two killers. Why on earth does he (and Kurt, apparently) think the Columbine shooters were heroes to the right and that that post would fit right in here? When has a conservative EVER praised Dylan and Klebold? Look at the other comments on this blog. Do you see anyone who sounds illiterate, anyone who can’t spell, anybody who thinks school shooting is a good thing? And Owen is not reacting to his arrest the way Buss probably imagines he is. Owen is not gloating - he thinks it was an overreaction. (So do I, but you know, even before 9/11 you couldn’t make jokes about bombs in airports. Making any comments praising school shootings is extremely foolish in this day and age.)

Like Kurt, Buss was blinded with hatred and contempt and so unfamiliar with actual conservatives that he couldn’t manage to even get his unfunny little parody right. Conservatives know what libs sound like because we hear them all the time. Libs only know their own little echo chamber.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2107 hrs

You pig m’fers; this is so clearly protected free speech that I hope the speakers sue the f**in sh*t out of you pig m’fers; this is crazy that a DA was not brought in to examine whether this speech was indeed legal first. I hate you f***in prosecutors and wife beating pigs…. you are worthless pigs—wishing someone dead is not a crime or being happy that a crime committed isn’t either; in 1981, a govt employee who was fired who stated she was “happy that reagan got shot and hoped he died” won a free speech suit and got her job back. You pigs are sick m’fers and I am getting so tired of this Hitler approach that this country uses now. Come get me you pig mother f***ers! I hate you f***ing pigs, I hope you choke on your doughnuts you worthless govt employee thugs; I love it when I hear about a cop getting killed, you know why? You pig f**ks derserve it.

Love,
Gerald R. Clough, J.D.
University of Wyoming College of Law 1994
Posted by gerald clough on December 04, 2007 at 2120 hrs

wow. Well I agree that society overreacts about a lot, but you yourself arent any better with that comment. Seems as if everyone overreacts in their own manner, either in the initial arrest of him, or your reply to the incident now.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2130 hrs

I am afraid to post here anymore for fear you will turn me over to the police.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2203 hrs

Owen,

Am writing to reiterate Richard’s (comment 22) advice that you retain legal counsel and refrain from commenting further on the case. Richard may be correct when he insists that there will be a Section 1983 action against the police department, but more importantly you may be personally liable under different statutes. Specifically, 18 U.S.C Section 2702(a)(3) (the Stored Communications Act) provides

“a provider of remote computing service or electronic communication service to the public shall not knowingly divulge a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or customer of such service to any governmental entity.”

There is an exception under 2702(c)(4) but the exception requires that a provider have a good faith belief that there is a danger of death or serious physical injury to any person. Your comments on this site may damage any claim you might have to a good faith belief that someone would be injured or killed. Also, SarahW (comment 26) is appears to be correct in that you are likely immunized under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (47 United States Code section 230(c)) for the content of the post and your act of removing it.

Nothing in this post should be considered Legal Advice, rather it is simply reference to potentially relevant United States Statutes.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2211 hrs

It is amazing that so many post (I mean comments) were about liberal VS conservative. Remember “United we stand - Divided we fall”. Also remember that private companies are killing inocent people in Iraq right now so that we can maintain or constitutional right of free speech. If you can arrest someone for saying something stupid, then G.W.Bush could be spending an eterinity in jail.
I think the police, (who’s job it is to determine if a crime has actually been commited rather than waste the courts time and tax dollers), reacted with thier typical stupidity with the “action first and commen sence second” rule in which they regularly abuse.
Poor guy, I hope his life isn’t completely destroyed by his dumb comment. As a G.W.Bush kind of christian, I hope he rots in hell!!! Oops, I mean, gets forgiven!!!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2214 hrs

I think the only person who did something wrong and is in need of a good lawyer is the Webmaster of this site. The poster had an expectation of privacy and from your story it sounds like you gave up his personal info without a subpoena from law enforcement.

Go ahead, I’d like to hear you claim the sleeping Detective texted the document to your beeper in those couple of minutes it took for your friend to turn over the IP address.

I think the webmaster is the one who is in trouble. I see a civil lawsuit coming.

PS - You might want to pull your little story down and not make it so easy for the teacher to win a lawsuit against you.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2220 hrs

FYI,

need-a-lawyer and Mr. Disappointed are the same person. There is no expectation of privacy on this site or any other. Read the terms of service. If you don’t agree to them, then don’t comment.
Posted by Owen on December 04, 2007 at 2232 hrs

Way to bend over for the cops when they came and asked for someone’s IP address. Have you ever heard of something called a subpoena you dickless wonder?

To the “educator” that reported the post: No your not a hero for reporting this-just another busy body ahole that needs to get a life.
Look up “sarcasm” in the dictionary you inbred, toothless illiterate hicks.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2257 hrs

I think the comment by the students say it best. Good Guy overall but one wrong comment can ruin your life.

Lesson 1 for the students - You Have No Rights, the constitution is a joke to our governing forces.
Lesson 2 - You have the right to be arrested for any reason any time and held indefinetly according to the Patriot Act. Lesson 3 - You must choose a side, liberal or conservative, No Free Thinkers Allowed.
Lesson 4 -If you think I’m kidding, just read the newspaper or turn on one of the Lefty or Righty news channels.
Final lesson - You are guilty untill proven inocent!!!
Extra credit - Watch what you say or type or even think, because someone is watching you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2301 hrs

I think there is something wrong when a webmaster will turn over the identity of one of his readers to the police without, as the webmaster admits, believing that a crime has been committed. Obviously, this is not a website that believes in freedom of speech.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2303 hrs

If this person was “acting like an imbecile” then he was acting like a liberal, not a conservative.
Posted by Reality Hammer on December 04, 2007 at 2317 hrs

The sad fact is all of what Mike said was basically true. What has our world come to. I have chosen sides. I never liked Bush. I don’t think that Owen did wrong in giving up the IP but I believe that it would have eventually happened whether or not he waited. Right now my AP class is kinda screwed at the moment because our teacher is gone and we do not have another teacher as experienced in the AP course as him. We had a different chemistry teacher, that i had for regular chem but we will have to see how this process gets dragged out
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2326 hrs

Why did the Webmaster turnover the IP address to the officer without a warrant?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2336 hrs

http://www.bootsandsabers.com/index.php/weblog/p ermalink/blogging_ethics/
Posted by Owen on December 04, 2007 at 2339 hrs

“Why did he give out the persons name”

I am not the webmaster but I would guess that from his comments above that he forsaw nothing illegal about the post and therefore thought the police would just go check out the guy and relize he was just being saterical and looking to get other commenters riled up for a good discussion. I’m sure he did not expect it to make nation news.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2345 hrs

Laughable.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2350 hrs

To the student of the teacher.

First of all it’s past your bed time! Just kidding. If you get a new teacher, dont worry. It has allways been up to you to learn on your own. Granted a good teacher is most benificial, but you can learn plenty on your own! Don’t let this affect your opinion of other teachers, we all make mistakes, thats part of learning and growing up. If your teacher does return, rember he is just a man not an idol and tell him he is an idiot for saying what he said but learn as much as you can from anyone who is willing to teach you but always Think For Your Self!!!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2354 hrs

Just saw it on the FNC ticker…
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2358 hrs

Next, lets get to banning, then burning, some books. People in this Country have no right to express their opinion if its extreme in nature compared to popular sentiment. What was he thinking? No satire should be allowed unless labeled first, and approved by the proper authorities. The D.A. went to Harvard, so he knows this Teacher has no right to express a satirical opinion where just anyone using the internet can see and read it. (NOTE - The above was satire, and no, I did not run it by the local Political Officer for approval first).

In my humble opinion, the School Board should fire the offended teacher for being so uneducated as to be unable to recognise satire and for such a lack of common sense to recognise a “free speach” issue. Yes, one obviously can’t yell “fire” in a theater, but an internet post - even one as distateful as, say, praising the 9/11 terrorists, is still protected speach, but distastefull. If I, in satire, praise the “brave terrorists that sent so many women and children to Allah”, am I inciting terrorism or pointing out the stupidity of the fools? Am I boardering on making a racist comment? Should I hire a lawyer now? The fact that School Board would string up one of their own for an anonymous statement, clearly satirical, is simply amazing. You know they will make him appologize, which is a shame. No one, not even teachers, should fear exercise of protected speech. The damage this will do his career shall serve as a shinning example to all public employee that they have not (practical) rights of free expression. The real irony here is that its us right wing folks that will be the ones jumping to this defense of this liberal. Now, off to burn those books!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0002 hrs

I would like to hear more from other students.
I doesn’t matter what all the bloggers think. The only thing that matters is how the students feel and how thier parents feel about what has happened. Is he a good teacher who made a mistake or an evil hate monger?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0005 hrs

To: the student of the teacher-Ken

What do your parent have to say about this ?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0010 hrs

To: the teachers reading this blog

What do you think?
Also, sorry for the spelling errors, its past my bed time too.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0014 hrs

Thanks for that wonderful commentary, Gerald. Glad to see that the U of W is producing such a fine lot of upstanding law professionals! Anyway, moving on. Mike… I believe you have things a bit distorted.

>Lesson 1 for the students - You Have No Rights, the >constitution is a joke to our governing forces.

This is simply not true. Spend some time in a court-room, and see how many criminal cases get thrown out, everyday, over technicalities in 4th and 5th amendment criminal procedure.

>Lesson 2 - You have the right to be arrested for any reason >any time and held indefinetly according to the Patriot Act.

This is another falsehood. The Patriot Act is a very complex document which outlines specific requirements. It is rarely (if ever) used by local law enforcement agencies, and is, for the most part, only used by the Counter-Terrorism section of the FBI. Thus far, just in Chicago, the provisions of the Patriot Act have interrupted a plan bomb the Sears Tower, as well as the Dirkson Federal Building. I just happened to jog past the Dirkson Federal Building as a part of my daily routine during the time that it was supposed to bombed. I’m kind of glad the system worked!

> Lesson 3 - You must choose a side, liberal or conservative, >No Free Thinkers Allowed.

Yet another misguided statement. You are free to be liberal, conservative, independant, Christian, Satanist, purple, trans-gender, you name it! In a democratic society, the political majority wins. Some people aren’t happy with that set-up. Do you have an alternate form of government in mind? Perhaps force the will of the political minority upon the political majority? Survival of the fittest?

>Lesson 4 -If you think I’m kidding, just read the newspaper >or turn on one of the Lefty or Righty news channels

This seems to be the core of the problem. If I could teach every student in America one lesson, it would be to break their dependence on the media for reliable information. Everyone seems to forget that the media institutions are a FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS! The newspapers, magazines, and news stations routinely leave out key details so as to make a story more controversial than it really is. Why? Controversey sells newspapers and commercial airtime. It gets ratings. Watch a congressional debate on C-Span sometime, then watch the evening news to see how many 8-second soundbites are taken completely out of context.

Don’t be so quick to say that we have no freedoms in this country. We still don’t have all the details on this arrest. There may very well have been threats made to other officials prior to this web-posting. There may be a whole array of details that the media is witholding, so that they can make a few bucks. However, I still stand by my original statement that IF the only basis for the arrest and search warrant were the contents of his blog post, the case will get tossed, and a successful lawsuit will follow.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0018 hrs

Dont we have more important things to worry about in this country like how to stop hunger and poverty or how to stop all of the homicides in the Milwaukee area which is what you hear about on the news every day. Our society needs to worry about more important things than a blog that says nothing about how a person truly acts and what a person truly does. Believe me, he was my teacher.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0019 hrs

i’m also a student of him, as i’ve posted before. Both of my parents are educators, with my father also being a teacher at my school, and thus a collegue of him. When i was first told of the ordeal by him, he was in disbelief himself. My mother thinks that it’s a joke, that there is no way it was an honest statement or that he should lose his job or be put in jail over it. At school today, our first day back since the ordeal was made public, there were lots of discussions at school. I do not recall hearing a single student saying they WANTED Mr. Buss to be fired over it. Although, being an aide for Mr. Buss, I was there in one of his classes, and a number of regular chemistry students seemed to think class would be getting easier since he was gone, but nobody seemed to think he deserved to lose his job, or had any problem or worry about the comment he made.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0020 hrs

Seems like the whole thing is a sad comment regarding the quality of our educators.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0035 hrs

Dear Anon:
Tell that to the 6 million people in prison or the enemy combatents being held for? Or to the people involved in an arguement with thier spouse who were arrested due to the laws saying domestic abbuse calls require someone must go to jail whether they did something or not. Or To people like me that were arrested for protesting the war. I guess standing in a crowd of people expressing thier constitutional rights peaceably is a crime. Although I am a pro-military and pro-American and pro-gun person but anti-injust-greedy-profiteering-war for oil minded person.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0040 hrs

Sorry, of topic rant.
Hope I’m going to get arrested for that comment. Although I’m sure I just made it on to some government watch list.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0054 hrs

I am very sorry to see this news
I think arrest the teacher is unfair
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0055 hrs

Mike:
you are a humour guy aha
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0128 hrs

Hey go get my IP address and report me. The idiot teacher who reported the teacher who showed questionable, yet protected statements, should be arrested for starting all of this crap. She/he is the one who has incited this whole situation. Free speech - reprehensible or not - is protected you total dipshit.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0155 hrs

If I may make a Modest Proposal . . . Leave the teacher alone! Sure, his satire was not on a par with Jonathan Swift’s, yet he clearly intended to be satirical. Except for the neurotic teacher who complained, this would never/should never, have become an issue. Bob’s right, a teacher who can’t recognize satire should be kicked out of the classroom.

We’ve turned into a nation paranoid about political correctness. How come it’s p.c. to object to free speech?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0222 hrs

Would you guys post a link to the post that, that guy was commenting on? I think it would explain a lot—- motivation wise. His comment was a responce to something and we need to read the whole story. On the face of it, it looks like parady to me—and that IS protected speach—and if that’s the case, I hope the teacher does get a good lawyer and makes millions of the stupid police who violated an American Citizen’s constitutional right. Otherwise: first HIM, and later they come for YOU, and finally they come for THE REST OF US.

You said he was not a regular—all the more reason to suspect parady—in this case most likely making fun of your site. You know .....military stuff, like guns and killing.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0311 hrs

Boy, the liberal bats in the Belfrey are really out on this post.
This “teacher” is an idiot and males other teachers look bad. He should never teach again- he is a poor role model for students.
The cops had an obligation to look at this. They had an obligation to get the IP address. For those who says Owen should get a lawyer, are you going to pay for 1t ? He did what he had to do and according to his consiousness. You idiots who are critical of him, you have never been put in that position.
Whether he is charged is irrelevant, he is a compolete idiot and should never step into a classroom again.
Funny, we have not heard from him or his lawyer.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0316 hrs

Whether or not his post was appropriate isn’t the only issue. It’s you bending over for the detective when he didn’t even buy you dinner.

As a server host, you steward sensitive information that can identify your users… and as such you are responsible for protecting that information. You shouldn’t just hand it out at the first sign of controversy and allow police to harass your users without legal cause.

Ask them to get a subpoena if they deem the comments to be that substantial. Way to over-react with the rest of them.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0348 hrs

Hmmmmm, you seem to have made Topic Of Conversation on my site…

http://210.48.108.85/~savagepl/discus/messages/5/450 1.html?1196843020
Posted by Kiwifrank on December 05, 2007 at 0429 hrs

there are many families and firends who lost a loved one in Columbine High School. it is absolutely wrong to call those who committed a henius crime against innocent children “HEROES”. Overpaid and less work means “Our great country is doing excellent economically”. As a parent I will never support a teacher who support MURDERS.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0437 hrs

You guys ever wondered why UBBS software tells you your IP was logged when you comment? Did you know that your IP is in the header for all to see when you post on Usenet (or send an email, for that matter)?

Don’t go anywhere online with an expectation your IP is going to be held sacred by any blogger or moderator. Find out your IP and how much it says about you (this varies) and behave accordingly.

Better yet—JUST DON’T SOCK PUPPET.
Posted by S. Weasel on December 05, 2007 at 0521 hrs

Let me just say the admin of this website should be shot for without a second of thought handing over the IP to the police. Luckily for me I live in Europe, a part of the world where there is (still…) 1. true free speach, unlike in the socalled ” land of the free” (believe me, the rest of the world is laughing at that) and 2. where no self respecting administrator would give out posters IP’s like that. Man you are a loser!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0719 hrs

P.s.: The ” should be shot part” in my comment is not to be taken literally…
He should be banned from operating a website in my opinion though.

@ crusaderagainstsocialdecay on December 02, 2007 at 1206 hrs
Nice bladiebla m8. Whining about this guy mentioning of the Columbine massacre and all, and you yourself compare those kids (who shot 12 people if I remember correctly) with nazis (who killed 6000000 jews, let alone all others).
Anyone that would draw a comparison with the Nazis is clearly mentally unhinged despite his seemingly pleasant demeanor…..
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0736 hrs

i think it is somewhat ridiculous that the only two options that are the blog admin gives for the original comments are that 1) the guys is a far right idiot or 2) the guy is a liberal posing as a far right idiot. seriously? that is the best we’ve got here?

there are many reasons the guy might feel the way he does. maybe his politics don’t play into this and perhaps as someone that has experience in the teachers union he is simply tired of seeing many teachers ‘overpaid’ as he says.

no matter what his reasons, it should be made pretty clear that teachers are *typically* under paid and over worked. if a teacher is present on school grounds for five hours a day, that doesn’t mean that their work day is only five hours long. there is a lot of preparation that goes into preparing lesson plans, homework, assignments, etc. add into the equation grading and you have a lot more than five hours of work.

and as i’m sure someone will assert- i’m not a teacher, a crazy liberal/conservative, or someone trying to ‘pretend’ to appear as something.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0842 hrs

You’re an idiot for turning the information over.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0912 hrs

Who needs idiot liberals to make conservatives look bad, when conservatives can make themselves look bad by turning over IP addresses without a warrant without so much as first talking it over with a lawyer or the EFF?

Way to go conservatives!

Do what the State asks you to do—who needs those pesky amendments?

My Bill Of Rights.org
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0921 hrs

I am very sure, weather Mr Buss was right or wrong, it was not a law enforement issue.
But people like the teacher or person that conplained to law enfocement are actualy guilty them selfs of helping destroy our Bill of Rights to include our supposable free speech.
The goverment with the help of the people that make & made this complaint are slowly tearing the corner stones down that this great country was built upon.
And beleive it or not we do live in a police state, in which that article and resulting complaint clearly shows.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 0945 hrs

Just curious, which part of “Its Owen’s house and if you dont like it, go F yourselves” dont you people get?

Lets say i went into work and started saying the same type of things that man did and a visiting salesman heard me then went to the police to complain. The police then come to my boss and want to know where i am, are you saying my boss should say that its a free speech issue and tell them to pound sand??
ar3 you high?
is it because its on the internet IN A PUBLIC FORUM?

There is no such thing as a RIGHT to anonymity in a PUBLIC forum especially when you are visiting.
Get over yourselves.
Posted by still Unreal... on December 05, 2007 at 1003 hrs

This guy should never have been arrested for what amounts to political satyr. Tracking down an IP every time you get your little feelers hurt by some anonymous online personality is lame.

LAME.

Remember, thought police, it’s a two way street.

The Shogun of USMB
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1036 hrs

And some people know the difference between satire and a donkey/goat man.
Posted by still Unreal... on December 05, 2007 at 1039 hrs

How about I just admit I condone all school shootings? Is agreeing with things against the law these days?

How about we start arresting people when they start breaking laws?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1051 hrs

Someone should blow up this blog.

Oh no my computer is broadcasting my IP, how do I dele
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1109 hrs

Actually, Brad, here’s Laughingatyou.
Whether he broke the law or not does not seem to be the reason for all this malice. About how “rights” were violated by telling the cop who did it seems to be.

I guess this goes along with the general Milwaukee no/stop snitching attitude.
Posted by still Unreal... on December 05, 2007 at 1131 hrs

I haven’t read the whole thread, because to be frank once I got to Tim’s posts about “liberals are smart and conservatives are dumb” (I’m paraphrasing, Tim, don’t get mad at me), I lost interest in seeing what else was coming.

My only thought, which may or may not be original, is that maybe it’s BECAUSE he was a teacher that he got arrested. Do we really want a psycho teacher (who may or may not be a liberal posing as a conservative… who cares?), with no small degree of influence over any prospective psycho students, spouting off about what heroes the Columbine whack jobs were?

What if he wasn’t arrested, and next week we had a couple shooters walking the halls of your local school, and then it comes out that the kids were inspired by this great teacher who thought that more teachers should be shot? Then who’s taking the heat?

Might not be the whole truth, but it doesn’t sound too far fetched to me.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1137 hrs

The collection of electronic “forensic” evidence in this incident is a goat-rope. I don’t think there was any reason to arrest this guy, but let’s assume for a minute that there was. There is NO CASE against this guy because the evidence collection was totally botched. Asking the webmaster, no matter how competent he may be, for the evidence is not going to be worth a damn in court. The police asking for the IP address and asking the webmaster to remove the post but “keep a copy” of it is ridiculous. That’s no different than asking a store keeper to collect evidence from a break-in and deliver it to the police station. That would NEVER hold up in court, and neither will this.
Posted by GunMD on December 05, 2007 at 1142 hrs

#63

Their spelling and grammar are definitely better than that of the teacher…
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1146 hrs

Hi guys, you are AWESOME! I’ve always enjoyed reading the blog here, there’s so much common sense and intelligence running around here. I miss that! LOL

I hope you don’t mind, I’d read the story on CNN and posted about it on my blog, then came here to get more of the scoop which I credited to you of course…

I think arresting this guy was a big mistake. Who knows his true intentions but I tend to agree with you that it seems he was posing as a conservative—-or rather what he believed a conservative is—in order to raise a ruckus. Personally I believe he has a complete warped view of conservatives.

Nevertheless, it was written as an opinion and we can’t have people arrested for opinions no matter how unpopular they might be. And if they can arrest this guy, they can arrest you or me. There are those who laugh at that thought, but those of us with brains and common sense know it’s true.

The teacher may have acted like an ass but…there’s no law against that, unless of course they create one, which I’m sure someone’s already thinking about…

By the way, I’m a registered independent, my husband and father own guns (we don’t hunt but hey no one’s perfect right? LOL), I’m a military veteran, I’m educated, I support our troops, I question the government when necessary, I’m opinionated and I vote….

does that make me a threat? LOL. Have a good day guys!!
Posted by Jess on December 05, 2007 at 1150 hrs

I just heard this story on the news. First, I can’t believe someone was arrested for this. Second, I can’t believe a blog site was responsible for calling the police. Last, this blog website will lose followers because of the idiot running it.

Maybe you should change the site url from boots and sabers to spineless snitch.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1212 hrs

The guy was an insensitive idiot for posting that comment, but tracking him down and arresting him is beyond ridiculous. Whoever felt the need to report it was also completely out of line. Whether or not people like it, freedom of speech still extends to people who we disagree with or dislike—that includes idiotic comments posted about tragedies. If these charges stick and this guy ends up with any kind of sentence, even just probation or a fine, they’ll be in violation of his rights. Plain and simple. If you don’t like what someone has to say, practice your own freedom of speech and bitch the fucker out. Don’t go crying to mommy over it.

So am I going to be arrested now for saying mean things on the internet about the teacher who reported him and the cops who actually went through with arresting him?

In future, it would probably be best for you to wait until they have a warrant before disclosing any information about your commenters or visitors to the cops. The naive little girl in me very much hopes that any judge would have refused to sign such an order… though my faith in the legal system diminishes every time I hear about some idiot being arrested for trolling on the internet while pedophiles and sex offenders are going free every damn day.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1214 hrs

Second, I can’t believe a blog site was responsible for calling the police. Last, this blog website will lose followers because of the idiot running it.

Chris, Owen did not call the police; they came to him.

That being said, I too think that an arrest was way out of line. A visit to the guy’s home and a brief interview should have been enough for the police to know that the comments were in no way a threat to anyone.

Wisconsin’s “disorderly conduct” statute is unconstitutional. I’m shocked that it is still on the books after all these years. The police use it as an excuse to arrest anyone for basically any reason they want. Perhaps the publicity generated by this issue will get the idiocy of the statute, and it’s common unreasonable usage like this by the police, will be the catalyst to get it re-written.
Posted by David on December 05, 2007 at 1222 hrs

The internet is serious business!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1246 hrs

My only thought, which may or may not be original, is that maybe it’s BECAUSE he was a teacher that he got arrested. Do we really want a psycho teacher (who may or may not be a liberal posing as a conservative… who cares?), with no small degree of influence over any prospective psycho students, spouting off about what heroes the Columbine whack jobs were?

Regardless of his profession, which shouldn’t have anything to do with his arrest, in America we shouldn’t be arresting people for having an opinion, no matter how ludicrious we think the opinion to be. I don’t understand how it can be seen as ok to arrest this guy because he’s a teacher and could be warping the minds of young people.

Heck, if we’re arresting him for that, might as well arrest all the other thousands of teachers out there who warp the minds of young people just in their everyday teaching. Of course I know that all teachers aren’t like that, but at the same time, as is the case in every group, there’s always a small faction of idiots.

What’s to prevent the government from arresting you or me or anyone here for speaking our minds? All they have to do is say we’re a threat and that others might act based upon our opinion.

The average person doesn’t just go out and commit a violent act based on having read someone’s opinion. The person who goes out and commits a violent act as in the case of the Columbine killers, have been far gone for a long time. Start at home for the answers and then work your way from there…
Posted by Jess on December 05, 2007 at 1247 hrs

Jess, it’s never the average person who loads up and kills a bunch of people. The average person would have read the post and thought, “What a moron.” The not-so-average person might think that this guy was the second coming, and has a really good point. And THAT’s the guy you should be a little more worried about reading some of this stuff…

And like it or not, teachers have influence over our kids. That’s just the healthy and well-balanced ones. Now think about what a popular teacher’s ideas and opinions could do with a kid who’s not all there to begin with.

I’m not saying the arrest is spot on, or that the guy should do time, but he sure as hell should pay a little more attention to that voice in his head that says, “uh uh, dude… bad idea.”
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1255 hrs

I agree, teachers have a tremendous amount of influence over children. Some good, some not so good. Hopefully parents are involved enough to make their voices known. But you and I and everyone here knows that isn’t always the case. Many parents just don’t care, they leave their kids to the care of the school system, as if they were babysitters…

Still though, despite his unusual comments, I believe that arresting this or any other teacher for unpopular opinions is a very dangerous move. While I see what you’re saying about what some kid could get out of this, I also just can’t wrap my mind around arresting him or anyone else, when they’ve done nothing but speak their minds (of course this is going on the premise that he was speaking his mind, even though it appears he may just have been posing as his own warped version of a conservative).

Did the man break the law? It seems like a far reach to charge him as they are considering doing. It seems like an overzealous DA may attempt to stretch the law as much as possible to cover it. This should be interesting.

If they want to keep teachers with opinions which could be construed as dangerous off the streets, they need to create a law banning teachers from having opinions period. Of course we know that won’t happen but damn where does it end?

What this guy did isn’t illegal. It’s stupid, but not illegal.

I do see your point though…just so you know
Posted by Jess on December 05, 2007 at 1315 hrs

Owen, you say no one on your website or anywhere on the internet has the right to privacy. So would you be okay if your personal information - like your home address and phone number - were made public in front of this angry lynch mob?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1326 hrs

A visit to the guy�s home and a brief interview should have been enough for the police to know that the comments were in no way a threat to anyone.

No, reading what the blog post said should have been all that was required. Then the police should have told the person that complained about feeling “threatened” to cancel their internet subscription. The fact that the police/DA wasted and are continuing to waste time on this issue tells me how stupid the police/DA are on this topic. Is there no crime for them to be working on in West Bend?

Everyone is entitled to their opinion even an incorrect moronic opinion. Like, say, the idea that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 or that we are helping US-World relations by continuing the occupation of Iraq. Those were bad/stupid ideas the day this administration came up with them and yet some people still believe them today. Stupidity is not illegal in the US, it has been on display for the world to see for the past 27 years.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1329 hrs

This is a sad and gross over reaction to this teacher’s blog. Since when is it illegal to speak what’s on your mind on the internet and have your house searched and life ruined for it? Shame on all those who wholeheartedly support the police department in this matter. Ironically, I’m sure one day your thoughts will be suppressed by a government you yourslf created.
Posted by anonymous&sad; on December 05, 2007 at 1341 hrs

If they succeed in shutting him up, can they get to work on Ann Coultier next? I find most of what she says to be far more offensive than what he said. If John Edwards becomes a victim of a hate crime because she called him a “fag”, isn’t she an accessory to it? If not, what is his crime? Suggesting that teachers are responsible for some of the violence that occurs to them? I can name a few teachers that surprised me for not getting attacked. But a lot of them were very nice, too. Unfortunately our school system is not very far from being a penal institution, and the stress can certainly send some students over the edge. Changes do need to be made, and on a grand level. The whole process of educating our children by “assembly line” is wrong. Teachers see hundreds of kids each day, and have no feel for who they really are. And I don’t agree that teaching is easy, but it’s not the teacher’s fault. I’m sure most of them do the best they can.

Note: If you send the police over to arrest me for my views, please inform them that I am not a “headline grabbing” individual, and they are not likely to make the newspaper for their trouble.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1342 hrs

In some way I agree with the sentiment of Number 88 . We American Citizens are going to have to fight for our freedomes just like we did 231 years ago. Only now instead of ‘Redcoats’ we have ‘Bluecoats’ ...... so what’s the difference? Power and money and right-wing ideologues are not going to let us be; so we’re in for a fight. I wolder what the militarists who run this site would have said about all the snipers and such that populated the countryside back in 1776?

Oh and they took MY comment aff their site that I left last night—It was a comment very similar to the most bland of today’s comments and mentioned that parody is protected speach and that I hoped that the arrested guy got a good lawyer, and that I hoped he “suied the police who arrested him for millions”—would one of the guys who runs this site email me and let me know (the info I left was accurate, and I left no hate speech—- not even parody).
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1344 hrs

If it had been my website, I would not have released the information without some kind of warrant and even then I would have been hesitant to do it. However, I’m not going to chastise Owen and Jed because they had their own reasons for what they did, even if others don’t agree with it. Look folks, it’s the chance we take when we post on the internet.

For me, it’s a chance I’m willing to take. Let them come to my house for posting unpopular opinions. Hell I think more than half of our nation’s Congress should be forcibly removed from office. Of course everyone has their own interpretation of “force” I’m sure some loon out there will take offense. I don’t care.

Can you imagine investigating every single person who posts controversial opinions?

Holy cow!!
Posted by Jess on December 05, 2007 at 1347 hrs

so are you gonna get sued for helping to restrict his freedom of speech?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1349 hrs

Let’s take away everyones freedom of speech, we don’t need to have opinions anymore, it’s 2007, we have had free speech for years why still allow such horrible thing anymore. People are too sensitive anymore, we much protect all the pansy people who cry over words and someone else’s thoughts or feelings.

Soon to come, school harassment to become a crime! No more school bullies to pick on people 2008.

Signed with sarcasm,

Stlouisx50
Posted by stlouisx50 on December 05, 2007 at 1403 hrs

The big question here is the difference between “unpopular opinion” and “potentially dangerous”. I’ve seen more outrage over the lyrics of a “Gangsta Rapper’s” song than I do over what this teacher said, regardless of his intent.

Do we give more credibility to someone who’s paid to entertain, or to someone who’s paid to teach our kids? I’m still not saying that the guy should be charged, but he should be held accountable, if not by the legal system than at least by the school district he works for. And I’m pretty sure that there’s a few parents out in Colorado who might agree…

Everyone is entitled to their opinion even an incorrect moronic opinion. Like, say, the idea that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 or that we are helping US-World relations by continuing the occupation of Iraq.

Yes, and thank you so much for making this again, about the Bush administration. I don’t know what we would’ve done without that burning commentary.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1408 hrs

By Perry, part two:

Could the person behind this be maybe Owen or Jeb themselves in one way or another? Remember that Owen admits to having freely given up the poster’s IP address,(basically his identity,) to an emailer who advised he was a detective with the West Bend police (make sure you save that Owen along with a complete copy of the blog and comments,) and that Jeb was able to deliver it to the officer, without any legal process required, within minutes. And remember Owen’s excuse that he was so willing to give up the poster’s IP address voluntarily, because he just thought the cops would “find him, chew him out a bit for being an idiot, and leave it alone.”

Yet doesn’t Owen state that based on the tenor of the poster’s comments that he concluded one of two things - that he was a true ultra-conservative idiot that was harmless, or a liberal using Owen’s blog site to razz all the “intellectual” conservatives who participate in his blog.”

My point being that based on Owen’s own admissions, there was no real basis for Owen believing that the police should be involved in the matter whatsoever. Yet, Owen makes it clear that he likes the idea that the cops would find the guy who was disrespecting his blog with this kind of unflattering, satirical stereotype of hate-mongering conservatives, and that somebody in a position of conservative authority would tell the “guy” that he’s an idiot and to leave Owen’s “upright” conservative blog alone.
And don’t you all find the school superintendent’s reported reaction interesting, to say the least. Notice how this stooge took this opportunity to pretend that it wasn’t obvious to her and everyone else that the teachers comments posted in a conservative blog were purely satirical. There’s no indication in her response that she recognized that the teacher’s post just gave testament to the teacher’s fervor in advocating for teacher’s salary and his contempt for conservative hate-mongerers

The fact that the superintendent tried to play this off as if this teacher was somehow a closet conservative and teacher hater is so completely ludicrous, one has to wonder if she wasn’t part of scheme to persecute this teacher and deny him his right to ridicule conservative thought (or the lack of it!)

Is it possible that Owen or Jeb, having had enough of these liberal “Mobys,” and having some connections in the law enforcement community, who had connections in the telecom industry, (remember, the IP address is just the start, from there, you have to get the ISP to get the person’s identity, and now we’ll have to find out if this was given voluntarily as well, or if it was hijacked,) who was then given the teacher’s identity? Upon finding out that this was not just any teacher, but a prior union official, president no less, was it then set up with officials in the school district, or some other conservative figure, to file a complaint? Will the police really have a solid record of who made the complaint, or will it ultimately turn out that it was an “anonymous” complaint, which is the golden child of conservatives and law enforcement in the pursuit of violating people’s civil liberties?

Laugh me off and call me a wanna be Perry Mason, but believe me, this is not a straight forward story of someone who legitimately perceived statements that were of a truly threatening nature that was then properly acted on by law enforcement and the courts.

And as to Crusader’s statements acknowledging that the teacher’s comments were nothing more than satirical comments, but that somehow the events of Columbine are too sacrosanct to have been used as part of this teacher’s satirical jabs at the conservatives, I’d tell you to blow it out your hind-end, but it’s obvious that it’s sealed off too tight for that to happen. So instead, I’ll just say that your comments were the scariest of all, in terms of putting in plain sight the dark corner that too many people (at least to my liking) in this country seem willing to turn toward.

Anyway, shame on you Owen and Jeb for not having the integrity to honor the very thing that your blog was to have stood for, which was the free exchange of ideas without unwarranted intrusions by government, which is exactly what happened here. So go ahead and give them my IP address as well, because if it’s a fight they want in denying us our civil liberties, I’m prepared to do my part, like so many that have gone before me. We can now add Mr. James Buss to that list, and we all wish him well in the fight.

Perry
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1409 hrs

Use an anonymizer. They are not that hard to use and they work extremely well at making the internet much more anonymous.

freeproxy.ru/en/free_proxy/cgi-proxy.htm
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1413 hrs

By Perry (part one)

I’ve read all the posts and all the other information available, and I’m now prepared to share with you what I believe really happened here. A few guiding principles that knowledgeable attorneys always follow: 1) the news media get about 10% of it right; 2) the cops and the other participants in our legal system of injustice are some of the best liars that you will ever find; and 3)no matter how much you tend to believe what someone is telling you, you have to make your own judgments.

It was not a school administrator, teacher, or anyone involved in the teaching profession that truly felt threatened by this comment and then allegedly made a complaint to law enforcement. Thanks to Owen’s honesty in at least reporting the part of the teacher’s post that the media did not report, “I am NOT advcting shootng teachrs,” it was obvious to anyone of any intelligence that the poster was not making threats. There is simply no way anyone who saw the full text of the blog and the teachers comments could have concluded it was threatening.

Moreover, it would have been obvious to anyone that read the teacher’s full post that it was nothing more than an over-the-top satirical comment. Of course, the reason one makes an over-the-top satirical comment is so that everyone recognizes it as such. What Owen doesn’t tell us is the response that this post generated from other posters.

My suspicion is that it was immediately identified as being from someone who was just trying to get under the skin of the conservative posters who normally frequent this blog.

Anyway, the reason the police investigated this teacher’s post and then made this arrest was based on the involvement of a highly placed conservative person whose skin the teacher’s post got under (or under the skin of someone who knew someone with the clout that could make this farcical arrest happen.) Whether it was the audacious tongue in cheek statement linking the Columbine shooters to the Young Republicans (pretty funny actually), or whether it was just the outrage felt by a good conservative who so much resented the liberal stereotype (but remember there is a reason it’s called a stereotype) of the red-neck, hate-mongering conservative that caused this person or persons to take action, we will probably never know.

Of course, you will hear the typical law enforcement cop-out (pun unavoidable) that “once we get a complaint, we got to look into it.” That just doesn’t wash though, since again, any person of any intelligence looking over the posts and the nature of the discussion in general, along with the disavowment of wanting anyone killed, would have been able to immediately determine that there was no basis for the complaint or any further investigation - at least not in a country where the hallmark of free speech rights resides in the use of satire and irony, and irreverence in general.

The fact that there was a search warrant issued on the teacher’s home, though, is what makes this incident all the more insidious, and provides some evidence that whoever was pushing to “out” this poster had to have some connections. Although so many of our judges come from prosecutorial backgrounds that make them mere rubber stamps for law enforcement, it’s hard to believe that any jurist would be so pliant in a case like this that was so outlandish and that so clearly implicated 1st amendment rights. However, the fact that a search warrant was issued may be one of the biggest obstacles that the teacher faces in a suit for violation of his 1st amendment rights, which every good conservative knows.

(See Perry part two, as I typed all this before I learned there was a limit on its size)
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1414 hrs

One shot at a time, Jimmy.

Oh christ I’m getting arrested now. Hopefully they won’t tase me, bro.

Shit like this is the cancer that is killing America.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1438 hrs

Perry brings up a good point.

Within the context of the comments that we had been tossing around that afternoon and evening this really did not seem any more ludicrous than a lot that had already been posted.

Things had devolved to the usual posturing and name calling from the Robcon Horatio Alger types. Public school teachers are lazy, should not be considered “professionals”, incompetent, you know the drill.

I actually thought it was someone who just got home from an Unhappy Hour at some bar. It was more laughable than threatening.

I wonder what made Mr Buss’s comment stand out?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1448 hrs

Maybe the part about Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold being heroes…?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1456 hrs

This was a shitty thing to do brah. Now I’m going to habe to get back to work immunising children from MMR… ONE SHOT AT A TIME
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1458 hrs

When I read the post made by Mr. Buss, it was obvious he was trying to make a point through sarcasm. I’m sure the last thing he expected was to be arrested for this action. I am further stunned that the idiot police department would be so dim to construe this as a threat and grounds for arrest. Regardless of the tastelessness of his post or his liberal leanings, he has the right of free speech and they were clearly trampled. This is disgusting. Who is the dumbass that reported him?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1507 hrs

What actually is a “troll?” Would that be someone who adds comments to a blog that do not march in the same general direction as the blog?

For instance, if the general tone of the B&S;bloggers is that everything tastes like vanilla and someone posts a comment saying that “everything tastes like baloney,” would the “baloney” poster be a “troll?”

Just curious about the “troll” designation.
Posted by JPN on December 05, 2007 at 1533 hrs

Why don’t we let the West Bend police know that we don’t appreciate their stupidity and disregard for our free speech?

(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Don’t say anything that’ll get you arrested.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1541 hrs

Owen, I think you are a disgrace. Do I understand you are also a journalist? Obviously not the heroic kind who protects his sources. At the first sign of trouble you turn over the teacher’s personal info? I think the newspaper where were you write a column should fire you.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1548 hrs

While everyone’s all up in arms, has anyone bothered to even see if the guy’s still in jail? Or even if he’s going to be actually charged? Or are we all having so much fun bashing the big mean policemen that we don’t care about the current facts?

http://www.jsonline.com/watch/?watch=1&date;=12/5/20 07&id;=32684
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1551 hrs

Disgraced, I wasn’t aware that Owen was a “journalist”, and thereby held to protect the identities of his sources….... Don’t you read the “About Us” section, or are you one of “those” people?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1553 hrs

See, here it is again… It’s waaaay easier to just jump into the mob mentality and swing your torches and pitchforks for injustice. Why don’t we settle down a little and check the facts before we start throwing the Molotov cocktails?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1556 hrs

He posted bond and is on paid administrative leave until his dickless superiors decide to fire him and they will. And, yes, the police officer in charge of making the decision to arrest this man should be picked on because he is a fool.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1558 hrs

Yeah, he posted bond but the charges have been dropped so I would assume he got his bond back.

As far as his dickless (Is this a slam at women in authority?) superior goes (Who incidently IS a women and therefore “dickless”). I think his continued employement is for her and the school board to decide.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1606 hrs

Agreed, jmstroup… partially. I’m still of the opinion that a teacher should be held to a higher standard than Eminem or Ice T.

Then again, if the cops had done nothing, and something bad had happened, I think this would be a totally different thread. You can’t really fault the police when it’s the populace that’s so lawsuit crazed.

Was there a crime committed? Nope.

Should he have been arrested? Nope.

Were his rights violated? Nope.

Should he be put back in charge of a classroom? Nope.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1610 hrs

Thanks for the link Cage.

Maybe the part about Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold being heroes…?

This is less acceptable than calling for glassing over the Muslim world which was done here a few weeks ago?

Another question I have would be is what if the comment had come from someone in Arizona, would the WBPD have gone down there to question him.?

That’s why I think Perry’s scenario deserves some thought.

Were there some other motivations in this?

Does the interest in knowing who says what here go beyond assessing where the traffic is coming from?

Owen a straight question.

With the exception of this incident, does any of this sort of IP/ISP info get disseminated to anyone other than Jed, Wendy and yourself?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1618 hrs

He was being sarcastic when he said the Columbine shooter knew how to handle those overpaid teachers. He was trying to make a point through the use of sarcasm. Some idiot totally missed his point and he winds up arrested and after 20+ years of teaching he will lose his job and career over an anonymous blog post?

This man will be defined and judged by one bullshit comment on a blog. A hardworking teacher that is sick of people trashing teachers. I wish I was a student at his school. I’d organize students on his behalf.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1622 hrs

By dickless, I meant spineless. Perhaps you can take that comment out of context and have me labeled a misogynist. Let me see if I can think of something to get me arrest.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1625 hrs

Typical useless west bend police when my mother with alzehimers was being abused by my brother they didnt lift a finger to help her.But aparantly the lazy good for nothing cops in west bend have the time and money to goto milwaukee to arrest someone for typing something.What a bunch of BS people.To bad he didnt make that statement about the west bend police.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1626 hrs

The difference, pjr, is that one was a threat the commenter could be reasonably assumed to be capable of acting upon, the other was a threat the commenter could be reasonably assumed to be totally incapable of acting upon.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1627 hrs

This is less acceptable than calling for glassing over the Muslim world which was done here a few weeks ago?

lol!! Hey, pjr, nice to see you again too… I’m glad to see your style of debate hasn’t changed. In all honesty, yes I think this is less acceptable. On the one hand we have a guy, who’s supposed to be in charge of teaching our children, hailing the shooters at Columbine as heroes. On the other hand we have some guy from Wisconsin talking about using violence in a war zone during a time of war.

Stay strong, brother
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1629 hrs

By dickless, I meant spineless. Perhaps you can take that comment out of context and have me labeled a misogynist. Let me see if I can think of something to get me arrest.

I dunno, throw in some stuff about homos and how all Muslims are violent psychopaths, and I’m sure that someone here will get all offended and report you for hate crimes or something…....

BTW, that was all meant as a spoof. A jest…. Irony if you will
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1633 hrs

For the safety of children and techers everywhere, I’m glad Owen and Jeb gave the info to the police.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1634 hrs

Gotta get a new keyboard. That should read teachers. Sorry.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1636 hrs

I suppose congratulations are in order.

For the first time ever, I removed myself from email notifications for a thread.

Way, way too many comments.
Posted by elliot on December 05, 2007 at 1636 hrs

Owen is a journalist. He writes a weekly column for the Daily News. You would think as such he would be a little more in touch with the concept of Freedom Of Speech. Guess not.

And Cagekicker, perhaps next time you should do a little research so next time you can pretend to be intelligent.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1637 hrs

He was not hailing the Columbine shooters. He was using sarcasm to make a point. It was a poor choice of words probably chosen quickly and put on a blog where he thought he was anonymous.

Don’t crucify this man. It is like the idiots in Sudan who want to execute the poor teacher for letting her class name the teddy bear Mohamed.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1640 hrs

Disgrace, I’m sorry to have wronged you in accusing you of not being bright enough to read the “About” section. I do hope that my comments have not caused any undue stress to you, or your family, and I will endeavor not to repeat any such slander at any time in the future.

Now, how does Owen’s job as a journalist (of which I was unaware…. soooooooooooooo sorry) relate to this public forum of debate?

You picked the right name, I’ll give you that…

He was not hailing the Columbine shooters. He was using sarcasm to make a point.

Apparently, not everyone got the joke. Sucks to be him. So yes, thank you very much for beating the poor dead horse. The man’s a hero. I take it all back. He should get a raise. Hell, we should all get raises.

Mr Buss, we salute you.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1647 hrs

I smell conspiracy theorists. Give over already. This is West Bend. It’s not even Milwaukee. I think that everyone involved in this story (the person who complained to the police, the police, Owen, even Mr. Buss) didn’t worry about dragging down liberals or conservatives as a whole, the Bush administration, or anything like that, but reacted to circumanstances in a way they perceived to be appropriate (making a satirical statement, percieving and reporting a threat, following through on a complaint, cooperating with a police request) and other people jumped on this and blew it into the s**tstorm you see before you. Perhaps Mr. Buss should have realized that he is in fact, a chemistry teacher and not a satirist and restrained himself, perhaps the complainer should have realized that they were in fact reading satire and not a threat, perhaps the police should have ignored the complaint, or simply told Mr. Buss that his comments were in bad taste and made someone feel threatened, perhaps Owen should have been paranoid of the cops and refused to turn over the IP without a warrant (we don’t all have something to hide), but they didn’t. End of story. Now let the cops let Mr. Buss go with some dignity for both of them, and let the school board decide the next appropriate step and go on with your life.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1651 hrs

I’m not saying he should get a raise cagekicker. But I don’t think firing him and ruining his career and wrecking him financially is appropriate.

I’m sure Mr. Buss would have chosen different words if he was submitting a letter to the local newspaper instead of posting an anonymous comment on a blog.

I don’t salute him but I’m not going to cast the first stone either.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1653 hrs

“Now, how does Owen�s job as a journalist relate to this public forum of debate?” - cagekicker

I will repeat myself for the people on the little yellow bus.

“You would think as such he would be a little more in touch with the concept of Freedom Of Speech.” - me

Also, CageKicker, I love how you make a mistake and then become immature and sarcastic in your apology. You make it out like it is someone else’s fault that you messed up. You are so ordinary. There is a reason you have not been successful in life.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1716 hrs

Well, I guess this puts things into perspective…

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071205/ap_on_re_us/mall _shooting
Posted by Kiwifrank on December 05, 2007 at 1744 hrs

As a former student, I was shocked when I read about what he had written on this website. I had him for a few years, and he was an amazing teacher. I am in college to become a teacher myself, and looking back I realize the ways he managed a classroom were great. Using sarcasm in his class was part of the ordinary, and he loved cracking jokes. Although he may have gone too far on this one, isnt that what america loves.
Look at all the things that south park has brought to television. They have brought curse words into acceptable words that can be said on television.
Look at Don Imus. He did get fired, but is now back on the radio. Although not in the same spot, he did get his career back on track. I hope Mr. Buss will do the same. I will be following this story very closely as I have been in the past few weeks.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1816 hrs

TERROR TERROR TERROR. RAWR!!!!!!
Overpaid teacher union thugs should be shot in the back of the head—one at a time. They should also maybe undergo some kind of severe nipple torture with a blowtorch or something. I would also like to express my praise and admiration for Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold because they did such fine work.
Osama bin Laden = awesome
Freedom = a dire threat which should probably be dealt with using large bombs of some sort.
But the main thing to take away here is that teacher union thugs should be shot in the back of the head—one at a time.
OMG INTERNETS THREAT!!!!!!1111!!!!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1819 hrs

I have penis?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1823 hrs

I am going to call the police and report you Bubs (Comment 193) because I am too fucking stupid to detect your sarcasm and I can count on West Bend’s finest being just as fucking stupid.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1858 hrs

I think Owen already called.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1905 hrs

By dickless, I meant spineless. Perhaps you can take that comment out of context and have me labeled a misogynist. Let me see if I can think of something to get me arrest.

So by “dickless” You mean “spineless” which I would take to mean “without courage”? Is that correct?

Curious how you equate having courage to having male genitalia.

Hmmmmmm. Well, that tells us a lot about you and your view points.

Thanks for your input.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1910 hrs

Perhaps Mr. Buss should have realized that he is in fact, a chemistry teacher and not a satirist and restrained himself

Why? His post was great satire and funny, IMO.

perhaps the complainer should have realized that they were in fact reading satire and not a threat

We cannot presume their mental or comical level.

perhaps the police should have ignored the complaint

I don’t think cops like doing that too much. That is what the attorney’s office does.

or simply told Mr. Buss that his comments were in bad taste and made someone feel threatened

No, they should have done nothing following the attorney telling them they have no grounds for a case.

perhaps Owen should have been paranoid of the cops and refused to turn over the IP without a warrant (we don�t all have something to hide)

If owen had contacted an attorney they would have told him to turn nothing over without a court order. And they would have been right.

but they didn�t. End of story. Now let the cops let Mr. Buss go with some dignity for both of them, and let the school board decide the next appropriate step and go on with your life.

Nope. Doesn’t work that way.
“Verizon is being sued for allegedly violating the Communications Act of 1934, the Electronic Communications and Privacy Act and the 1986 Stored Communications Act. Each of these federal statutes limits how much information phone companies can reveal without a customer’s consent, or without a search warrant or subpoena.”

Why do you think the right-wingers are trying to update FISA to cover Verizon’s ass?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1912 hrs

Are there any hot girls who want to help me hijack a 747 and crash it into a teacher’s union headquarters? We could have a cockpit orgy and the pilots would be too dead on the floor in pools of their own blood and entrails to stop us. We could even reenact 2girls1cup just as the jet is slamming into the building.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1917 hrs

I think the best way to settle this issue is for everyone to suck my balls.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1921 hrs

I agree with comment #200.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1923 hrs

Also, CageKicker, I love how you make a mistake and then become immature and sarcastic in your apology. You make it out like it is someone else’s fault that you messed up. You are so ordinary. There is a reason you have not been successful in life.

First of all, you know nothing about me or my level of success. Second of all, your reference to the short was amusing if a little low brow. Third, I think it’s great that in a thread where the vast majority is defending a guy’s right to use irony and sarcasm, you’re berating me for it.

Your self righteous vindictiveness says a few things about you though. Dropping into personal attacks and name calling is a sign of a very small-minded person. Not that I give a flying fornication what you think of me, but maybe we could keep in touch through email? I’d love to hear more of your blazing insights.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 1924 hrs

you guys got to ask yourselves what idiot judge issued the warrant
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 2112 hrs

I would like to hear from the teacher who thought that thier life was in danger because the posting idiot teacher said the columbine kids were heroes. Satire or not, a 10 year old could have figured out that he was not threating anyone. But lets all rember that in this post 911 fear and propaganda age that everything you say will be used against you.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 2143 hrs

160 Perry
“It was not a school administrator, teacher, or anyone involved in the teaching profession that truly felt threatened by this comment and then allegedly made a complaint to law enforcement.

Article at http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8TAS5782&show; _article=1&catnum;=1
A teacher reported the comment
“The comment disturbed at least one teacher, who called police in West Bend, 40 miles north of Milwaukee”
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 2240 hrs

After reading some of the more enlightened comments here by people like CageLicker, Kandick, Pig, and BVBigdope, maybe I was too hasty.

Suppose instead of being written by an intelligent person acting like a hate-mongering, moron right winger, the exact same post had, in fact, been written by a hate-mongering, moron, right winger, who was very serious about what he/she was writing.

Wouldn’t I have to say then that I supported the phantom complainer’s actions, Owen’s actions, the police actions, the court’s actions, and the school administration’s actions, especially if I were taking the role of being the glassy eyed, bleeding heart, stereotype liberal that the right wingers love to villify? Here’s some gun-toting right wing kook applauding the killing of innocent teachers and children, and may himself/herself be a loaded gun.

I’m stumbling here though, trying to be fair, which is the curse of the liberal, in that the moron poster made it clear that he wasn’t actually advocating killing teachers. And even more troubling, he didn’t say it in a way that sounded like code for “I really want to kill teachers and encourage others to join with me.”

However, let’s say that I agree you have to error on the side of caution, even if it involves misjudging an innocent individual, a conservative trait. So when the police get there, they don’t find a guy who has Bush/Cheney stickers all over the makeshift bunker that he built in his front yard out of the neighbor’s garbage cans capped off by a flag that has a teacher with a bulls eye on his back; they don’t find a poster depicting Osama Bin Laden hugging a spokesperson from the NEA with our commenter crouched on the ground pointing a sniper rifle at the both of them, and they don’t find a high chain link fence containing several pit bulls who have chewed the legs off of effigies of Wisconsin’s educator of the year.

Instead, they find a nicely kept, ordinary looking home. When the swat team knocks on the door - they decide against a no-knock warrant entry because innocent people keep getting killed- a senior citizen of normal appearance politely answers the door. He then admits to the police that he in fact made the post, again insisting that he has no intention of ever harming anyone, and he is just so sick and tired of all these liberals who want to keep pouring money into the education system, to not only pay the excessive salaries of teachers who do nothing, but also the rape that is taking place by all the school administrators making six-figure salaries. He even starts to hold his chest and profusely apologizing to the nice police people for causing all this darn commotion, but no one has ever accused him of being the brightest bulb on the block.

I suppose as a good liberal, knowing this person is still “the enemy,” that I should support the police decision to make the arrest, since we just don’t want to put these poor policemen that are in the field, with danger all around them and a thankless public, to have to make a judgment call of this kind.

But you know what, as a good liberal, in these circumstances, I’d still end up taking the position that the cops could have and should have exercised good judgment and not charged this person or made the incident public. And I would still be extremely critical of Owen and Jeb for giving out this person’s IP address without a warrant. Just because I have nothing to hide, that doesn’t mean I don’t value my right to privacy and my right to be free of unwarranted government intrusions.

However, in the case of Mr. Buss, I’d give odds on my ability to convince a jury that no reasonable person, in looking at the overall context of Mr. Buss’s comments, could have concluded that his comments were anything other than a spoof on conservative thinking. His misspellings combined with the content of his remarks were a dead give away, and anybody that couldn’t tell that shouldn’t be allowed computer access. And even if you want to cut the accusers some slack there, once the police got to his house and determined who he was and were told by him that his comments were just a spoof on a bunch of Bill O’Reily sycophants, it absolutely should have ended there.

On the bright side, I see University of Wisconsin, Madison, in Mr. Buss’ future, because he obviously knows where to hit the conservatives where it hurts. And even though the D.A. in this case is an ass wipe for not acknowledging that Mr. Buss’ statements were never based on his real views and should never have been perceived as a threat, at least he proved he was not a total idiot through his decision to drop the case.

P.S. It probably makes little difference, but I wanted to clarify that I am not endorsing Mr. Buss’ hostile viewpoint toward the Wisconsin public’s resistance to teacher and administrators salaries. I’m just adamant in my defense of his right to express his viewpoint in the manner he has chosen.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 2244 hrs

Sockpuppet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)
Troll
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
Moby
http://lgfdictionary.wordpress.com/lgf-dictionary/#moby

To clarify the nature of the beast
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 2254 hrs

Dictionary Terms on Blogs, Commenters and Dirty Tricks:

Moby
http://lgfdictionary.wordpress.com/lgf-dictionary/#moby

Sockpuppet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)

Troll
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

note : a correction on address for sockpuppet
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 2303 hrs

To Perry
You write too much and I am sorry but don’t have time or patience to read it all.
To Mike
Yes my parents actually agree with me on this one. They don’t think the teacher did the right thing in what he wrote and neither do I but My parents and I think our rights as citizens are slowly slipping away.
To jmstroup
If he does lose his job I would be very unhappy. Nobody here probably knows this but the principal last year was involved in a DUI case and he still retained his job. I have said this earlier actually. I would probably do something about it that is if he wants the job back.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 2315 hrs

205 Ragnell

Ragnell, it appears you missed the point, maybe because you stopped reading after you read that sentence. My point is, that is what is being reported by the police to try to justify their stupid and wrongful actions.

Hopefully Mr. Buss will now pursue this fiasco, and then we’ll see who this alleged teacher is. I’ve already put out my guess, which is that it will either be an anonymous teacher complainer, or it will be an administrator/former teacher complainer.

Unfortunately, Mr. Buss may decide, as often is the case, that he doesn’t want to screw with it and will let it die quietly.

The cops count on this. You wouldn’t believe how many people who are subjected to improper police conduct are happy to let it go as long as they don’t end up in jail.

That’s life in the semi-police state we live in. If you haven’t been touched by it already, just wait, you will be, either from what happens to you or to someone you care about.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 2323 hrs

209 Student

No biggy student, I don’t think you have probably had enough life experiences to understand a big part of it anyway, but I’m always happy to answer questions.

Plus, as a student, hopefully you’ll learn that there aren’t any real shortcuts, and that learning is a time-consuming but rewarding process (and that your parents aren’t always right.)

Good luck.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 2339 hrs

#209 studentofarrestedteacherken

If you ask most teachers in the elementary and secondary levels, they’ll probably tell you that teachers experience more limitations on their freedom of speech and actions than the average citizen. Within and without the classroom, they face all sorts of consequences for what they may say or do. Their list of restricted behaviors is continuously growing.

So, an ill-considered joke, words or opinion may result in parental complaints, reprimends or even lawsuits.* New teachers often have difficulty remembering that extreme care must be taken with dress, body movements and language. Even experienced teachers will slip up occasionally and cross that line.
It doesn’t stop after classes, since most teachers coach or train students in drama, sports, debate, robotics, science[the list is endless] They engage with the parents during these activities, causing the adult community to expect teachers to remain in professional mode at all times. The community is far more forgiving of people in professions that do not involve their children.
Is this unfair?
It is part of the requirements of the profession. Teachers are a primary adult role model for millions of students.

Sure, we can read off news stories of teachers that abuse their positions; but on the whole so many teachers maintain that discipline over their actions. It is a demanding job that deserves respect.

*one of the big reasons teachers join unions-for access to their free legal representation
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 05, 2007 at 2359 hrs

God Almighty! You guys keep calling Mr. Buss’s comments “satire”—- it is not satire, it is PARODY, and parody is protected speach as decided by the US Supreme Court. Let me briefly explain: nowadays satire is verse (performed or otherwise, written) with sarcasm or irony—- not protected—- but has its Latin roots in discursive verse—- which was protected by Roman Law, and is protected by US law. PARODY is a burlesque of sorts—- and has become more of a caricature (here of an idea about a group of people—gun toting conservitives and the militarists, etc.) and done to make a point; made obvious by the choice of such a horrendous act, and actors, to praise / the Columbine school killings—and thus is discursive verse. The making of a point IS protected by the US Constitution, First Amendment. Please note: the free expression of thoughts and ideas, was so important to the functioning of a free people, that our Founding Fathers (as they are called) placed it formost /at the top/ of the listing of all amendments. ‘Numero-Uno’ as they say; without which nothing else can function.

I hope you people will give this chemistry teacher a little credit for having more of an intellect than most of the people writing here, and for making an ANTI-GUN or ANTI-WAR/ANTI MILITARY/STATEMENT. Just ask anyone who has a degree in chemistry ....... “was it easy?” and they’ll clue you in—- most chemistry majors either drop-out or flunk-out. It takes a lot of analysis and not just memory to learn this discipline.

That’s all I got to say—except that I must have been blurry-eyed when I said that my first post was removed as it is not.
(cf. my earlier comments at #‘s 120 and 153) My apologies to the two guys who run this site.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 0101 hrs

Perry,

Outside of your conspiracy-mongering, your argument and strategy is one longer version previously made by several commenters.

Summarized:

1. Many of these arguments are based on the assumption/opinion, that “Buss wrote satire”, as an undisputable fact and the foundation stone of the rest of their argument.

2. What follows: instead of providing any proof of that opinion, instead, many depart from presenting a real debate, throw their critical thinking to the winds, and resort to name-calling about those who don’t agree.

From there, it is a rehash with a variety of commenters’ arguments balanced upon the foundation stone[that their assumption[satire]is an established fact]. It’s an infamous and flawed debating technique.

Is this a strategy? To label anyone that disagrees with the stated assumption, as “illiterate hicks”Outside of intellectual laziness, are the commenters who rely on this technique hoping to bully any dispute into silence? It doesn’t appear successful.
It is interesting that such a number of commenters popped up at this site just to repeat this same assumption as a fact—over and over again. Are they hoping their efforts will create an echo-chamber effect, and eventually make an assumption appear as an accepted fact to other readers? If dozens of commenters on arrive at a blog to repeat the same thing, we know it must be true. Right?

If we wanted to imitate Perry, we could engage in more absurd conspiracy-mongering; by claiming many commenters were union organizers here to spin some damage control. But that would be an assumption not fact.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 0106 hrs

This blog is run by a weak snitch
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 0656 hrs

People really do keep losing their facts here.
1. You can be arrested by the police without the judge issuing a warrant and then held for some time (I think 48 hours? does anyone else know?) without any sort of charges being filed. NO ONE ever charged Mr. Buss with a crime, the police sought to, for whatever reason, but the DA decided not to.
2. The internet is a PUBLIC forum. There is NO expectation of privacy in PUBLIC. Just because no one can see you sitting in your underwear when you are typing whatever you want to say does not make it any less public, therefor no invasion of privacy here.
You can surely disagree with the correctness or morality of these truths, you can call our nation a police state or charge our nation with thought control (although I would doubt that you truly fear that or you wouldn’t be posting here). That doesn’t change the facts. Also, telling the truth takes the most courage of all.
Oh, and Perry, that’s actually a new derogatory form of my name. I haven’t had anyone do that to my name since high school. Thank you for your kind consideration.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 1229 hrs

224 Ragnell

You are either very dense or you are very young, or perhaps both. Instead of trying to dissect the way people make points, why don’t you instead try making a substantive argument disputing the points that are made.

There’s a reason so many of us keep saying the same sort of thing, it’s because it’s so obvious. Just because you don’t get it, that doesn’t mean that all of us that do have to pretend that we don’t get it to make you feel better. Instead, we all post to offer reinforcement to one another that we’re not alone.

So pure and simple, are you saying that even though Mr. Buss’s subsequent post made it clear that he wasn’t advocating killing teachers, that you believe that it was reasonable that someone still felt so strongly that this poster presented a threat that the police needed to investigate? If you do, for whatever reason, then the next question has to be whether, in performing an adequate investigation, was it reasonable for the police to believe that Mr. Buss’s comments amounted to criminal conduct? Keep in mind that there is no question that the complete thread was available to the police, including Mr. Buss’ subsequent comment, at the time the police investigated this manner.

If you answer yes, then it’s my opinion that you are a dumbass and a tool, and so is anyone else that agrees with you. And you can call me a dumbass and a tool for calling you one and for believing the way I do, or you can believe yourself to be the better person and say you just respectfully disagree.

What you don’t get, though, is that there is a right and a wrong answer here, and the right answer is the answer you refuse to accept. So if you want to continue to be on the wrong side of things, that’s up to you, but because of my passion on this subject, I have to disrespectfully disagree.

Now if you want to gig me on my suspicions that there is some type of intentional foul play going on here, I don’t have a problem with that. Maybe it’s true that the cops and the courts are really that incompetent, and the school administrators are just having fun beating up on a teacher union rep after having been wrongfully handed an opportunity to do so. It’s a mean spirited world we live in, and it’s only going to keep getting worse..

It really doesn’t matter whether this happened through incompetence or corruption, though, the fact is that your side can not offer a reasonable argument that legitimates the actions that were taken. You simply want to pretend that if someone makes a comment that someone feels threatened by, that they then have the right to file a complaint with the police, and the police then have the right to arrest someone, even though a proper investigation should have established to anyone’s satisfaction that no crime had been convicted.

I continue to give your side my reasons for saying it was not reasonable for the police that a crime had been committed that would subject Mr. Buss to a valid arrest. Your side continues to offer no reasons for establishing why it was reasonable for the officer to conclude a crime had been committed thereby subjecting Mr. Buss to a valid arrest (and of course, the legal standard is that the police need probable cause to effectuate a valid arrest.)

Instead, you just keep saying how the police really can’t try to determine this, so they just make the arrest and let the prosecutor decide. THAT’S NOT THE LAW. Arresting people is a BIG DEAL, and the police are charged with the responsibility of using that tremendous power judicially.

The reason that your side doesn’t care, though, is that you don’t like Mr. Buss’ politics, so you don’t give a crap that he was wrongfully arrested and subjected to an unwarranted governmental intrusion. And that makes you and anyone else who countenances this an ass wipe in my book. This is as black and white as it gets.

Perry
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 1230 hrs

The teacher who called police on James Buss is incapable of teaching, has no sense of humor and is paranoid. Perhaps that’s why he/she won’t reveal their name.
Posted by Namaste on December 06, 2007 at 1240 hrs

So why did you give the cops his IP address? Because some jack-booted, power hungry, cheesehead barney fife asked for it? Next time tell him to go fuck himself. If he wants information, make him get a warrant.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 1403 hrs

When I asked what idiot judge issued the warrant I didnt mean for his arrest I meant for the search warrant what idiot judge would issue a search warrant for a posting.Plus when has losing are rights been liberal or conservative I find this ridiculous.Any one remember a few years back in germantown that let their grass grow above a certain hieight and the government came in and cut it and sent them a bill?or how about the ludicrous law in kenosha about if your wearing speedos and you have a hard on you can get it for indecent exposure.Come on this police state thing is getting old we are taxed to death and the government says it doesnt have enough money to help people But when it comes to going to war all of sudden we have money coming out of nowhere.Excuse my lack of periods they seem to be working hit or miss But am I the only one that sees our governemnt as taking to much control hell when you buy house now you cant even paint it the color you want with out a home owners associations approval
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 1420 hrs

216 kandyce

Here you stole my line about people getting their facts straight.

First off, as my subsequent post indicated, while you can be arrested without a warrant (unless you are in your home, with certain exceptions,) it is only a proper arrest if there was probable cause to establish that a crime had been committed.
The cops can’t simply arrest someone for looking at them the wrong way and then see if the DA wants to try to figure out some charge.

This dovetails into the invasion of privacy issue, which you have also confused. The invasion of privacy here comes not from making a post and having it investigated, as we all know that our internet activities, for the most part, can be lawfully and unlawfully, traced back to us by the authorities.

The invasion of privacy, though, comes first from having someone voluntarily provide an IP address, an IP address that the police may have not been able to get a GOOD judge to issue a search warrant for, given the lack of probable cause to believe that the posting constituted a crime of any sort or that the search would turn up evidence of a crime to support an arrest based on probable cause.

The second invasion of privacy comes from an ISP giving up your identifying information without a warrant, which although we don’t know happened, it has never been reported that a search warrant was obtained.

The ultimate invasion of privacy, though, and the most egregious aspect of this case, comes from the police either doing a slipshod investigation, or intentionally disregarding exculpatory evidence. It should have been obvious to them after interviewing Mr. Buss and finding out that he was in fact a teacher and former teacher’s union president, and upon hearing him explain that his intentions were just a mockery of a previous poster’s comments (have you read the whole thread?) and on the ultra-conservative mindset, that there was no basis for an arrest or to further intrude upon his expectations of privacy. Instead, they chose to make an unlawful arrest, defined as one without probable cause to believe he had committed a crime.

Owen even testifies to this in his post, stating:

It was explained to me that it was not believed that the commenter had any intent to harm anyone, but that the mere presence of a comment appearing to condone such violence had to be punished because it might encourage someone else to engage in violence against schools.

Well guess what class, a comment appearing to condone violence is not a criminal offense, especially when the comment was made as a way of ridiculing someone with a mindset that does condone violence. The cops know this, judges know it, and everyone posting to this blog ought to know it. But once you are subjected to a wrongful search and arrest, you can never give a citizen back what he has lost, which is your expectation of privacy and not being subjected to unwarranted governmental intrusions into your life.

As to my ignorant and childish jest of your screen name (and real name?), and those of the others, I’m glad you have a sense of humor. After I did it, I thought how juvenile it was and thought about apologizing, but I get so pissed off at you lunkheads for being on the wrong side of this.

Those of us that are decrying what happened to Mr. Buss are doing this not just for him, but for all of us, you as well. Sure, this time the system wronged a liberal, which probably is more often the case than with conservatives, since the police, prosecutors, and courts like them better, but as we’ve seen, conservatives aren’t immune from being wrongfully singled out by the system.

Whether it’s due to incompetence or conspiracy, the result is the same. The people who are directly affected, and many others who are indirectly affected. have their lives and outlook changed forever, and we as a society are the worse off for it.

P.S. If you want to disagree with me fine, but then tell me how you think the police had probable cause to make the arrest once they interviewed Mr. Buss at his home (even though I still have a huge issue with the issuance of the search warrant, but we’re not privy to what affidavit testimony was offered. I’d bet dollars to doughnuts, though, that the good officers made no mention of his subsequent post disavowing any intent to want to kill teachers.)
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 1525 hrs

“It should have been obvious to them after interviewing Mr. Buss…”. None of us know the content of the interview, nor the tone of the interview. To have an opinion on whether or not he should have been arrested is to base that opinion entirely upon the blog comment, not the interview. The argument that he should not have been arrested currently rests on no more facts than an argument that he should have been arrested. Until the actual interview is known, this is all speculation.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 1549 hrs

221 Perry
Thank you for your last post. Yes, Kandyce is my real name, like I said before I have nothing to hide Just to clarify, I do think that the cops made a mistake in arresting Mr. Buss, and I never said that I supported that decision. If you will look in my earlier post, I said that they made the decision THEY thought was appropriate, not the decision that I thought was appropriate. I was simply trying to point out the intent of everyone involved, not the rightness or wrongness, as everyone was seeming to blanket the issue with a right/left conspiracy theory bias, and I was seeing it as people acting as they saw appropriate. Some times your best intentions can still bite you in the butt, which is a risk of living.
Two other things, I wouldn’t be so quick to rush to judge people as right or left or government entities comprised of one or the other. You tend to create what you perceive. FYI, my brother-in-law calls me a socialist, which has left-leaning implications.
Also, you’re really long-winded. It hurts my head a little to read your whole posts. If you want people to attend to your opinion, try compacting it a bit.
I’m not saying, I’m just saying.
Ok, now. I’m getting long-winded.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 1553 hrs

People really do keep losing their facts here.
1. You can be arrested by the police without the judge issuing a warrant and then held for some time (I think 48 hours? does anyone else know?) without any sort of charges being filed. NO ONE ever charged Mr. Buss with a crime, the police sought to, for whatever reason, but the DA decided not to.
2. The internet is a PUBLIC forum. There is NO expectation of privacy in PUBLIC. Just because no one can see you sitting in your underwear when you are typing whatever you want to say does not make it any less public, therefor no invasion of privacy here.
You can surely disagree with the correctness or morality of these truths, you can call our nation a police state or charge our nation with thought control (although I would doubt that you truly fear that or you wouldn’t be posting here). That doesn’t change the facts. Also, telling the truth takes the most courage of all.
Oh, and Perry, that’s actually a new derogatory form of my name. I haven’t had anyone do that to my name since high school. Thank you for your kind consideration.
Posted by Kandyce on December 06, 2007 at 1229 hrs

(1) Warrantless home arrests are ILLEGAL pursuant to the 4th amendment. The exceptions are hot pursuit and/or a felony with exigent circumstances, neither of which apply in this arrest. If the arresting officer did not have a valid warrant to arrest Mr. Buss, then he, any other officers who were present, his agency, the city, etc. are liable to Mr. Buss for false arrest, false imprisonment, illegal search and seizure, defamation (slander AND liable per se, intentional infliction of physical AND emotional distress, etc. IF a judge or magistrate actually signed a warrant for Mr. Buss’ arrest based on his perfectly legal blog post, then that person and his employers (county/state) are liable as defendants as well.

(2) There is substantial state and federal case law supporting internet users’ right to a reasonable expectation of privacy and the duty of care owed to users by blog hosts. There is no question that the hosts of Boots and Sabers violated their duty of care to “Observer” (aka Mr. Buss) when they emailed private information about him to an alleged police officer without a valid warrant. The alleged police officer could have just as easily been some homicidal rightwing whack job stalker posing as a police officer. The blog hosts didn’t know and, by their own admissions, didn’t care.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 1602 hrs

Marheth:

1. There was no warrantless arrest.

2. The hosts contacted the investigator.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 1609 hrs

BVBigBro:

(1) Warrant/no warrant is only relevant to identifying/excluding defendants
involved and their part in depriving Mr. Buss of his civil rights. Due diligence would have revealed Mr. Buss had committed no crime and was not subject to arrest.

(2) Moot. No warrant for the information was ever requested or produced.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 1635 hrs

Marheth:

“Due diligence would have revealed…” Once again we are speculating on the nature of an interview between the officers and Buss, to which none of us are privy. It is entirely possible that said interview indicated the exact opposite.

Given that Buss made his statement public, I doubt there would be much sympathy for an expectation of privacy and a need for a warrant.

This arrest may have been justified or unjustified. From the evidence that we have, and the knowledge that there is an interview of unknown tone and content, I don’t see how to answer that question beyond speculation.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 1654 hrs

BVBigBro:

The facts are Mr. Buss posted a comment on an internet blog, someone read the comment and complained to the police. From that point, the police had a duty to the complainant to review the comment and ascertain whether or not the comment was in fact a crime. If legal procedures had been followed and due diligence had been properly exercised, the police would have consulted the DA, been advised that no crime had been committed and the investigation would have ended right then and there. Case closed. Period. Unfortunately, for everyone concerned, the investigation didn’t end then and there. .

Mr. Buss’ attorney has advised him not to make any public statements. To my knowledge Buss has and is following his attorney’s advice so I wouldn’t much stock in any hearsay attributing any statements to him.

FYI sympathy has nothing to do with deciding liability in a civil rights lawsuit.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 1838 hrs

Has there been any reports by students or the media about this teacher doing inappropriate things with students. I’m just wondering.

Keep us all posted and if there are students that do in fact or don’t in fact know something I’m sure we would all like to hear about it.

thanks

-Bob
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 1938 hrs

I’m just thinking about the female teacher that was having sex with the 13 year old student that is back in the news again.

Wouldn’t it be interesting to know what wouldhave happened to her if she had done the sick and twisted thing that Mr. Buss did…

And I’m sure there are children/students out there that would also want to weigh in on this interesting question.

Please come forward and talk, it is ok we will support you.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 1943 hrs

Mr. Buss is a great man, and I expect to see him in school again any time now. I find it appalling that people now look down on him more than they look down on the principal of Oak Creek High School, who was arrested for actually doing something illegal, driving while drunk. The principal could have killed someone, but he kept his job and there was no question about it. Now a chemistry teacher writes sarcastic comments on a blog, and people are calling for his head. I fully expect Mr. Buss to file a lawsuit against the West Bend police department, because they unlawfully arrested him, parading him through the newspapers and television media, effectively ruining his career.

Whenever anyone hears the name “Buss” again, they will immediatly think of the “right wing whack job” who supported the Columbine massacre. And there will be no one to tell them otherwise. People will not want their kids to go to school if he is there, because they believe what the media want them to believe. So far, I belive four people on this post have attested to being his student or colleague, and they all admired him. It should be noted that crusaderagainstsocialdecay never mentioned that he was a student of Buss. I have a pretty good idea who crusaderagainstsocialdecay is, and from what I know, he is a right wing whack job. He is obviously looking past all the facts and cutting down Mr. Buss because he believes him to be a liberal.

I don’t blame Owen for giving the police Mr. Buss’s IP address. It would happened anyways. I put the blame on the West Bend Police Department for unlawfully arresting him and ruining his life. He should sue them for libel AND slander. I just hope the media picks up on the story. The media is so easy to cut someone down, but they never seem to present insider accounts. I just hope they don’t interview crusaderagainstsocialdecay.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 2011 hrs

Marheth, to say that no crime was commited is to say that no threat was made. To say that no threat was made is not obvious without an investigation.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 2029 hrs

To all: one should check the time of Mr. Buss’s comments vs. the other comments and the investigation. You may not like what you find. Note, for instance, that Buss’s “retraction” came after the complaint had been made, after the investigation had begun and after the IP address had been given to the authorities.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 2035 hrs

A retraction never should have been necessary, for the orriginal comment was so over the top that it seems impossible to have been judged as being sincere. I also find it hard to believe, that the authorities were contacted, responded, and that Owen could respond again to give them the ip address, all within the not-even 14 hour period between his comments. Not to mention, that the majority of that time was overnight, with his orriginal comment at 6:50 pm and his “retraction” at 8:30 the following morning.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 2111 hrs

#

Marheth, to say that no crime was commited is to say that no threat was made.

Precisely.

To say that no threat was made is not obvious without an investigation.

Yes, and all that had to be investigated was the comment. Everyone who has read the comment, including the DA, agrees it contained no threat. It was completely unnecessary to investigate the commenter after reading and determining that the comment contained NO threat. The fact that the investigator knew the comment contained no threat and the fact that he made the decision to proceed with investigating the commenter in spite of that knowledge, is evidence of abuse of power under color of authority and malice.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 2213 hrs

“Everyone who has read the comment, including the DA, agrees it contained no threat.”

No they don’t. The school superintendent and the other school officials who made the complaint have specifically stated they believed the comment was a threat. the commenter himself has stated he sees how the comment can be construed as a threat. The DA did not say the comment contained no threat. He stated there was no threat of imminent lawless action, and then only after an investigation of the individual had been conducted.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 2243 hrs

Here’s the comment posted by “Observer”:

Looking at those teacher salary numbers in West Bend made me sick. $60,000 for a part time job were you ‘work’ maybe 5 hours per day and sit in the teachers lounge and smoke the rest of the time. Thanks God we won on the referendum. But whining here doesn’t stop the problem. We’ve got to get in back of the kids who have had enough of lazy, no good teachers and are fighting back. Kids like Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold members of the Young Republicans club at Columbine. They knew how to deal with the overpaid teacher union thugs. One shot at a time! Too bad the liberals rip them; they were heroes and should be remembered that way.

Please identify the threat?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 06, 2007 at 2343 hrs

The threat, as identified by the school officials who complained, was “One shot at a time.”

(As an aside, they should have noted that Klebold and Harris were specifically referenced, and given that Klebold and Harris also bombed Columbine that brings into play the bomb threat angle, but I digress.)
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 0000 hrs

I very much wanted to be done with this… but I can’t.

Perry, we don’t have every fact in the arrest, so I’m not going to pretend to have some vast store of knowledge the rest of you don’t have. I’m going to be the better person. I’m also not going to devolve into name-calling. I’m not even going to call you a lunk-head just because you don’t believe the things I believe. Your opinion’s yours, and it really isn’t any more valid than mine.

Where you lose me is in your complete dismissal of any opinion other than your own. You don’t know the cops who made the arrest. You don’t know what happened in their interview with Mr. Buss. It could very well be that the patrolmen decided to come down on the side of caution, in what they thought could be a fairly hot case, and let the DA make the decision.

Mr. Buss wasn’t in the hoosegow for more than an hour or two. That’s about enough time to be processed in and then post bail for disorderly conduct and improper communication (I think those were the proposed charges, but I could be wrong). When the charges were not filed, he got his bail money back, and hopefully left with a better respect for the affect of an ill-conceived word.

Was the arrest necessary? No. Was it illegal, oppressive, conspiracy driven, or whatever? I have no idea, but I tend to think that most of the people involved have better things to do than sweat stuff like this, so I’d guess no.

Here’s something a little off topic… I keep seeing references to the dumb conservative Neanderthals vs the smart freedom loving liberals. You all know that as long as we keep the “us against them” mentality, nothings ever going to be resolved, right? I have nothing against the liberal ideal, but when it starts being swung out to the far left things get a little ridiculous.

For what it’s worth, I think the same for the conservative side of things.

If this post offends you to the point that you feel the need to bash me, call me names, or tell me how dumb I am, then you’re the one I’m talking about. My only response to you (whoever you turn out to be…) is, “yer mom”.

Good day.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 0055 hrs

223 Kandyce

Thank you as well, you’re welcome, and I guess I’m so long winded because I think I know too much for my own good. It’s difficult for me to allow people to continue in what I see as their ignorant ways without at least trying to enlighten them somewhat.

I know those people resent that. After all, ignorance is bliss. I’ll try to limit myself, though, and maybe you should just skim through my “too long posts” until you find something that catches your eye.

Anyway, I’m glad you recognize that it was a “mistake” for the police to have arrested Mr. Buss, but I think you are being too charitable.

While I know it’s a rehash, aka/longwinded, the pathetic thing is that there are still people posting on this thread who can’t seem to comprehend that Mr. Buss never expressed anything of an untoward nature. It was Mr. Buss’ fabricated, red-neck, over-the-top ultra conservative character that did say some very alarming and dare I say, outrageous things.

And while others may have chosen not to take the approach he took, he should have been able to do so without the fear of having the police come knock on his door, or at the very least, without being arrested.

If you’ve read the thread that Mr. Buss made his comments on, then you have to understand why it immediately became a conservative vs. liberal slugfest. Liberal thinkers do not generally like union leaders to be thought of as union thugs, and conservatives don’t like being characterized as a bunch of hater-mongering, gun-toting jerks that would like the idea of seeing some teachers put in an early grave.

It was a tit for tat exchange. However, instead of confronting his antagonists head on, Mr. Buss chose to use his redneck persona as a way of ridiculing those whose comments he took to heart, seeing as he was one of those “union thugs” himself.

I’m sure it was somewhat gratifying to Mr. Bass that the poster who made the union thug comment wasn’t clear as to whether Mr. Bass’ comments were a spoof on him and a jab at some of the more hard line conservative thinking, or whether Mr. Bass was truly some kind of idiot who was making more reasoned conservatives look bad.

Yet in the end, Mr. Bass was smart enough to make it clear that he wasn’t so loony as to advocate the killing of teachers. Instead , his response established that his character was someone who was allied with the right wing hate mongers that continue to spew out their venom and make sure we will remain a country divided.

All of this, of course, leads to my final rehash, which is that even though the police should not have even contacted him, that once they did meet the real Mr. Buss and saw he was not the on-line character he pretended to be, the case should have been closed.

I truly hope you understand that what happened to Mr. Buss demonstrates why we have to take the offensive in guarding against encroachments on our first amendment free speech rights. If the police don’t have to be more judicious about charging people with a crime based on what a person has expressed in writing, we will end up censoring ourselves for fear of being subjected to this kind of unwarranted and over-zealous government action. It doesn’t sound like to me that you want this to happen.

Seriously, think about it, unless you decided to skim over it.

I’ll stop now, but I’m not done yet, as you’ll see!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 0453 hrs

Cagekicker - 239, BVBigBro-233 and 236

So, you are threatening my Mom, and thereby, the institution of Motherhood. Surely this is even more off limits than any reference to the Columbine incident that could lead a bunch of idiots to believe that someone was advocating doing violence to teachers.

Well hell, I guess I deserve that for playing with your online name, so I won’t press charges.

You say I lost you, but I never had you, not even close. Your ability to be so dismissive about what we do know in this case merits the know-nothing attitude I’ve displayed toward the lame justifications you keep trying to make for the wrongful actoins taken toward Mr. Buss.

Are you really that dense. Just because we weren’t there when the cops showed up at Mr. Buss’ residence, you really believe it’s unfair for us to say that the police were boneheads in making the arrrest?

Both you and BVBigBro need to move to Egypt, because you are both definitely in a state of DE NILE.

Now if the cops came to his door and said we’re here to arrest you, and keep your mouth shut and don’t say a word because we don’t want to hear it, then I guess you’re right . i guess that this wouldn’t have allowed them to make an intellgent decision about what to do.

Of course, if that happened, that would just serve to prove my point and others that the cops blew it. On the other hand, we know that Mr. Buss is a teacher who was a union president and is someone who should be able to speak up for himself.

Perhaps you and BV could share with us your scenario of what might have taken place when the police came to Mr. Buss’ home, completed their search and made their arrest. Give us something that could somehow support your argument that the police could still have concluded that there was probable cause to arrest him on the charges they did.

The fact is, you can’t, and that’s why you keep hiding behing your lame argument that let’s not speculate about what happened since we weren’t there. I say Poppycock, poppycock, poppycock.

Now BV, you do at least offer something substantive in saying we should take a look at the timeline, which I’ve done several times. I agree with you that timeline, if Owen has it right, indicates that the complaint was made and the IP were given to the cop prior to Mr. Buss’ responsive comment to the poster whom with Mr. Buss was locking horns.

You call it a recission though, which shows your bias in wanting to make it seem like Mr. Buss had done something wrong. Yet, it was the union thug poster who asked Mr. Buss to clarify his remarks, as he was unsure whether Mr. Buss was for real or not. Right there is your proof that the cops weren’t being reasonable in failing to figure out that Mr. Buss’ comments, in the guise of the right wing teacher hater, did not amount to a crime.

Now what do you make of the fact that it wasn’t until several days after the cop had gotten the IP from good citizen Owen before he ever asked Owen to take it down. And what of the fact that it wasn’t several days until after the comments were made that the cops showed up at his door.

There certainly seems to be a lot of time there for the cops to get a lot of information about Mr. Buss, and yet they don’t seem to be in too big of a hurry to clamp down on this teacher killer.

And lastly, what do you think about the Superintendent’s stupid statement that she just doesn’t know why Mr. Buss would make those kind of statements. It really doesn’t seem strange to you that she, nor the papers, nor the cops would explain, at the very least, that his posts arose after a blog comment was made disparaging teacher union leaders as union thugs.

No you don’t, because you are too locked into the idea of wanting to see Mr. Buss get railroaded, because you don’t like his politics.

And BV, in your post, you state that Mr. Buss agreed that his comments could be perceived as a threat. I haven’t read that anywhere, and I’d love to have your source for that and be able to read it.

If it’s true that Mr. Buss is now agreeing that the investigation and his subsequent arrest was understandable and proper, then I’ll admit to being the biggest dumbass there ever was, and I promise never to get involved in another blog discussion again if I don’t personally know all the facts. Hell, I might not even if I do, I’d be so damned disgusted and dismayed by it.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 0551 hrs

I just can´t believe what i read in th news, something about a teacher that was arrested because of his opinion?? Where´s the Democracy of the US?? Can´t i be unhappy with the government?? O r is thi just because he oner of this blogs likes soldiers? After all i just saw military stuff around here….

I just like to add that America stinks, Bush stinks and why should we respect a country that does not care or Kyoto protocol?? WE should get all the nations in the world to cut al th supplies we provide to US just to see how all of you are going to come winning for help.

I think that you better ix your inside before trying to steal others oil like “BUSH” is doing in Iraq, How many sons, fathers, friends and boyfriends will US have to loose befre you relize that you´re neer gonna beat them? O ri Bush so obssesed because of NAM that he wants to try til he ins?? After all you lost there and after a fe years in iraq you´re still losing.

Whatever i don´t live in US, I don´t care for US. After all US doesn´t car about the rest of the world.

Screw America
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 0745 hrs

Excerpts of Mr. Buss’s comments are available in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article linked in the post entitled “B&S;commenter explains actions.”

I think the post arrest hype has blown the whole thing way out of proportion. Based on other testimony Buss shouldn’t be fired (Although the school district will probably demand some sort of psych. evaluation as a CYA measure - personally I’d find that far worse than the arrest), and he has made it clear now that he never intended to hurt anyone, but he caused a great deal of grief to a lot of people and hopefully will exercise a little more restraint.

In the end I don’t like the idea that the police should never have investigated the incident. They acted on an actual complaint with the information that was available to them at the time and that information warranted a investigation IMO.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 0800 hrs

Are you really that dense. Just because we weren’t there when the cops showed up at Mr. Buss’ residence, you really believe it’s unfair for us to say that the police were boneheads in making the arrrest?

Um, yup. You don’t know what might have led to the arrest. Unless now you’re claiming god-like omniscience to get you through the day. (noted: more personal attacks because I disagree with perry)

If it’s true that Mr. Buss is now agreeing that the investigation and his subsequent arrest was understandable and proper, then I’ll admit to being the biggest dumbass there ever was, and I promise never to get involved in another blog discussion again if I don’t personally know all the facts. Hell, I might not even if I do, I’d be so damned disgusted and dismayed by it.

Here, perry, I’ll make it easy for ya…....
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=693765
Nice knowing ya, perry. I’m sure there’s another blog out there for you somewhere.

Now let’s all sit back and admire the irony of perry standing up so staunchly in defense of free speech, and then berating in one breath, and then berating and insulting anyone who has the audacity to disagree with him in the next.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 0957 hrs

To the commentors isnt that what the government wants???Right there last commentor said it hopefully from now on Mr.Buss will excorsize a little more restraint when posting and maybe protestors can go protest much much further away from president bush’s parade and maybe people should never flip off a police officer.and maybe people should report their neighbors when they speak about the government.AND MAYBE JUST MAYBE we should all have fbi files on us with personality profiles hmmmm I agree we should all be more cautious.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 1027 hrs

Here’s a question did mr.buss actually say that so far we have the police saying he said the apology.isnt that hearsay???
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 1038 hrs

Here’s a question did mr.buss actually say that so far we have the police saying he said the apology.isnt that hearsay???

Isn’t anything we read in the newspaper technically “hearsay”? We’re trusting the newspaper to print accurate information, but do we really “know” they’re telling us the truth?

And, jim, I’m totally on board with wondering what the government wants. The way I see it going right now, the government is starting to lean away from “liberal” and “conservative” distinctions, and spiraling into “secular progressive” policy.

I’ve seen it here… people who think that we’re too dumb to think for ourselves or have our own opinions. People who want to tell us what is right to think or believe.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 1047 hrs

Apparently, perry’s right… I’m obviously not smart enough to handle the quotes. They seem to have gotten a little out of hand in that last comment.

Sorry
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 1055 hrs

Cagekicker and BV BigBro - 243 and 244

Thanks for providing me with the additional info, and I mean that sincerely. I had read the first half of that, but for some reason, I didn’t see the second half dealing with the reporter’s summary of the police report.

Well Cage, I guess you won. I’ve been banished by my own words, as it’s clear that the police report of the account of the statements allegedly made by Mr. Buss without a doubt establish that Mr. Buss confirmed that he had done wrong and deserved what he got.

In fact, wasn’t there something in the police report where he thanked the police and the complainant school administrators for their noble actions in exposing a miscreant like him for being such a low down dirty lone wolf irreverent psychopath. Maybe the “reporter” didn’t have room to include that in his report, though, since he’s paid to repeat and write, not to think and write.

Yes, we all know the police never lie, and they always put in the police report everything that’s said, even if it’s information that would show that the police had acted improperly in making the arrest.

Yet, somehow seems to be missing. Like maybe the part in the police report where Mr. Buss is quoted as saying: “While I can understand how someone reading my initial post might have had some concerns over whether I was for real or not, even to the point of wondering whether I might be a deranged ultra-conservative union thug hater killer, I would have thought that once I made my follow up post advising I wasn’t advocating killing teachers, that this would have allayed anyone’s fears. And after all, it was just a post to a blog where often discussions get heated, what people write gets misunderstood, and where people use satire, facetiousness, and hyperbole to try to make points. What it really points out to me is the danger of trying to infer what the intentions are behind someone’s written words when you don’t have the benefit of seeing them in person and getting a better sense of what they really mean through their demeanor and tone. That’s why the court’s give so much latitude to someone’s written words as part of upholding our first amendment rights.”

Mr. Buss went on to state that, “I guess being my most charitable, if the police felt that a further investigation was necessary and wanted to obtain a warrant to get my IP address, and a neutral fact finder in the form of a judge agreed there was a valid basis for a search warrant to be issued and also to issue a search warrant to obtain my identity from my ISP so that the police could investigate me further, I can maybe, but just maybe, live with that.

However, once the police came to talk with me, and had a chance to verify who I was and to satisfy themselves that I wasn’t the persona that I had created in my post, I find it outrageous that they continued to treat me as a criminal suspect, and in fact arrested me, for charges that they obviously knew were unsupportable and in violation of my first amendment rights.”

Or gosh Cage and BV, do you think our poor overworked and under appreciated public servants were just too busy to include those statements in the police report?

No, I don’t think that’s the reason. Thank goodness, though, that lawyers are smarter than cops, but that’s not to say that cops are dumb and that they don’t get a lot of help from smart lawyers. I guess I should add that thank goodness criminals are not generally very bright. Mr. Buss, on the other hand, who is not a criminal, is a very smart guy.

Now of course I’m back to insincere, except for sincerely saying that again, you guys/gals are both a bunch of tools. I know you don’t like my name calling, but it just fits so well.
Just punishment for both of you would be to get reamed like Mr. Buss has, and then have all your self-righteous conservative friends feed you to the wolves like you’ve done to him.

While it’s been kind of fun giving you boys a verbal spanking each time you post something that isn’t supportable, I don’t think I can devote much more time to this. However, I hate to leave it on the record where both of you provide your inane reasoning to justify your wrongheaded support of the wrongful actions that were taken against Mr. Buss. I think I’ll probably have to let you have the last incorrect words, though, because you guys aren’t getting it, and I don’t think you ever will. I can only hope that even if your mindset wins some battles, it will never win the war that is being waged against our civil liberties by government and its supporters like you.

So that’s life in this great melting pot of ours, or should I say boiling pot. (I know I can count on you to keep us posted on any further developments, and again, if Mr. Buss issues a statement wherein he agrees he got what he disturbed, then I’ll keep my previous promise.)
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 1553 hrs

Comment 219 was posted by a different Mike, other than me mike - from the previous postings. I am opinionated but I try not to be as rude as that person. So as not to be confused I’ll put an H after my name.
Mike H.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 1554 hrs

I’m still waiting! Post 204.
I would like to hear from the person who started this whole controversy.
YES, YOU , the one who reads this blog and opted to call the police to file a complaint.
You managed to screw up several peoples lives and I just want to here your side of the story or your opinion.
You can post without people knowing who you are. I don’t think their going to be giving out IPs as quick as befor.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 1631 hrs

Well, his statements are now worse. Perhaps you should look at his timeline Perry. His claims of heated arguments and posting a retraction are unsupported by the factual timeline of when his IP address was provided, and his “retraction” was after all, nothing of the sort. Worse, he admitted that his statement could be viewed as threatening, which means that he admitted to the police that he posted a statement that could be viewed as threatening via computer to a public forum. That alone basically forces the police to bring the matter to the DA.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 1653 hrs

The threat, as identified by the school officials who complained, was “One shot at a time.”
(As an aside, they should have noted that Klebold and Harris were specifically referenced, and given that Klebold and Harris also bombed Columbine that brings into play the bomb threat angle, but I digress.)
Posted by BVBigBro on December 07, 2007 at 0000 hrs

My question, “Please identify the threat?”, was addressed to you. Where’s the threat?

It is obvious the statements released to the media by Maryjane Burdge and Toby Netko after the DA announced there was no evidence to charge Mr. Buss with any crime, were a feeble and rather pathetic attempt at CYA. Why? Because at the top of this thread the B&S;blog host posted this:

This evening I called and spoke to the detective. He did confirm that no other evidence was found at the man’s home and that the charges are based on the comment he left here at B&S;.

...It was explained to me that it was not believed that the commenter had any intent to harm anyone, but that the mere presence of a comment appearing to condone such violence had to be punished because it might encourage someone else to engage in violence against schools.

The perpetrators of this malicious witch hunt already knew the comment posted by “Observer” was not a threat to anyone, yet they deliberately conspired to punish Mr. Buss to teach him a lesson anyway. Their punishment was to expose him as the poster, smear and defame him with press releases like his comment was the same as a bomb threat at an airport, publically shame and humiliate him with a false arrest based on charges they already knew would not be pursued, etc., etc., etc…. They did a very thorough job. It could have been worse. Netko could have called in a SWAT team to execute the arrest warrant and “accidently” shoot Buss when he opened his front door. Oh well…
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 1719 hrs

Understand one thing: Wisconsin has a statute specifically addressing threats made via electronic communications. It is by nature vague. It is also, IMO, a stupid way to make law. It puts the police in the position of having to let someone off for what can very easily be considered later on as a threat, or arrest them. The police shouldn’t be put in this position. A wise man once said that vigorous enforcement of the law is best way to get rid of bad law. Perhaps this incident will get rid of said law, or at least lead to a better definiton of that law to eliminate cases like this.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 1729 hrs

BVBigBro post 1

Are you serious?

Yes, his response to the blog poster who referred to his kind as union thugs did not come until about after an hour or so after Owen voluntarily gave him his IP address, (assuming the time lines correct, which I’m willing to do for purposes of this discussion.)

And yes, it’s definitelly not a retraction. A retraction would have been to say, hey, I’m not the red neck right wing idiot I pretended to be, I’m actually a union leader teacher who didn’t appreciate your union thug reference, and everything I said in my post was a farce on you conservative jerks.

Instead, he wisely advised, based on the poster’s question, that no, he wasn’t advocating killing teachers. He then stayed in his persona and went on to lampoon someone he believed to be a right wing hate monger talk show host.

But, and listen up BV, at the time that the police followed up with Owen about removing Mr. Buss’ first post, his other post was there for all the world to see, and it was also there long before they got their warrant and searched his house.

Now are you saying that you think that Mr. Buss somehow made his second post because he knew somebody complained to the cops and he was being investigated?

If you are, then say it, but I don’t think you are, because you know that would be laughable. It’s too close in time to his first comments and was only made as a response to a question that was specifically put to him by the other poster. Plus, he didn’t back off one bit on his ruse.

Or are you saying that you don’t think that the police saw his second post, and you don’t have a problem with that? If you are saying that, then you are a tool, because they absolutey did have a duty to review the whole blog as part of their investigation and prior to making a decision on an arrest.

Or are you saying that the police may have seen it, but you don’t think it’s relevant, that all that matters was the first post.

I’m thinking that this is closest to what you believe, and again, this makes you either a tool, or just a complete sheep.

It did matter in terms of them making a decision as to whether Mr. Buss’ posts constituted a threat sufficient to support a charge based on probably cause that he had committed a crime.

You keep trying to say that once someone made the complaint to the police that they perceived his comment as a threat, that the police then had to go forward with an arrest and let the DA decide on the charges.

I’m telling you as a lawyer, and others have said the same thing so you don’t have to believe me, that this isn’t the way it works.

When the police are called with a complaint about any conduct, it’s their job to determine if the conduct being complained about: 1) Actually occurred, and 2) whether the conduct was a violation of criminal law that is supported by evidence that amounts to probable cause to believe the offense was committed.

Again, as a rehash, if your neighbor calls the police to claim that your cat keeps meowing and she’s afraid it’s going to lose it’s voice and once to have you arrested, the police can’t just come out and arrest you and let the DA decide if a crimes been committed, i.e., cruelty to animals.

First they need to investigate with you, unless they want to just tell the caller there’s nothing they can do because they don’t think a law has been violated, which they do a lot.

If they don’t feel this way, then they have to investigate. If they come to your house and you tell them that yes, my cats in heat and been meowing a lot lately, that doesn’t give them the right to arrest you on the spot, since you admitted that the complainants assertions were correct, and then tell you the DA will decide if there’s a case.

The police are actually in the first line of defense in being charged with the responsibility that people are not subjected to unwarranted and illegal governmental intrusions. The way they do this is to make a proper investigation, and if they have any reservations, to consult with a DA before charges are brought. This is the way it is supposed to work.

If the cops don’t want to follow the rules and make an unlawful arrest, one defined as an arrest without probable cause, then they are subject to civil liability, even though the aggrieved person is rarely made whole.

The cops blew it here in a big way. Tell me you see the light!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 1740 hrs

Perry, I am happy to see that you are saying they should have investigated the incident. That’s a change from your original comment. My last comment was terribly unclear and I am entirely responsible for the consequences.

I have never said the police had to arrest him. I have never said the police had to arrest him. I have never said the police had to arrest him. I have never said the police had to arrest him. Will that suffice? I was unclear in my last post and I should have referenced the DA as I did in the post before the last one. My point, which I made poorly, was that in other states threat statutes are considerably more clear, making things much easier on the police.

Buss’s motive for posting his second comment is unknown to anyone other than Buss. It did, however, occur 14 hours after his second comment, not closely after. We also know that it was during this time that the complaint was made, school officials passed the complaint on to the the police, the police began an investigation, they requested his IP address and the IP address was provided. Buss then proceeded to speak of heated arguments (not supported by when he made his comments vs. other commenters), admit he made the comment and then admit it could be seen as threatening. Stupid. At this point I agree wholeheartedly that the police should have gone to the DA to see if said threat rose to a level worthy of prosecution and I regret not referencing that in my above comment as I did in the earlier one. That’s all I ever claimed they should do, and we are in agreement.

Whether the police consulted with the DA or not is unknown. I would hope they did. If they did not then that is a problem for me. It removes what had been up until then pure motives. Alternately the DA may be doing a backpedal. We don’t know one way or another.

As to the CYA going around, I agree with you. I suspect the powers that be (beyond the police who really have no motive against Buss) wanted something more done, but, like you, I have no actual evidence of this.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 1841 hrs

Here’s the law:

http://nxt.legis.state.wi.us/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templ ates&fn;=default.htm&vid;=WI:Default&d;=stats&jd;=947.01 25

It was created in 1995 to amend stalking laws in domestic abuse cases, specifically to stop either spouse from using emails to harass the other. There is no record of anyone other than spouses sending nasty emails in domestic abuse cases ever being charged with violating this particular statute anywhere in the state of Wisconsin in the 12 years in has been on the books. Mr. Buss is the first.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 1918 hrs

Are we also going to overlook the Libel in which he falsely made statements and attributed them to another source the whole Mark Belling thing can be litigated in civil court should Belling chose to do so. I personally would have a hard time holding back. The comments he made were disgusting.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 2223 hrs

Mike G. -1

You’re mistaken, Mr. Buss didn’t make the comments. Somebody like you, but maybe in a more extreme form, made the comments in a persona created by Mr. Buss to show how far conservative whack jobs might really go. In fact, if they hadn’t removed his post, there would have probably been a few ultra conservative teacher union thug haters that would have given him some support.

As to Belling, my understanding is that he is just one more right wing radio mouth hatemonger who I’m sure wouldn’t be offended by the remarks attributed to him, because assuming he really didn’t say them, he probably thought them at the very least. Also, I’m sure he’s happy to get whatever publicity he can, his type usually is, and he would be flattered to be bashed by a liberal, just as he loves to bash them.

P.S. I read his comments about this incident on his web site, and not surprisingly, he’s just as disingenuous about it as the other conservatives that have commented on what happened.
What a surprise - no tears by the conservatives for a liberal that was a victim of a legal system that tramples on people’s civil liberties, especially liberals’.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 2247 hrs

Civil liberty is obviously being trampled… I would not say by me. Who is the hatemonger, perry? Me? I don’t know you and you most certainly don’t know me. He was not a victim of the legal system. He was a victim of his own actions. To my knowledge, he has not been charged, nor unreasonably detained. He violated ss 947.01 Disorderly Conduct at the least to the determination of probable cause. As he has not been charged, how can he be a victim of the legal system. And yes Mr. Buss did make the comment, just because he changed his name to an alternate personae does not mean he did not say it or write it. He formulated the thoughts and he is ultimately responsible for what ever the outcome is for his actions. There are consequences to our choices. He made a poor one.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 2301 hrs

BVBigBro-1

Well I guess maybe there is hope for world peace and unity and all that warm and fuzzy stuff, or maybe it’s just the season. Anyway BV, baby steps, baby steps.

I really haven’t changed positions, as I still feel that common sense and respect for first amendment free speech rights should have allowed the police to dismiss the complaint outright. Even if the timeline’s correct and Mr. Buss’ second comment wasn’t available when the investigation started, it should have stopped no later than once the second post came to light.

However, so as not to get stuck on this issue, I was willing to concede that possibly the investigation wasn’t clearly unwarranted, just to get to my main point, which was the issuance of the warrant and the arrest clearly were.

I am glad that you agree that the arrest was improper (or is it possible that you are saying that while you agree he shouldn’t have been arrested, it wasn’t improper. If so, then more baby steps are needed.)

I still sense some lingering reservations on your part, though, like you aren’t convinced that Mr. Buss’ follow up post was a pure and unadulterated response free from any thoughts that he may be under some type of speech police probe.

However, your focus on the timeline really doesn’t support you at all. On 11/15, at 9:16 a.m., Overtaxed in WI made his disparaging union thug remark and slammed the WEAC.

It wasn’t until 11/16, at 6:50 p.m., more than 24 hours after Overtaxed made his remark that Mr. Buss weighed into the discussion.

Then, it was about 5 hours later, at 11:25 p.m., that Overtaxed took the bait, knowing it was directed at him, and posited the question to MR. Buss’ whacko conservative persona as to whether he was advocating killing teachers.

Is it not understandable that Mr. Bus was in bed at that time, and it appears that the first thing in the morning on the 17th, at 8:30 a.m., he got back into the discussion and made his post renouncing teacher killing, having been a good poster and having checked his email 1st thing in the morning and seeing there had been new comments made (a very nice feature of this blog I might add, but maybe they all have that.) I think the timing on the exchanges are fairly typical of blog discourse (unless you’re a chump like me and stay up until 5:00 am posting!)

I just don’t see how you can suspect that as he lay sleeping, he sensed that the speech police had been called in to go after him, and again, if he had, you know his post would have looked much different.

And I don’t know why you don’t clearly see his motivation and anger over some of the posts, knowing that he was very much pro-union and very supportive of teacher causes. Having conservatives laughingly dismiss union leaders as union thugs and blaming the union for keeping teacher salaries inflated for services not performed would tork me off in his positon, even though I’m not personally a huge pro-union type.

I’m glad you agree about the CYA, and I assume that you agree it has a lot to do with the U word. However, in small towns, and I live in one, saying the police have no bias isn’t always that easy to do. Somebody is married to somebody on the board, at the school, went to school with them, etc., etc.. Again, if the police didn’t have some improper interest in pursuing Mr. Buss, then the only answer for me is incredible incompetence/Homeland security wanna be.

Mr. Bus was one of the good guys, and the police should have been able to determine that immediately. Instead, they grabbed his computers, his rifles, and were probably disappointed that they couldn’t find some real violation of the law. That‘s probably the only positive aspect of this whole mess.

So what’s the BVBigBro moniker about, just curious?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 07, 2007 at 2333 hrs

I still can’t say if he should have been arrested, and given that the original post commentary had petered out, his original comment can’t be claimed to have been made in the heat of the moment,. Buss may be a good guy, but that’s beyond my knowledge. In the end I’m exactly where I started, he should have been investigated, possibly arrested, he shouldn’t be charged and he probably shouldn’t lose his job.

I think the CYA started with his arrest. The DA is a political office, and an astute politician if consulted would have said arrest him (you can backpedal from an arrest, not vice versa after everything goes bad).

My moniker is a reference to relatives of mine who blog.

In any event I believe Mr. Buss would rather this thing end, and for his sake I will do my part with this sentence, after all it is hockey season.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 08, 2007 at 0004 hrs

Mike G -1

Civil liberties are trampled when someone exercises their protected first amendment rights, in this case free speech, and end up being wrongfully arrested and put in jail. If there was probable cause to believe that Mr. Buss had committed the offense of disorderly conduct, then you are correct, there is no civil liberties violation, unless the police improperly obtained Mr. Buss’s identify after having secured Mr. Buss’ IP from good citizen Owen. Also, a civil liberties violation would have occurred if the police, in obtaining the search warrant, lied or withheld information that would have persuaded a judge not to issue the warrant. Lastly, it could have occurred if the judge signed off on the warrant even though no valid basis was given to him for issuing a warrant.

Now we do know the DA determined that no chargeable crime was committed by Mr. Buss. While this isn’t conclusive on the existence of probable cause for the arrest, or the lack of it, it doesn’t bode well for the police. What also doesn’t bode well for the police is that disorderly conduct is not the type of charge that would generally be associated with the type of conduct that had occurred. And what really doesn’t bode well for the police is that they had an opportunity to fully investigate this matter and make a decision about an arrest prior to making the arrest, but it doesn’t appear they did so.

Now if his arrest was unlawful, or any part of the so-called investigation was unlawful, that would make him a victim of our system of injustice.

Where you are so very wrong here though is in your assertion that the context and circumstances of the post that Mr. Buss submitted has no bearing on the words he wrote. It has everything to do with the words he wrote and what his thoughts and intentions were.

Here, he definitely had to think of those words. When he did so, he wasn’t articulating his thoughts that he wanted to kill teachers, he was formulating his thoughts as to how someone who was an ultraconservative union thug hater might articulate the kind of thoughts that such a person would have.

The first amendment right to freedom of expression permits us to create personae and to express how that persona would express itself without accusations that the persona’s words represent our real views.

That was kind of a mouthful, so an example might be better. The best one I can think of is Dana Garvey’s church lady. Garvey used the church lady to lampoon the moral majority and right wing religious zealots, and for general purposes of irreverence.

Yet, no one would have ever thought to accuse Garvey of actually harboring the beliefs espoused by the church lady. In fact, everyone knew it was the exact opposite. Here, there was no question in the authorities minds that Mr. Buss had taken on the persona of the union thug teacher hater in making his comments, so there was no basis for an arrest

You are right that there are consequences to our choices. What we have to guard against is that the consequences of choosing to exercise our free speech rights doesn’t result in an improper and unwarranted governmental intrusion as happened here.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 08, 2007 at 0052 hrs

BVBigBro -1

Good for you, but I don’t know why all of a sudden you’re hung up on this heat of the moment thing. Mr. Buss doesn’t need that as a basis for having made his post. All he needed was to have someone make the negative comments that they did that triggered his desire to make a response. So what if the thread has tapered off, if no one listens, no one gets riled. At least you’ve put something out that satisfies you that you’ve done your part to take a stand. Here, Overtaxed did decide to keep the thread going by responding, and the world of blogging is all it should be.

Normally it would be to his credit that he posted in a clever and gripping way that got people to look. And nothing would have, or should have come out of it if the police had handled it properly. They blew it, and I think ultimately it will get sorted out to his advantage, but it will take awhile to get the ball rolling.

For all we know, he may end up having to sign something agreeing not to sue anyone over this in order to keep his job. Even though he may be reluctant to do so, he might decide it’s just not worth it for him to fight the good fight.

Of course, if they try to fire him or demote him in any way, then I’m sure the gloves will come off, and they will have made a decision they’ll regret.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 08, 2007 at 0109 hrs

perry, you seem almost reasonable and fairly intelligent, I don’t get why you think you have to throw the slams around to get your point across. I actually read your posts until you start calling people “tools” and start pointing the finger at the Evil Conservative Right wing whackos.

I don’t get why you’re so hung up on this guy. He’s not freaking Nelson Mandella! The guy probably didn’t set foot in a jail cell, and yet you’re setting him up for martyr status.

You’re speculating on what the arresting police might have thought or done. Based on what you’ve said, I’d like to know on what store of knowledge your judgments are based. Your simple dismissal, claiming that the investigation should have ended once the officers got to Buss’s house, spoke to him and realized what a swell guy he is seems like a pretty simplistic view. I don’t think it works like that once a charge is filed.

I don’t think you do your view points any justice by beating the horse after the buzzards have been on it for hours. I know that’s not gonna stop you from repeating yourself at least one more time though. So go for it. In fact, I’ll save you some time…

“Cagelicker, you’re dumb and I’m smart. I’m right and you’re wrong. You don’t stand a chance against my staggering intellect, so you should just pack of your computer and return it to the store. You’re a loser, and you should kill yourself.”

Gosh, perry, I guess you’re right after all… I don’t know what I was thinking. It’s all so clear to me now. You’re a crusader, out to right the wrongs and show us all how to live better and more fulfilling lives. Hugs and puppies and rainbows for everyone!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 08, 2007 at 0420 hrs

Hey everyone.
Just wanted to say that my asshole is on fire. It’s literally on fire because I sat on red hot a stove element set to maximum.

I also think that whoever gave away those IP addresses should probably be shot.

K, gotta go. My asshole is just burning!!!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 08, 2007 at 1510 hrs

cagekicker -1

Okay, cagekicker, you think you can talk the talk, so let’s see if you can walk the walk. Send me an email with your name and address, and in it tell me how you are so sick of all these liberal thugs doing all their name calling and picking on conservatives.

Tell me that you wouldn’t mind seeing some of these liberal types get what’s coming to them, one shot at a time. Tell me in it that you own several weapons, and if someone robbed you and got a hold of one of your guns to shoot some liberal, that it would make you happy that your gun purchase didn’t go to waste. Also include the name and address of your employer in the email, and mention how when you are at work, during your lunch break, you use the computer to slam liberals, as kind of a desert.

I’ll turn your name in to the cops, and tell them that you seem like you may be losing it, and I’m kind of fearful, and I see your comments as a veiled threat. I’ll also contact your employer and let them know about your actions.

Then, assuming the cops take the bait, as they did in this case, and they come in and search your home and seize all computers in your home and any weapons you have like they did with Mr. Buss, then we can see how you like it.

Also, when your employer decides they have some concerns and put you on a paid absence pending any further actions, you can enjoy your free time off pondering what’s ahead in your life.

And sure, the police will probably let you post bond in a few hours (do you feel lucky punk,) , and you probably won’t get thrown in with some real piece of scum who ends up assaulting you, and then you’ll be able to see for yourself just how minimal of an intrusion this was on Mr. Buss’ life.

And afterwards, you can wait around while the DA decides if he’s going to prosecute, after you explain why you did what you did, and you never intended to really harm anyone, and you are not a criminal. The same goes with your employer.

I’ll take my chances with the police in filing the complaint, because I’ll them that I really believed what I reported, since you decided to go along with it. That should get me off the hook.

Well, what do you think big man? You seem very quick to minimize the unwarranted intrusion to Mr. Buss and all of the ramifications to him from that unwarranted intrusion. And you don’t seem to understand why anyone should get bent out of shape about it.

Of course, the reason you don’t care is because high-minded, holier than thou people like you believe they lead such perfect and good lives that nothing like this could ever happen to them. This only happens to people who deserve it, and your such a good citizen, you could never be wrongfully accused of anything.

From your other posts, I thought that maybe you were getting it a little bit, but now I’m back to thinking that you are some 14 year old precocious rich kid born into privilege and a conservative heritage that you’ve embraced 100%.

Either that, or you’re just a tool. And no, I wouldn’t tell you to commit suicide, I’d rather that you and one of your fellow conservatives went to the gun range and accidentally shot one another, just like what happened with your buddy Dick.

P.S. I note that you still are using the cop-out that we really don’t know what happened when the cops got to his house, so we can’t speculate. Yet, you couldn’t meet the challenge I put out inviting you or anyone else that thinks like you do to give me a scenario of what might have happened when they got to his home that would have justified his on the spot arrest. You act like they drove up to his house with a report of a crime in progress, as opposed to having dawdled with this for several days before even contacting him.

And yes, Sherlock, the police can serve a search warrant, and then later come back to make an arrest. Frequently this is what happens in a case that involves a crime that is not in progress, and especially when it involves crimes that potentially implicate first amendment rights.

I don’t know what your talking about, though, when you say the cops can’t just drop an investigation once a charge is filed.
That’s the whole point; no charges had been filed at that time he was arrested, and no charges were ever filed.

You get insulted because I call you a tool, but then you display your ignorance for all the world to see. Don’t shoot the messenger (and I hope that guy’s asshole is all right.)
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 08, 2007 at 1633 hrs

I have AIDS. It sucks. :(
If you’re going to have unprotected sex, just make sure that it’s really really really good unprotected sex, otherwise it might not be worth it.
-sigh-
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 08, 2007 at 2000 hrs

perry, there have to be meds for whatever it is that’s wrong with you… Your post is all over the board, and I’m not sure what it is you want.

Yup, sticking to the “no speculation” notion. Sorry. Also, I understand the freedom of speech standpoint. I never said that you and yours didn’t have any reasonable points. And I sure as hell never claimed to be holier than thou… I’m leaving that to you.

Um, as for my age, I’m 37. I came from a single parent home, middle class income. I currently work for the Dept of Corrections here in Wisconsin. I spent four years in the Marine Corps as an MP. I’m a father of two. I currently live in Racine. I don’t own any guns personally.

You want a scenario that would justify an arrest… How ‘bout the scenario that they didn’t arrest him, decided that it was all just a big misunderstanding, he’s a teacher for crying out loud. The police do nothing and everyone goes on about their business.

Then the worst case scenario happens. The “character” created by Mr Buss isn’t a harmless teacher trying to make a point (badly), but is actually an unbalanced whacko (conservative, liberal, Martian, I could really care less). Emboldened by the fact that his statements haven’t been acted on, he loads up and blazes away some teachers, some students, and a little old lady walking her dog.

Now, everyone wants to know why nothing was done before this tragedy. Maybe, if the statements had been investigated, things could have been different and lives could have been saved.

Once again, I didn’t say that the arrest should have been a foregone conclusion. What I have said is that I can totally understand why a cop might have decided that he didn’t want to be the one solely making the decision to dismiss what turned into a very high profile case.

Jeeze, man, you’d think I was suggesting the guy be drawn and quartered or something. Have I wronged you personally? Have I actually claimed the moral high ground here? I don’t think so. All I’ve suggested is that maybe you should think about the variables before you sling the mud. There are things that you haven’t considered, and it’s just too easy to call the game from the armchair.

Peace, brother. I have to live here too…
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 09, 2007 at 0227 hrs

For those who still “don’t get it” as to why Mr. Buss’s civil rights were violated by the West Bend police et al, try this analogy:

Incident: A teacher finds an unmarked envelope with a strange looking powder in it that somebody left in the teachers’ lounge and assumes the substance is poison. She believes somebody left it there to poison teachers and files a complaint with the police.

Question: When the police commence their investigation of the complaint, what should be their first task?

(A) Find out if the substance in the envelope is actually poison as the teacher’s complaint alleges

or

(B) Track down the person who left the envelope through fingerprint analysis and
arrest them.

Answer: ?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 09, 2007 at 1910 hrs

Marheth that is one of the dumbest analogies I have ever heard…

I suppose if the person that left the mysterious envelope had also left an ominous message with it that talked about anthrax…

Dumb da dumb dumb dumb….
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 09, 2007 at 1951 hrs

Marheth that is one of the dumbest analogies I have ever heard…

Posted by Bob on December 09, 2007 at 1951 hrs

Heard? I didn’t speak the words, Bob. I wrote them. If you “heard” words instead of reading them, maybe your medication needs tweaking. Ya think?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 09, 2007 at 2111 hrs

Heard? I didn’t speak the words, Bob. I wrote them. If you “heard” words instead of reading them, maybe your medication needs tweaking. Ya think?

Seriously? That’s the best you could come back with?

Seriously.

And in answer to your analogy, they would definitely find out what the substance was. And then they would find out who left it, and why. And if it was a joke, meant to scare the teachers, there would be consequences… Because in society, even one with freedoms, there are consequences.

Sadly, no one seems to want to hold anyone responsible for anything they do. This whole thread reeks of relativism.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2007 at 0002 hrs

Marheth… You stupid little person. I’m legally blind and have a program that reads small text to me off the computer. So yes you closeminded little person. I literally “heard” what you wrote.

Which, by the way, was still one of the most ignorant, stupid, comments I have seen posted yet. Except for your follow up comment where you picked on a disabled person. Nice one dumbass.

-bob
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2007 at 0857 hrs

LOL. This thread is comedy gold.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2007 at 1121 hrs

Marheth… You stupid little person. I’m legally blind and have a program that reads small text to me off the computer. So yes you closeminded little person. I literally “heard” what you wrote.

Which, by the way, was still one of the most ignorant, stupid, comments I have seen posted yet. Except for your follow up comment where you picked on a disabled person. Nice one dumbass.

-bob

Posted by Bob on December 10, 2007 at 0857 hrs

A blind conservative? That’s so redundant. As redundant as a lying conservative, Bob.
Computers for the blind correct spelling, punctuation and syntax errors. Yours doesn’t. Take a hike, boob.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2007 at 1447 hrs

And in answer to your analogy, they would definitely find out what the substance was. And then they would find out who left it, and why. And if it was a joke, meant to scare the teachers, there would be consequences… Because in society, even one with freedoms, there are consequences.

Sadly, no one seems to want to hold anyone responsible for anything they do. This whole thread reeks of relativism.
Posted by Cagekicker on December 10, 2007 at 0002 hrs

So your answer is (A) followed by (B)? IOW, if (A) determines the substance in the envelope is a harmless artificial sweetner, and NOT poison, the police should still proceed to (B) and track down the person who left the envelope of artificial sweetner in the teachers’ lounge and arrest them even though procedure (A) has already established that no crime has been committed?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2007 at 1523 hrs

Marheth… I may be “legally Blind” but at least I’m not an idiot… I didn’t say that I have no sight, I said I have a program that helps me read small text. It is called ReadingBar 2 for Internet Explorer and it really has helped open the internet up to people with disabilities such as mine.

But that being said. I should get one of those fancy computers that you are referring to. Does it also include software/hardware that edits out lunatic liberals…

Seriously dude quit bashing on the disabled. And admit that you made a sophmoric, stupid, ignorant analogy.

In all seriousness, stop bashing people with disabilities it is bad form.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2007 at 1530 hrs

I checked back to see how this thread could still be going… I wish I hadn’t.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2007 at 1538 hrs

Marheth, you stupid waste of flesh. Why don’t we test your little analogy.

Go ahead and put some white powder into an envelope and mail it to your govenor or the White house. Lets see if that evokes any sort of response. I wonder what the outcome would be?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2007 at 1540 hrs

So your answer is (A) followed by (B)? IOW, if (A) determines the substance in the envelope is a harmless artificial sweetner, and NOT poison, the police should still proceed to (B) and track down the person who left the envelope of artificial sweetner in the teachers’ lounge and arrest them even though procedure (A) has already established that no crime has been committed?

Posted by marheth on December 10, 2007 at 1523 hrs

At the least they “track down the person” and find out what the intent of the envelope full of white stuff was. If it was to spread fear or intimidate some sort of charge might be in order.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2007 at 1546 hrs

THERE’S NONE SO BLIND AS THOSE WHO WILL NOT SEE

I put that quote in bold caps deliberately so your “program” would SHOUT it to you, boob. Did it work?

Bashing blind, deaf, and dumb fascist conservative trolls, and their sock puppets, is a moral imperative, boob. Personally, I think waterboarding them would be more fun, but (sigh) one does what one can….
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2007 at 1636 hrs

Actually when you put things in bold I can pretty clearly make out what you are saying. So thank you for that.

In other news, your analogy was and is idiotic.

xxoo

bob
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2007 at 1708 hrs

cagekicker - 269

Okay, I can see that approach didn’t work, and I’m going to assume that you weren’t persuaded by marheth’s analogy either, but hopefully you aren’t legally dumb like Bob.

So under your scenario, the police investigate Mr. Buss and determine he’s a union leader and teacher and wasn’t foaming at the mouth, and they believe his explanation of the circumstances of his post, as it has a compelling truthfulness to it. They then make the decision that there’s no probable cause for an arrest, with or without involving the DA.

And then, the unimaginable happens. A few weeks later he does a Mr. Hyde and goes into a teacher leader union thug killing spree. Talk about your conservative paranoid delusions.

Another flaw with this reasoning is that based on the anti-teacher and union thug posts that were made on the blog by true, dye in the wool conservatives, can we really be sure that conservative members of the public would be critical of the police decision not to make an arrest. (We won’t even factor in the facts of this case where after they make the arrest, they shortly thereafter let our psycho assassin out on a chump bail amount.)

And as far as the liberal members of the public, aren’t those the same folks who are screaming that his rights have been violated. Surely they won’t be critical, or they’d just be a bunch of liberal hypocrites giving conservatives more fuel for liberal bashing.

Starts to sound like a win/win situation for the police if they don’t make an arrest and something like that happens, doesn’t it?
I will give you credit for answering my other question and ruling out option 1 on being a spoiled, rich, conservative kid. And it does a lot to help explain why you don’t think being wrongfully arrested is such a big deal. It appears likely that you’ve been around people who have been wrongfully imprisoned, and I’m guessing that things like that probably doesn’t bother you too much either.

After all, as long as you get your pay check, you aren’t going to speculate if someone got wrongfully convicted, or if people should be going to jail for violating our one legal drug only rule (and yes, I agree that I digress there.) Of course, I think you have to be pretty self-righteous to live that life.

I’d ask you if you were disgusted by what happened at Abu Ghraib, but I’m afraid of the answer I might get. I’m actually a little concerned about your choice for a screen name knowing what you do. I’m not sure what it means to you, but it doesn’t have a positive, rehabilitative sound to me.

Lastly, I do resent your insinuation that I need meds. What make’s you think that the problem isn’t the medication I’m currently on.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2007 at 1826 hrs

I’m still confused about something… Did Mr. Bus actually get charged with anything… NO? Wow so what is the problem here. He posted, what some if not many people would argue, a threat on the internet. This percieved threat was called in by HIS OWN KIND. Yes actual teachers called the police about this percieved threat. The police responded as they should when law abiding citizens report a percieved threat that is written, spoken, or acted on.

Because Mr. Bus admitted that he wrote the email that many felt was hostile and a threat, they made an arrest. The DA determined that there was not enough to make a charge and now he is free to live his life.

If Mr. Bus doesn’t want this sort of thing to happen again he should choose his words more carefully in the future. I’m certain that he can pose as a fake Conservative and sound like an ass without making his Own LIBERAL union friends fear for their lives if he tries harder…

As for the invasion of privacy issue about his IP being release… I’m sure the disclamer to write in this blog covered that.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 10, 2007 at 1905 hrs

perry, once again you have chosen to totally miss the point(s)... Not a big shock, I’ll grant, but still I guess I held a little hope.

First, I can’t believe you think the idea of someone going on a killing spree is such a far fetched idea. Take a look outside and tell me what color your sky is.

Second, in my line of work, there may have been a few that were “wrongfully imprisoned”. First off, it’s not my job to worry about that. My job is to treat all the inmates I deal with more or less the same. I think I’m fair when dealing with them, and I’d be willing to bet that the majority of them would agree. You don’t know me, or my job, or what my level of professionalism is.

Don’t belittle yourself by trying to judge me on what I do, unless you have spent some time in my line of work. Whatever your profession is, I wouldn’t try to tell you how to do it. As for the nickname, it’s a joke… much like the rehabilitative system you mention, which I’ve seen at work for the last 14 years.

I should thank you for clearly illustrating the mindset of not only the far right/left wingnuts, but also the concept of “relativism” I referred to before. You’re so sure of your place in the world (and for that I envy you) that you can’t conceive of any other opinion or thought. You also seem to believe that there’s no behavior so heinous (except that behavior which you personally take umbrage with) that it cannot be defended under the vast umbrella of individual rights.

By your arguments, all concepts of right or wrong are relative to the individual, so who can say what is or isn’t acceptable behavior? What a world you live in. Personally, I think I’ll leave you to it.

Now, feel free to take your potshots, based on hype, paranoia, and the trusted and true self-righteous indignation I’ve come to expect from you. If nothing else, the bile you spew has been entertaining.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2007 at 0010 hrs

MARHETH…......

I never said EVERYTHING in this world is the fault of liberals. I am simply pointing out that sometimes people snap and shoot up a place. Sometimes the people that snap have family and friends that would swear up and down they never thought this could/would happen. And sometimes these phisical threats are foretold by the perps through emails/blogs ect…

When MR BUSS made his comment/threat (as percieved by his OWN peers). The police and the blog owner did the right thing by investigating MR BUSS. MR BUSS may just be a stupid deludid liberal who was trying to discredit conservatives. OR he could have been a psycho gun toting madman that was giving us one chance to stop him before he started shooting.

MR Buss should look at the world around him and understand that making comments/threats like he did are NO JOKE…

THAT is my point…

And when people are critical of the police or of this blog moderator for doing the right thing it makes me sick.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2007 at 1340 hrs

Bob -287

Come on Bob, we don’t need liberals to discredit conservatives, they do that all by themselves. Instead, liberals, like Mr. Buss, prefer to make fun of them.

His satirical remarks pointed out how big of losers they are based on their union bashing rhetoric by showing what their mindset could produce in the extreme. It was clever and made its point.

After what just happened in Colorado, though, it’s a little scary for being almost prophetic. It shows why what the cops did here was so wrong, because it’s such a clear example of what the authorities might have done there, given the opportunity, that would have been right and saved lives.

The reason I state this is because if you haven’t heard, it was reported that the “Christian thug hater” shooter did enter some blog posts, in which he made some very serious and obvious direct threats, which his fellow “anti-Christian” posters did challenge him on. Unfortunately, it wasn’t enough to stop him in time . (And I hope these reporters aren’t’ throwing this out about the blog posts without getting their facts right.)

Citizen Owen knew Buss’ post wasn’t a real threat, as he admits, but he chose to disregard privacy and free speech protections in favor of siding with the authorities. Of course, that’s what makes for a good conservative.

And don’t you whacky conservatives try to use what happened in Colorado to justify the actions that were taken against Mr. Buss here, because they are apples and oranges.

But I know you will, just like you believe that 9/11 justifies all the unlawful and despicable activity that Bush and company have engaged in since that tragedy.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2007 at 1524 hrs

I’m still confused about something… Did Mr. Bus actually get charged with anything… NO?

The answer to your question is YES, boob.

Cpt. Netko charged Mr. Buss with the crimes of (1) disorderly conduct and (2) unlawful use of computerized communication systems to get the warrent for his arrest. Netko then drove to Buss’ home where he ordered him to place his hands behind his back and then handcuffed him in front of his wife and children. Netko then paraded him out of the home and across his property in front of his neighbors and their children, placed him in the back seat of one of many police cars gathered for the event, and took him to jail.

Wow so what is the problem here

The problem here is false arrest etc. Netko prepared a charging affidavit for Buss’ arrest warrant alleging Buss had committed crimes, which he hadn’t, so the warrant was obtained by fraud and, therefore, Buss’ arrest was false.

If Mr. Bus doesn’t want this sort of thing to happen again he should choose his words more carefully in the future.

I am quite sure Mr. Buss doesn’t want “this sort of thing to happen again” to himself or anyone else, and that will be the reason he files his multimillion dollar lawsuit against Netko et al for violating his civil rights.

In the meantime, I hope Mr. Buss uses his indefinite paid leave of absence from work to treat himself and his family to a much needed and much deserved vacation somewhere where the people are more fun and interesting than West Bend. Australia’s great this time of year.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2007 at 1531 hrs

Whatever you say marheth… I wish Mr. Bus the best in whatever lawsuit he isn’t going to file. He has no case NONE not a small one not a big one not one at all.

All messages posted at this site express the views of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the owners and administrators of this site.

By registering at this site you agree not to post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, or that violate any laws. We will permanently ban all users who do so.

We reserve the right to remove, edit, or move any messages for any reason.

Even by the weakest standards his post was vulgar, obscene, hateful, and threatening. HELL his OWN chronies in the teacher union were the ones who felt THREATENED and called the cops.

I know that in your mind Mr. Bus is just a cook and therefore should be afforded the right to say whatever he wishes. But as in the case that happened earlier with the wacked out gunman, the truth is there are psyco’s out there. Psyco’s that would and do act out their sick messages to people.

As has been well established you do NOT have the right to yeall fire in a burning building. All Speech is not allowed.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2007 at 1543 hrs

”...the truth is there are psyco’s out there.”

It’s not a new phenomena. There are lots of “psychos” out there besides the ones that go postal or shoot up schools, etc. Ann Coulter is a psycho. Phyllis Schlafly is a psycho. Rush Limbaugh is a psycho. Some psychos cluster together in groups like the KKK, CCC and JBS, but even these festering boils on the ass of humanity have constitutional rights…like freedom of speech and freedom to be secure in their persons et al. Mr. Buss was entitled to those same protections and didn’t get them.

The DOJ, FBI, Secret Service, dozens of behavioral experts and civil rights attorneys spent years and millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money developing the written threat assessment protocols for school and workplace violence which have been provided to each and every law enforcement agency and school district in the United States, including the West Bend School District and Police Dept. It is a fact that they not only had the written protoculs for easy reference, but they had also attended taxpayer funded seminars for a live presentation of the material to help them understand, clearly and without confusion, exactly what kind of speech constituted a threat and what kind of speech did NOT constitute a threat. In other words, they got the memo. Netko and the rest of the gang are FUBAR, boob.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 11, 2007 at 1727 hrs

every law enforcement agency and school district in the United States, including the West Bend School District and Police Dept. It is a fact that they not only had the written protoculs for easy reference, but they had also attended taxpayer funded seminars for a live presentation of the material to help them understand, clearly and without confusion

That makes me happy to hear you say that… NOT only has Mr. Bus’s credibility and honor been ruined… But according to you the Psyco wussy liberal cronies down at the school district (Who felt fearful of their lives based on Mr. Bus’s quote) will also be in a world of hurt…

I can see it now “FORMER president of the union sues current union teachers after they felt threatoned by his hateful speech”.....

Oh I love it… I can’t wait for them all to burn!!!

Ah ha ha ha ha…

Guaranteed there will be no lawsuit by anyone. Who should be suing are the families of columbine students and the early republican group that mr buss slandered with his