sarcasm warning. Justin Carter now on sucide watch

Did you just make a terroristic threat?  LB, sic em...

How is Powerman's opinion a terrorist threat? I am confused... 

Don't make me come after you.

Read the law......the speaking of the threat IS the first move in all of the "making a terroristic threat" laws.  Look, this is nothing new in that freedom of speech has never been extended to speech that is so offensive that it disturbs the peace of others....or causes them alarm and fear of being injured or killed.

Get used to it.....those laws are everywhere now.  We spend quite a bit of time dealing with them during the school year.

I agree with the dad though.....common sense needs to be applied in large degrees with these laws.

lol, I'll admit that it's hard to get my sense of humor through text. 

The part that bothers me about the terroristic thread laws is the severity of their punishment.  Nobody will deny true acts of terror, bomb threats and plane hijacking type stuff are very serious and worthy of high level punishment. 

However, individual verbal (or written) threats in my mind do not raise to the same level because they're individual threats.  I'm sure we all have been to a school fight where two individuals are verbally going back and forth at each other making all kinds of threats.  Not good, but certainly not worthy of 20 years in prison.

When I had my opportunity to visit the county jail facilities there was a guy there who was drunk at home and got into a verbal fight with his wife.  He tried to leave the house and she didn't want him to drive drunk so she jumped in front of him to stop him at the door.  He pushed her to the floor and said something to the effect of "Get out of my way or I'm going to kill you".  Most certainly a threat, and most certainly not good. 
She calls the cops because she was worried about him drinking and driving and didn't even think anything of the threat he made.  He gets arrested and charged with false imprisonment, assault, terroristic threats, assault by strangulation (because he pushed on her neck when he pushed her over), etc...
He was facing 150 to 200 years in prison.  Throw in being poor and a public defender and he pleads guilty to half the charges expecting probation and is sentenced to 10 to 21 years in prison.
Now, I'm not defending what he did in any way but I honestly don't feel his crime was any more than a misdemeanor level with the possibility of a 5 year type felony.  Heck, in Nebraska 2nd degree murder is a 20 to life offense and manslaughter is 1 to 20.  He likely could have killed her and gotten a similar sentence.

So, that being said I agree that common sense needs to be applied with these laws.

I'm not cool with the whole "terroristic threat" thing. Me saying I am going to kick your but... is a threat. It is already a criminal offense... because I scared you and made you fear for your safety.... but tacking on "terroristic" has nothing to do with anything.

"Terrorists" are a group of people that have already declared a holy war on another group of people and their only real weapon is gurilla warfare and suicidal bombings. They do not have the military assets to conduct a true war, so that is what they do... and trying to blow up a bomb to kill however many people at a public gathering should carry with it a "special" criminal penalty.

But Adam Lanza was just a nut case. Same with that idiot Holmes... they are not "terrorists"...they are just murderers which is already sort of against the law.

But now... we are going to apply "terrorisitc" threat to a school yard bully because he hurt sombodies feelers... that is BS. This story is BS... fine if somone phoned him in and police came in with warants and investigated him... hey idiot... don't say stupid things in public... but all these charges and time in jail... really? People learned a long time ago not to joke around with saying you have a bomb in an air port, I guess we will learn not to say stupid things like this in public... but this is really getting ridiculous.

I don't get mad... I get even....

Nah....they are all state laws....and they all pretty much read the same.  You know that "free speech" has never meant you can say whatever you want to say any time you want to say it. Yell "FIRE" in a crowded movie theater and see what that can get you if you are taken seriously..

But yeah, your last comment is right on.....there is alot of "teaching a lesson" that goes with that law, and it is pretty pathetic, but these are those times.

Can't help but think this goes back to the whole mental health debate that occurred during the gun debate.

Would make a lot more sense to put this guy in a room for a few days and have him evaluated to determine if he is just dumb or is on the path to hurting himself or someone, rather than to put him in jail and ruin his life. 

Involluntary hold, is not an involluntary committment. But I would also tend to think he has talked to some one by this point. I mean right now he is on suicide watch.... but unfortunately it seems the jail is what made him so.

Ok.. now this one.. maybe...

These terroristic threat laws have been beefed up in the last decade.  If Carter was under the 1999 Texas law, he would be facing a Class B Misdemeanor at worst.  In 2005, the law was changed to add more scenarios under which a terroristic threat can be prosecuted and greatly enhanced the possible punishment.  

The Texas terroristic threat statute includes your garden variety assault (saying something to place a person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury) with an enhancement if the assault is against a family member or a public servant - both still misdemeanors.  The type of threat that Carter has been accused of is threatening to commit any offense involving violence to any person with the intent to: place the public or a substantial group of the public in fear of serious bodily injury - a third degree felony.  

This case revolves around Carter's intent to cause fear of serious bodily injury.  Using lol and j/k is some evidence that there was no real intent.  Interestingly enough, it is immaterial whether the accused had the capability to carry out the threat (guns, bombs, etc.) or the intent to actually carry out his threat.

There is enough to charge Carter - not sure if there is enough to get a conviction.  Whether the prosecutors should continue to pursue this case is a different story.  There is no doubt that the bail is excessive.  The purpose behind bail is to ensure the accused will not flee - it shouldn't be used as a punishment (remember innocent until proven guilty).