Decrepit Old Fool left me a comment on this post. DOF is on my blogroll, and although he and I don’t see 100% agreement, he’s a good guy and a good friend.
Anyway, he links to this article over at Reuters.
A radical environmental activist has been indicted by a federal grand jury for demonstrating how to build a firebomb in a speech just 15 hours after a fire that his group claimed responsibility for destroyed a large apartment complex being built nearby.
Okay, now this is one of those “mixed feelings” things. I don’t hold a particularly strong affinity for radical environmentalists, but I do hold a strong position on the First Amendment, and this next part is scary.
Rodney Adam Coronado, a 39-year-old member of the Earth Liberation Front, was indicted on a charge of giving instructions on how to build a destructive device, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in federal prison. The indictment was unsealed on Wednesday.
…The law makes it illegal to tell others how to build destructive devices with the intent of having them commit crimes.
There’s that “thought crime” thing again. In my post below, several of us noted that we hold particular knowledge of how to use commonly available household chemicals in exciting and vigorous ways. Now, do you suppose that some ambitious young assistant DA might want to make a name for himself by taking OUR conversation and going to court? Sure, it’d be a battle that was easy for him to lose, but who among us is in a position to spend the time, effort and money to fight such a charge? One or two such cases would serve to really stifle conversations such as the one we had.
Equally frightening is this:
Three people who attended Coronado’s speech were jailed for refusing to testify before the grand jury about the content of the speech. All have been released.
By implication, not only was it unlawful for our tree-hugging bozo to MAKE the speech, but it was unlawful for people to LISTEN to it.
Laws upon laws upon laws. We are rapidly approaching the point where EVERY one of us will be guilty of transgressing one law or another. Then it’s just a matter of whom they want to prosecute…
The difference I see, is that y’all are just B.S.ing and this dork was (seemed like) trying to get the attendees(?) to actually build the things. And use them.
Reminds me of something that happened back in, I think it was, `92.
I was a member of a BBS that specialized in text files. Porn, jokes, serious articles, you name it, including the normal amount of “anarchist cookbook” types. All that bomb stuff was fun to read, but you would be a fool to try any of it. Most wouldn’t work as it is, but the stuff that would work failed to list any safety precautions so you would most likely only blow yourself up.
Anyways, some kid logs in, download a bunch of the stuff, and faxes it to hid dad, at the FBI. They shut the site down in less than a week, but didn’t press any charges.
Remember this term, “Management of Lifestyles”. It is in present day use by many alphabet-anencies. I find it repugnant. Tommy
“Three people who attended Coronado’s speech were jailed for refusing to testify before the grand jury”
IF you’re subpoena’ed, and you refuse to testify, either you had better fit the (rather narrow) legal definition of ‘self-incrimination’ or you are going to jail for contempt. No thoughtcrime or other libertarian persecution fantasies needed, and the rule is the same for all grand jury and petit jury cases, not just those involving the freedom to help babybombers blow things up.
And crimes of intent (as opposed to crimes of fact) have been part of the judicial system since the English invented it.