Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Arlington Man Loses Gun License Due To Blog About Tucson Shooting
CBSBoston.com ^ | January 18, 2011 11:20 PM | Beth Germano

Posted on 01/19/2011 7:14:56 AM PST by Mad Dawgg

ARLINGTON (CBS) – A blog threatening members of Congress in the wake of the Tucson, Arizona shooting has prompted Arlington police to temporarily suspend the firearms license of an Arlington man.

It was the headline “1 down and 534 to go” that caught the attention. “One” refers to Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot in the head in the rampage, while 534 refers to the other members of the U.S. House and Senate.

Police are investigating the “suitability” of 39-year-old Travis Corcoran to have a firearms license

(Excerpt) Read more at boston.cbslocal.com ...


TOPICS: US: Arizona
KEYWORDS: giffords
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last

1 posted on 01/19/2011 7:14:57 AM PST by Mad Dawgg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

He’s not too bright, IMHO.


2 posted on 01/19/2011 7:17:48 AM PST by sweet_diane (Adoption, the beautiful choice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

great graphic


3 posted on 01/19/2011 7:18:19 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sweet_diane

How about revoking his Blog liscence, instead?


4 posted on 01/19/2011 7:19:56 AM PST by Scrambler Bob (If you could read my mind ... just count up the felonies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

You know how everbody is saying, “Jeez, somebody should have done something about the shooter”?

Well, this is one of those things that somebody does about wackos who make threats.


5 posted on 01/19/2011 7:20:25 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

So, what the ‘Authorities’ are saying, in effect, is that you can have *either* the First Amendment, *or* the Second - but not both.....


6 posted on 01/19/2011 7:21:39 AM PST by Uncle Ike (Rope is cheap, and there are lots of trees...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

This guy is an idiot.


7 posted on 01/19/2011 7:21:59 AM PST by MsLady (If you died tonight, where would you go? Salvation, don't leave earth without it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scrambler Bob

“How about revoking his Blog liscence, instead?”

The Commerce Dept is writing rules for an Online Digital Signature that will fix that problem!

They promise, promise, promise it’ll be voluntary, but you’ll need one for certain things.

Like seatbelts were voluntary, and health care.


8 posted on 01/19/2011 7:22:01 AM PST by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sweet_diane

Definitely has won an honary Darwin award at the least.


9 posted on 01/19/2011 7:22:07 AM PST by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

What this guy did was STUPID.
and the media will make him an example for gun control.

Yet a Leftie that makes a DIRECT threat to a political citizen is given the full support of that very same media.


10 posted on 01/19/2011 7:22:24 AM PST by Marty62 (Marty 60)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

Don’t look for a lot of sympathy for this idiot.


11 posted on 01/19/2011 7:23:06 AM PST by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

I’m a believer in ‘Due Process’. If I am missing some of the facts, please correct me - my work’s firewall is blocking the entire article.

If a threat was made by this person, then prosecute. Intimadation by removing a Gun License, WITHOUT due process is a method preferred by tyrants and dictators; and should never be tolerated.

If I were in charge, my response would be swift and immediate. First off, the person who stripped this individual of his Gun License needs to have this job stripped from him. He is unworthy of the power he holds - for he raped justice by arbitrarily stepping in and violating a citizen’s most basic rights - without presenting the citizen an opportunity to defend himself. This person, by his own actions - violated the santity of the office he holds.

Then, if the citizen is indeed making threats - he can have his day in court too.


12 posted on 01/19/2011 7:24:55 AM PST by Hodar (Who needs laws .... when this "feels" so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Ike
Additionally, the former gun owner stated, “It is absolutely, absolutely unacceptable to shoot indiscriminately. Target only politicians and their staff and leave regular citizens alone.”

The first amendment gave this cretin enough rope to hang himself.

13 posted on 01/19/2011 7:25:13 AM PST by NautiNurse (ObamaCare uses Bernie Madoff theory of economics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

Complete stupidity to make a comment like that!


14 posted on 01/19/2011 7:25:29 AM PST by PORD (People Of Right & Duty!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

“Well, this is one of those things that somebody does about wackos who make threats.”

Oh yes....I’m also quite sure the feds are ALL OVER these threats by whackos too...

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/can-we-get-someone-to-shoot-sarah-palin-twitter-users-call-for-palins-death/


15 posted on 01/19/2011 7:25:30 AM PST by Crim (The Obama Doctrine : A doctrine based on complete ignorance,applied with extreme incompetence..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Ike

1st Amendment never granted a right to threaten or incite. This guy is an idiot and deserves it.


16 posted on 01/19/2011 7:26:25 AM PST by Melas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: EDINVA

This guy is a moron, but what they are doing is wrong. I believe he has a case if he decides to sue.

Authorities are going overboard. In effect, they are saying that you cant wish someone or think someone should be dead. You can no longer have bad thoughts.


17 posted on 01/19/2011 7:27:06 AM PST by And2TheRepublic (People like freedom of speech, but only when it's sweet to their ears.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

He’s a moron, and worthy of investigation. This isn’t some stupid crosshair graphic or oversensitivity. “Free speech” does not typically include actual threats of violence against anyone, public officials included.

Words mean things. This is worthy of law enforcement attention.

SnakeDoc


18 posted on 01/19/2011 7:29:08 AM PST by SnakeDoctor ("They made it evident to every man [...] that human beings are many, but men are few." -- Herodotus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: And2TheRepublic

Let me rephrase my last post. He can say what he wants, unless he actually makes a threat. saying “one down, 500 to go” isnt a threat IMO.

I dont see in the article what else he said other than the title.


19 posted on 01/19/2011 7:30:46 AM PST by And2TheRepublic (People like freedom of speech, but only when it's sweet to their ears.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: PORD
"Complete stupidity to make a comment like that!"

True but since when is "stupidity" against the law?

And if stupidity IS against the law please explain why Congress isn't behind bars?

I mean if being stupid were a crime then most of our elected officials would get the death penalty...

Right...?

(BTW does the above statement mean, I will be investigated?)

20 posted on 01/19/2011 7:31:55 AM PST by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg
You conveniently left out the part where he encourages mass murder:

"It is absolutely, absolutely unacceptable to shoot indiscriminately. Target only politicians and their staff and leave regular citizens alone.”.

21 posted on 01/19/2011 7:32:45 AM PST by kristinn (Lowering the IQ on FR since Jul 31, 1998)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

“has prompted Arlington police to temporarily suspend the firearms license of an Arlington man.”

What the government gives the government can take away.


22 posted on 01/19/2011 7:33:29 AM PST by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

It is not a good idea for a sane person to yell “Fire” in a crowded theater.

Nor is it a good idea for a sane person to imply bumping off 534 members of Congress.


23 posted on 01/19/2011 7:33:57 AM PST by Presbyterian Reporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kristinn
"You conveniently left out the part where he encourages mass murder:"

Conveiniently?

I followed the rules of copyright law I didn't edit a thing...

I believe an apology is in order...

24 posted on 01/19/2011 7:35:54 AM PST by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

Excellent post!


25 posted on 01/19/2011 7:36:04 AM PST by Twotone (Marte Et Clypeo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Ike
The First Amendment does not give one the right to threaten to kill anyone, including member of Congress.

Now, this may have been merely a very, dumb comment, as opposed to a real threat, but an investigation into it seems totally appropriate to me.

26 posted on 01/19/2011 7:38:36 AM PST by Above My Pay Grade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

Blogging and alcohol don’t mix.


27 posted on 01/19/2011 7:38:36 AM PST by b4its2late (Ignorance allows liberalism to prosper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Presbyterian Reporter

I agree with you that it is not a good idea.

Where does it say that he himself will commit an act or says for others to do such a thing.

It looks to me from the article ( i cant view video links at work) that he is merely giving a how to.

We dont arrest people for writing about how to make a bomb or how to infiltrate a building, clear a room, or set up an ambush.

This guy is a serious moron. We can all differ on what is inciting violence, but another part to this is they are going to take away his license without any conviction or arrest.

just my humble opinions.


28 posted on 01/19/2011 7:42:11 AM PST by And2TheRepublic (People like freedom of speech, but only when it's sweet to their ears.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
Irony alert!

I’m a believer in ‘Due Process’...Intimadation by removing a Gun License, WITHOUT due process is a method preferred by tyrants and dictators; and should never be tolerated.

But...

If I were in charge, my response would be swift and immediate. First off, the person who stripped this individual of his Gun License needs to have this job stripped from him.

So, the justice raper should be fired immediately but the guy advocating mass murder...he can keep his gun for now.
29 posted on 01/19/2011 7:44:07 AM PST by drjimmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: And2TheRepublic

right here-—

“It is absolutely, absolutely unacceptable to shoot indiscriminately. Target only politicians and their staff and leave regular citizens alone.”.


30 posted on 01/19/2011 7:45:30 AM PST by Presbyterian Reporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Above My Pay Grade; NautiNurse; Melas

” “It is absolutely, absolutely unacceptable to shoot indiscriminately. Target only politicians and their staff and leave regular citizens alone.” “

Sorry - I don’t see a “threat”, in that quote (which, granted, is the only part of his original article available) - where does he say “I will...” or “You must...”

This is, at worst, bad mannered - and stupid - hyperbole, and, in truth, much milder than you’d hear in a barroom on any given Saturday night....


31 posted on 01/19/2011 7:49:38 AM PST by Uncle Ike (Rope is cheap, and there are lots of trees...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg
Hey wow! The Oppressive left got themselves a two-fer, the First and second amendments in one fell swoop.

/sarc.

Ahh, remember the good old days when Libs were in favor of the Constitution?

32 posted on 01/19/2011 7:50:14 AM PST by Voice of Reason88 ( Freedom is never lost all at once - Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Presbyterian Reporter

exactly my point. sounds like a ‘how to’. Im not trying to defend the guy’s mental process, but i think the powers that be are going overboard.


33 posted on 01/19/2011 7:50:17 AM PST by And2TheRepublic (People like freedom of speech, but only when it's sweet to their ears.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: And2TheRepublic
"This guy is a serious moron. We can all differ on what is inciting violence, but another part to this is they are going to take away his license without any conviction or arrest."

Same here.

Though his words make me uncomfortable I am waaaaay more uncomfortable with the Government taking his personal property (firearms)which BTW is supposedly protected by the 2nd Amendment.

Further, the reason they supposedly took his firearms because he wrote "objectionable" words...

And I am even more uncomfortable with the fact that many freepers see nothing wrong here...

What was the actor's name who said: "There is a whiff of fascism in the air..."?

34 posted on 01/19/2011 7:52:07 AM PST by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Ike

Who are the brain police?


35 posted on 01/19/2011 7:53:19 AM PST by Gasshog (going to get what all those libs asked for, but its not what they expected.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

What he said was very stupid.

Some of those 534 others and their staff are good people. Of course, we could get along just fine without many of the rest of them, too.

Just sayin’....


36 posted on 01/19/2011 7:54:24 AM PST by EricT. (Can we start hanging them yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

>>Additionally, the former gun owner stated, “It is absolutely, absolutely unacceptable to shoot indiscriminately. Target only politicians and their staff and leave regular citizens alone.” <<

That is the money quote. The 534 to go rant might be explained away as some sort of gallows humor or sarcasm. The quote above seems to clearly be calling for 534 murders.

I wonder what his defenders would say if he were a Jihadist calling for 534 suicide bombings?


37 posted on 01/19/2011 7:57:07 AM PST by Above My Pay Grade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg

He should be investigated, which would be due process.

Suspending a license w/o that is not due process.

Consider this: if had not blogged it, where he could be identified through computer records, but spoke it and a cop overheard, would he be subject to arrest?

To identify him and determine he has a license, he’d need to be detained and asked for ID at a minimum.

Put another way, is saying something like this in the general public as bad as joking about bombs in an airport?


38 posted on 01/19/2011 7:58:22 AM PST by fruser1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fruser1
"Put another way, is saying something like this in the general public as bad as joking about bombs in an airport?"

See my problem with the whole thing is NOW its unacceptable to joke about bombs in an airport.

We all just accept it as such.

...and the Overton Window gets just a little bit bigger and we lose a little more liberty...

39 posted on 01/19/2011 8:03:19 AM PST by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: kristinn
You conveniently left out the part where he encourages mass murder:

"It is absolutely, absolutely unacceptable to shoot indiscriminately. Target only politicians and their staff and leave regular citizens alone.”.

What if he were a Muslim US citizen? Would we be so quick to defend this as free speech? I think they are doing the right thing here, investigate. If it turns out he's just a blowhard idiot, no harm done. If he is in need of mental health professionals, get them for him.

40 posted on 01/19/2011 8:06:08 AM PST by DejaJude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: fruser1
The “534 to go” might be dismissed as the equivalent of joking about bombs in an airport (which will probably get you arrested these days, or at least detained and prevented from boarding your flight).

The part of about not shooting innocent people and targeting the congress members is clearly not a joke, and is advocating the murder of 534 members of Congress. The authorities were right to temporarily take his weapons. He will have an opportunity to get them back through due process.

Do you think an Islamic Jihadist who blogs threats or calls for 534 suicide bombings or terrorist attacks should be allowed to keep his weapons, and the 1,000 pounds of fertilizer in the van in his garage until due process has been completed?

41 posted on 01/19/2011 8:09:41 AM PST by Above My Pay Grade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Ike
where does he say “I will...” or “You must...”

Did you ever study basic sentence structure in grade school? The subject is implied, and the implied subject is you.

42 posted on 01/19/2011 8:15:53 AM PST by NautiNurse (ObamaCare uses Bernie Madoff theory of economics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Ike

If you don’t see the threat there, you may be as nutty as the idiot who made it

What part of “Target only politicians and their staff...” (in the clear context of “shooting” from the previous sentence), do you not understand?

What if one of the 7 members of your immediate family was murdered by a street gang, and then one of the gang members wrote:

“Seven down, six to go” and

“It is absolutely, absolutely unacceptable to shoot indiscriminately. Target only Uncle Ike and his family members and their staff and leave their neighbors alone.”

That wouldn’t be a threat, and you’d be outraged if they took the guys weapons, right?


43 posted on 01/19/2011 8:23:35 AM PST by Above My Pay Grade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: drjimmy

One person made a decision to strip 2nd Ammendment rights, without a court system, without redress, without the over-sight.

This idiot made a GENERAL statement, saying what many others believe. He didn’t murder, or incite others to murder - he simply said “### to go”. We have ‘comedians’ to talk about assination of GW Bush, and that’s perfectly fine. When one makes a written threat, that’s actionable. But, a statement that there are some number left to go - is NOT a threat.

Yes, the guy who thinks that there are too many Libtards (or, conversely a gun-owning Libtard who makes the same GENERAL statement on Conservatives) should NOT be deprived of their Bill of Rights, simply because of a GENERAL statement.

I value my 2nd Ammendmendment rights far more than you do, apparently. They will NOT be stripped without due process.


44 posted on 01/19/2011 8:25:49 AM PST by Hodar (Who needs laws .... when this "feels" so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: kristinn
You conveniently left out the part where he encourages mass murder...

Context is everything. What he said may be ill-advised hyperbole, but it does not appear to be a threat. If, instead of merely advocating it, he had claimed that he was planning to commit mass murder, that would have been an actual threat. If he were standing directly outside of the Capitol building, stirring up an angry crowd of NARAL members or radical environmentalists or New York Times columnists, all holding pitchforks and/or guns, that might legitimately be construed as an actual threat.

Sitting behind a keyboard in his mother's basement and writing the words that he wrote is not - rather, that is speech protected under the first amendment.

Just as many here have suggested that the world would be a better place if Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro were no longer breathing air, those are not actual threats - it's not the same as if those posters were claiming that they themselves were planning or intending to kill Chavez or Castro, which would appear to be actual threats.

45 posted on 01/19/2011 8:44:02 AM PST by Zeppo ("Happy Pony is on - and I'm NOT missing Happy Pony")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
When you made your first post, you could be excused for not knowing more about the threat since you didn't have access to the complete article. By now you should have read in other posts that in addition to saying "1 down and 534 to go" this guy also said the following, which is a direct incitement to commit murder: "It is absolutely, absolutely unacceptable to shoot indiscriminately. Target only politicians and their staff and leave regular citizens alone."

I sure hope you're not one of those complaining that the Tucson sheriff should have done more to prevent Jared Loughner from killing all those people, since this guy is making more of a direct threat than Loughner ever did.
46 posted on 01/19/2011 8:49:41 AM PST by drjimmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Zeppo

“”Sitting behind a keyboard in his mother’s basement””

____

Is this true that the 39 year old blogger being discussed here lives with his mother?


47 posted on 01/19/2011 8:59:48 AM PST by Presbyterian Reporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Presbyterian Reporter

I was using hyperbole (or was it sarcasm?). I have no actual knowledge of the guy’s living arrangements.


48 posted on 01/19/2011 9:13:28 AM PST by Zeppo ("Happy Pony is on - and I'm NOT missing Happy Pony")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Ike

Really they’re just saying what’s been the case for a while, if you make a statement that’s deemed as threatening to government officials you’ll get a visit from some well dressed people. Threatening speech isn’t protected.


49 posted on 01/19/2011 9:16:56 AM PST by discostu (this is defninitely not my confused face)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg
A blog threatening members of Congress in the wake of the Tucson, Arizona shooting has prompted Arlington police to temporarily suspend the firearms license of an Arlington man.

This is EXACTLY why the 1st and 2nd Amendments exist. Too bad we are no longer in a Constitutional Republic. Or at least, some states no longer have a republican form of government that respects the US Constitution.

50 posted on 01/19/2011 9:19:53 AM PST by backwoods-engineer (The future? Imagine Cass Sunstein's boot stamping on Lincoln's beard, forever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson