I’m glad you feel that way. It means more fried clams for me.
Actually, Lepage’s latest race-related comments are less off the rails than what he said in January (the bit about how drug dealers coming to Maine are impregnating white women). Although it is mean (and sizeist) of him to refer to a political opponent as a “snot-nosed runt”.
Uh… yeah… Not true you idiot
And I won’t even touch on the irony of your post.
See, that’s good trolling. The lazy “hurrhhurrh all u libtardz are stoopid” shtick would get you laughed off of Yahoo! Answers.
It’s probably too late for your mother to change her mind and love you, but we’re still here for you. Just a modicum of effort is all we ask.
A link provided by a feeble-minded idiot that talks about the KKK’s stance on issue? Yeah, not clicking on that one.
No, and you know it’s not. The claim in the post is that he made death threats and that he should be prosecuted for them. If he is mistaken, he is mistaken. But that’s not part of his claim.
Other posters had already said it better than you, anyways.
One out of 4 ain’t bad.
The claim is that he made threats and should be prosecuted, but that is not part of his claim?
Did you leave a sentence out? Because as written, it’s pretty confusing.
Calling someone and saying you would shoot them right between the eyes isn’t a death threat? Or do you have a cite that laws against criminal threatening don’t apply to the governor?
[QUOTE=Loach]
Wishing that 19th century dueling was still a thing is not a credible threat. Wishing someone was dead might be against the rules here but it isn’t against the law.
[/QUOTE]
That’s the crux of the thing, right there.
Sounds a lot like hyperbole to me.
Anybody else flashing back to 12 Angry Men scene?
Juror #3: I’ll kill him! I’ll - kill him!
Juror #8: [calmly] You don’t really mean you’ll kill me, do you?
I love that movie.
What the Governor did may not be illegal, but it’s behavior pretty unbecoming of a Governor. Or any human being, really.
Not that I, as a Michigander, have much room to talk about poor governance.
Most definitely. It should played ad nauseum for any future election campaigns to show what a colossal dick he is.
The fact that he encouraged Gattine to share that message with everyone is further reflection of his poor judgment.
Ever hear of the Civil War? The battle of Gettysburg? You want to know who helped save the Union? Guys from Maine, led by Joshua Lawrence Chamberlin, who was later a governor of Maine, and a college professor and college president.
Nope, I’m not from Maine, but it ticks me off when people run down a state like that. Paint with a broad brush much?
You need to get out and read some history.
It seems extremely similar to the South Park episode where Jimbo and Ned infiltrated the KKK meeting and told them to change their stance and come out in favor of changing the South Park flag, because nobody would want to be on the same side of the issue as the KKK.
I’m also having trouble believing he’s sincere when the first thing he said when asked why he no longer supported Trump was “We don’t like his hair. We think it’s a toupee.”
“The enemy right now, the overwhelming majority of people coming in, are people of color or people of Hispanic origin.” - Paul LePage
Where to start?
Your keen instinct serves you well: a death threat does not turn on the legality, or lack thereof, of the actions threatened. As you correctly suss, killing is generally illegal, and this does not render death threats legally permissible.
Lepage’s comments fail for another reason entirely: the victim must in fact fear that death (or serious bodily injury) will occur, and that fear must be reasonable under the circumstances. There is an objective and a subjective component, in other words, as Maine Revised Statutes Title 17-A, §210: Terrorizing, and construing case law make clear:
Do I need to explain to you, in light of this framework, why the comment made by Lapage is not under the ambit of the statute?
Just in case, I will.
It’s objectively unreasonable to imagine that any legislature would legalize dueling.
Even if this were a reasonable fear, the mere existence of legalized dueling did not permit one person to simply walk up to another and shoot – even where dueling was legal, this would be murder. The parties involved in a duel were present by mutual consent; there was never a legal obligation to accept a challenge to duel. See, e.g. the “Code Duello,” see also “The Ten Duel Commandments,” from “Hamilton: An American Musical.” Music and lyrics by Lin-Manuel Miranda.
Yes, when the governor of a state who has previously made what is at best racially insensitive comments and at worst unfounded, unhinged racist comments is caught on tape in a rant filled with homophobic slurs and what is at best unprofessional behavior and at worst signs of serious psychiatric disorder, pedantic arguing over the legal arguments of whether or not it constituted a valid death threat absolutely IS the salient point. :dubious:
It may be, or it may not be.
If I say those words because I am an actor, reading the assigned lines in a play, then it’s not a death threat.
What makes the threat a criminal one is the elements described in Maine Revised Statutes Title 17-A, §210(1), and the construing case law. Specifically, the threat must reasonably instill fear that the threatened action will be carried out.
Here, Lepage reportedly said that he “…wish[ed] it were 1825. And we would have a duel, that’s how angry I am, and I would not put my gun in the air, I guarantee you, I would not be Hamilton. I would point it right between his eyes, because he is a snot-nosed little runt and he has not done a damn thing since he’s been in this Legislature to help move the state forward.”
These words don’t communicate an unequivocal intention to shoot Gattine. The sentence is in the subjunctive mood: a WISH that it were 1825 so that he had the option of dueling Gattine. This cannot, as a matter of law, sustain a conviction for criminal threats as defined in §210(1).
No, my cite explains how the statute does not apply to the governor’s words.
Interestingly enough, Lepage’s grasp of history is as fractured as his temper. Hamilton’s duel with Burr was at Weehawken, New Jersey in 1804. Maine didn’t exist at that time, of course; when it became a state in 1820 it adopted anti-dueling laws, including a $1000 fine for challenging someone to a duel or accepting a duel challenge.
Maine actually lost a sitting U.S. Representative to a duel eighteen years later, although the duel itself took place in Maryland. Maine’s Jonathan Cilley holds the distinction of being the last member of the U.S. House of Representatives to die in a duel. Cilley, a Democrat, was harshly critical of the Whigs, and aroused the ire of Rep. William Graves of Kentucky, who felt his personal honor impugned and challenged Cilley. Washington DC prohibited dueling, but Maryland did not. Cilley accepted the challenge and specified rifles at 80 yards. The duelists missed initially but a subsequent shot from Graves was fatal.
As recently as 1997, Maine still had an anti-dueling related law on the books: $100 fine for ridiculing someone who refuses a duel challenge.
Not much for fighting ignorance, are you?
The main – no pun intended – point is beyond dispute: the governor’s an idiot.
But that’s no reason at all to pass over, without correction, inaccurate claims like boffking’s. Lepage is correctly called an idiot, but he’s not an arsonist. He’s not a smuggler. He’s not a armed robber. He’s not a counterfeiter. Implicit in your comment seems to lurk the idea that because Lepage is an idiot leavened with a morally reprehensible streak of racism, other attacks against him are justified, regardless of their truth.
boffking is also an idiot. He’s amiable, and no racist, and his idiocy is more tolerable because he’s just some schlub on a message board and not a sitting governor.
But boffking’s idiocy does not get a pass merely because it’s directed at a worse idiot.