And we all know a young girl can and will pull off a murder of an important person 
That's a bit dumb. There are much more dangerous people who make the same threat. Yet they go after harmless girl? I knew the government had the priorities mixed up sometimes but sheesh.
So they should just 'look' and determine she's not a threat. They did what they are tasked to do: protect the life of the President. It was only two Secret Service agents talking to her for fifteen minutes.
Also...
Quote:
"I wasn't dangerous. I mean, look at what's (stenciled) on my backpack - it's a heart. I'm a very peace-loving person,"
Quote:
She posted a picture of the president, scrawled "Kill Bush" across the top and drew a dagger stabbing his outstretched hand.
HOOHOO HOOHOO! 
Fear the evil killer lolis 
Quote:
It was only two Secret Service agents talking to her for fifteen minutes.
If you consider pulling a student publically out of class, threatening her, and yelling at her "only talking," then I suppose you don't believe the type of questioning Bush approves of is torture either.
Questioning would not be inappropriate, but they went way too far.
My dad knew a co-worker in the 90's whose e-mail name was "killclinton" and he got a phone call from the secret service. And back then we thought THAT was scary. But also sorta a funny coincidence because he'd just bought a gun and Clinton was coming to L.A.
But when your job is to protect the most hated person in the world I guess you can get a bit paranoid.
I'm sure Bush is shaking in his boots.
Those non-voting teens are dangerous.
Yup, all those non voting teens at Columbine agree with you.
Jimro
Man, whatever happened to freedom of speech?
Actually, before I ask that, I should ask whatever happened to common sense?
This is the second instance I've heard of the secret service going to question somebody over a Bush threat (first was over at Livejournal). I have a screenshot of the journal entry. Basically, she had written a joke prayer to God asking him to kill Bush in a hysterically wrong way involving drugs and underage boy pr0ns.
It was funny. And still is, everytime I reread it. But it wasn't as if she would go through and actually plan that to happen. **rolls eyes** Ahhhh, paranoia.
~Shadowed Spirit Sage
Quote:
Man, whatever happened to freedom of speech?
Actually, before I ask that, I should ask whatever happened to common sense?
Sometimes I see myself asking those same questions whenever I hear or read or see something like this.
You realize I was kidding, Jimro?
This is nothing compared to Bush hate I saw. Some of them were more severe.
Bush would make the hippiest of hippy's wanna eat bunnies... raw.
~Rico
Hooray for censorship!
If I was Bush I would have just gave the word to execute her.
At least then we could impeach him.
~Rico
Silly fox, it's not a crime if the president does it! He's not a crook!
What did I tell you about this place. Run before it infects you!
~Rico
SpiritSenshi,
My point is that we live in a world of 11 year conscripted soldiers in Africa, young suicide bombers in the middle east, high school shooters here in the US.
Age has nothing to do with threat potential.
Jimro
Leave it to a soldier to think a kid 60 pounds wet is a national threat.
~Rico (disgust for military +20)
Quote:
Leave it to a soldier to think a kid 60 pounds wet is a national threat.
~Rico (disgust for military +20)
Rico, a child with an AK can kill you just as dead as a full grown soldier with an AK, and you are not even debating that little fact, you are simply trying to put me in a bad light because I pointed out the obvious. As far as your disgust for the military, I have observed no evidence of you overcoming your own prejudice against servicemembers since I came to the MoFo.
Jimro
No they can't. Go grab an average ten year old off the playground, hand them a "AK", and tell them to kill people. See what happens.
And stop hurling the same assinine accusation at me every few posts. Your ability to argue has sure gotten rusty since you left.
~Rico
Not to mention firing blindly into a crowd of kids is a world away from pulling off a successful assassination of one of the most heavily-guarded men in the world =/
Rico... I guess I am getting rusty. But since you say that an average 10 year old won't just shoot a gun that he's handed....
intl.aemj.org/cgi/content.../7/5/559-b
Quote:
Seeing Is Believing
Parental Perceptions versus Observed Child Behavior around a Firearm
Geoffrey A Jackman, Mirna M Farah, Harold K Simon and Arthur L KellermannEmory University, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta
ABSTRACT
Objective: To compare parental expectations to actual or observed behavior of their children upon finding a real gun. Methods: A convenience sample of 8-12 yr old boys was recruited from families who completed a survey of firearm ownership, storage, and parental perceptions. Parents were asked to rate their children's level of interest in real guns (1-2=low, 3=moderate, 4-5=high interest). Parents were asked to bring their son's friend and/or a sibling in the same age range to the exercise. Following informed consent each pair or trio of boys was placed in a room with a one-way mirror and observed up to 15 minutes. An actual.380 caliber handgun with a radio transmitter which detected triggering was concealed in a drawer.[/b[ Results: Out of 64 boys (mean age 9.8 yrs) who took part in this study, 48 (75%) discovered the gun. Thirty of 48 (63%) handled the gun and 16 of 48 (33%) pulled the trig According to the surveys, 31 of 48 boys (64%) were perceived by their parents to have a low interest, 9 (19%) were perceived to have a moderate interest, and 6 (13%) were perceived to have a high interest in real guns. One family was noted to be unsure of their 2 (4%) children's levels of interest in real guns. From this study, 20 of 31 boys (65%) who were perceived by their parents to have a low interest, 7 of 9 (78%) perceived to have a moderate interest, and 2 of 6 (33%) perceived to have a high interest, were observed to handle the gun. In addition, 11 of 31 boys (35%) perceived to have a low interest, 3 of 9 (33%) perceived to have a moderate interest, and 2 of 6 (33%) perceived to have a high interest in real guns, were observed to pull the trigger. Conclusion: When given an opportunity, more than half of the children described by their parents as having a low or moderate interest in guns played with a real gun and over one-third pulled the trigger. Adults who keep guns in their home should make them inaccessible to children regardless of their perception of the child's interest in guns.
Why don't you just google "child kills" or "teen kills" and admit that a "child" can be a legitimate threat. I am not saying that everyone is a bloodthirsty killer, just like most people are well adjusted normal individuals.
But to say someone is not a legitimate threat based on their age is stupid.
Jimro
Quote:
Leave it to a soldier to think a kid 60 pounds wet is a national threat.
That was a rather cheap shot. (Oh a pun) Coupled with stereotyping.
Yeah, kids could certainly have the ability to use a gun. I don't know if that's related to the topic (wot Wonderbat said), but I don't support such discriminatory statements. Unless they're like, too young to manually operate the gun.
Remember, no matter how cool it may sound to take over the world with an army of AK-47 babies, don't try it. Motor skills get in the way.
I only stereotype those that stereotype veckypoo, you know that.
And no, kids don't. I watched Jamie try it when it was about 11, the recoil knocked him over.
Rico,
To counteract your vast experience with children shooting rifles, I've watched plenty of kids (and many younger than 11) shoot full sized weapons without a problem. Good technique is good technique.
The majority of people will not willingly kill another human in cold blood. The majority of Americans don't own a firearm.
However, when you have a large enough population, even an very small minority becomes a large number. If we go with the standard for "willing killers" set forth by Grossman in "On Killing", 3% of the population can shoot to kill without extensive training.
In a 300 million population, that 3%= 9 Million individuals.
While Grossmans percentage is based on adults, I am going to go out on a limb and say that adults come from somewhere, and that these "willing killers" were always willing killers and didn't wake up at 18 and decide to be able to pull a trigger.
I bet I (or any experienced shooting coach) could spend an afternoon with Jamie and train him to handle a moderate recoiling rifle like an AK, AR-15, or 30-30 without difficulty.
Food for thought:
www.take-a-pen.org/nederl...107004.htm
www.radionetherlands.nl/f...itory.html
www.flickr.com/photos/twocrabs/27488745/
www.liberia-leaf.org/repo.../index.htm
www.voanews.com/specialen...1-voa1.cfm
Jimro
Jim what you continue to ignore is that being able to fire a rifle doesn't mean you'll be able to kill the president.
Being able to fire a rifle means you have one of a necessary set of skills to kill the president, if the assassination is to be carried out by a rifle. There are a LOT of other ways to kill someone.
To kill someone you need a plan, and the ability to carry out that plan.
We've seen with school shootings that "children" have the ability to plan and execute an attack on others. The Columbine shooters even used improvised explosives in their attack.
I agree that the VAST majority of children don't have either the skill set or the will (or even the motivation) to kill the president. But when you have a population LARGE enough, even very small percentages BECOME SIGNIFICANT. Not every child in Africa is fighting as a soldier carrying an AK, in fact a very small amount. But in a large enough population that becomes a significant number.
I'm not saying that your average elementary schooler is a hardened killer. What I'm saying is that assuming every kid is harmless is stupid. That doesn't mean treat them like criminals, unless a crime has been committed. It means you need to respect the fact they they are an individual who may someday (or even today) have the resources and motivation to end a life.
Jimro
Man, I love the United States of Tyranny.
*deletes massive post on the point that it's pointless to talk when noone is really listening*
Until people stop looking for an easy scapegoat, they're not going to find the solution.
~Rico
Would this thread have a different tone if some teen had done a similar act towards President Hilary Clinton and had a similar visit by the secret service?
Jimro
No. Why?
Either one or the other is actually happening here.
A: The Secret Service doesn't ACTUALLY think the girl's a threat, this is more aimed at dissuading others from following suit.
II: The government is quaking in their collective boots over this chick, for she is the chosen one.
Also:
After they left, Kirstie Wilson sent a text message to her daughter's cell phone, telling her to come straight home: "There are two men from the secret service that want to talk with you. Apparently you made some death threats against president bush."
"Are you serious!?!? omg. Am I in a lot of trouble?" her daughter responded.
Moments later, Kirstie Wilson received another text message from her daughter saying agents had pulled her out of class.
