B&S Commenter Arrested
Would you like to know more about this?
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…
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 on November 30, 2007 at 2055 hrsMost 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 hrsLet’s see if the ACLU jumps all over this one.
Posted by on November 30, 2007 at 2132 hrsI 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 hrsNo, Mark Belling NEVER said anything that!!
Posted by on November 30, 2007 at 2211 hrsI 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
Posted by Asher Heimermann on November 30, 2007 at 2217 hrs
http://www.ASHERHEIMERMANN.comLet’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 on November 30, 2007 at 2250 hrsYeah, 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 hrsProtected 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 hrsConsidering 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 on December 01, 2007 at 0048 hrsI 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 on December 01, 2007 at 0738 hrsHoisted 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 on December 01, 2007 at 0815 hrsThat’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 hrscapper -
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.
Posted by Fuzz on December 01, 2007 at 0917 hrs
That’s grape-lady karma at its finest. 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 on December 01, 2007 at 0934 hrsthey 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 on December 01, 2007 at 0954 hrsConservatives 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 hrsGiven 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 hrsAbsolutely agree with you, Mike.
Posted by Tim on December 01, 2007 at 1100 hrsMaybe this will be the issue that brings decorum back to boot and sabers.
Posted by on December 01, 2007 at 1125 hrsOwen, 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 on December 01, 2007 at 1357 hrsOwen,
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
Posted by Mpeterson on December 01, 2007 at 1435 hrs
MpAnother 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 on December 01, 2007 at 1446 hrsE-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 on December 01, 2007 at 1504 hrsRichard, 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 on December 01, 2007 at 1514 hrsI 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.
Posted by on December 01, 2007 at 1531 hrs
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?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:
Posted by BadgerBlogger on December 01, 2007 at 1558 hrsAs 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.
Wow, a DougJ got arrested.
Posted by on December 01, 2007 at 1602 hrsI am starting to think that Mickey may have been a plant as well.
Posted by on December 01, 2007 at 1612 hrsTo 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 hrsImagine 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 on December 01, 2007 at 1646 hrsEr, 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 hrsEr, 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 hrsBut 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 hrsThere is no proof you aren’t an idiot tim.
What are the odds on that one?
Posted by on December 01, 2007 at 1829 hrsNow Althouse has picked up the story.
Posted by Tony Turner on December 01, 2007 at 1950 hrsSee, 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 hrsSee, 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 hrsTim, 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.
Posted by on December 01, 2007 at 2034 hrs
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.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 hrsWell, 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 hrsAnyone know what field this teacher works in?
He taught chemistry.
Posted by Owen on December 01, 2007 at 2047 hrsTim,
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 on December 01, 2007 at 2050 hrsEven 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 hrsOwen
“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 on December 01, 2007 at 2104 hrsFormer 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 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 on December 01, 2007 at 2202 hrsYep 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 on December 01, 2007 at 2300 hrsIf 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 on December 01, 2007 at 2341 hrsI’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 on December 02, 2007 at 0232 hrsOk...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. “
RichardThat’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 on December 02, 2007 at 0239 hrsSeriously 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 on December 02, 2007 at 0311 hrsSeriously 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 on December 02, 2007 at 0400 hrsStudents 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 on December 02, 2007 at 0404 hrsA 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 on December 02, 2007 at 0434 hrsi 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 on December 02, 2007 at 0914 hrsIn 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 on December 02, 2007 at 0952 hrsNo, 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 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 hrsI 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 on December 02, 2007 at 1206 hrscrusader - 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 on December 02, 2007 at 1315 hrsWhew, 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
Posted by Mpeterson on December 02, 2007 at 1331 hrs
MpPersonally 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 apologiesAnd owen I bet you have a picture of dylan klebold above your computer. See I was right “
Posted by on December 02, 2007 at 1517 hrsTo 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.
Posted by on December 02, 2007 at 1936 hrs
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.You stay classy, Kurt.
Posted by on December 02, 2007 at 1939 hrsI 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 hrsMp,
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,
Posted by on December 03, 2007 at 0010 hrs
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.#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 on December 03, 2007 at 1418 hrsI 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.
Posted by on December 03, 2007 at 2245 hrs
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.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 on December 03, 2007 at 2322 hrsHere’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 on December 04, 2007 at 0233 hrsI 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 on December 04, 2007 at 1709 hrsOwen, 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 on December 04, 2007 at 1742 hrsWhat 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 on December 04, 2007 at 1756 hrsOh 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 on December 04, 2007 at 1826 hrsHow 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 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 hrsThis 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 hrsMr. 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,
Posted by on December 04, 2007 at 2003 hrs
--LewisThis 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 hrsthis 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 on December 04, 2007 at 2045 hrsI 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 on December 04, 2007 at 2050 hrsI’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 on December 04, 2007 at 2107 hrsYou 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,
Posted by gerald clough on December 04, 2007 at 2120 hrs
Gerald R. Clough, J.D.
University of Wyoming College of Law 1994wow. 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 on December 04, 2007 at 2130 hrsI am afraid to post here anymore for fear you will turn me over to the police.
Posted by on December 04, 2007 at 2203 hrsOwen,
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 on December 04, 2007 at 2211 hrsIt 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 tha