# what constitutes a threat against the president? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 27, 2004, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-threat-against-the-president/271573 "2004-10-27T23:50:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-threat-against-the-president/271573/1 "2004-10-27T23:50:41Z")
Your phone rings. Someone starts blathering on about the president. You were doing something important (which the caller couldn’t know, of course). You say, “Are you aware that I am not interested and I think he should be shot?” in an extremely impatient voice. Have you just committed a crime? Would there likely be repercussions? ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-threat-against-the-president/271573/2 "2004-10-27T23:56:46Z")
The best answer is that anything the Secret Service deems worthy of investigating is a threat. Not all investigations lead to criminal procedings. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-threat-against-the-president/271573/3 "2004-10-27T23:57:02Z")
It depends if the Secret Service heard of it. Lately, they’ve been considering any form of protest a threat against him, and arresting people on that. :eek: In the case you drew, it would be possible that the Secret Service (if this was reported) might take an interest and ask you to explain what you meant. Most likely, they let you off with a warning. But if they saw anything that gave them the impression you might plan to carry out the threat – well, that would turn ugly very fast. ---
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2004, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-threat-against-the-president/271573/4 "2004-10-28T16:13:20Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > You say, “Are you aware that I am not interested and I think he should be shot?” in an extremely impatient voice. > > Have you just committed a crime? Would there likely be repercussions? I wonder if the wording even constitutes a threat. If I say I think all Mexicans ought to have a visa to the United States (to get in), am I threatening them with the possibility of giving them visas. Consequently, I think John Kerry ought to be shot. Perhaps not to death, but enough to justify a Purple Heart. Is the expression of an opinion without a course of action a true threat? The following is an _example_ only: “I think I’ll shoot John Kerry tomorrow.” Yeah, that’s an opinion, but it clearly indicates an action and could be considered threatening. In short, is there a legal distinction? Will I be on the news tomorrow for threatening John Kerry? ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2004, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-threat-against-the-president/271573/5 "2004-10-28T16:49:23Z")
The Secret Service investigates thousands of cases every year. How many do you ever hear of? How many lead to trial? How many to detention? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Chao\_Goes\_Mu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_chao_goes_mu/32/3191_2.png) [@The\_Chao\_Goes\_Mu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Chao_Goes_Mu)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2004, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-threat-against-the-president/271573/6 "2004-10-28T17:24:54Z")
I would think that there is also a distinction between saying “I think ‘so and so’ should be shot” and saying “I am going to shoot ‘so and so’.” The first statement is more of an opinion. IANAL but I think it would fall under the First Amendment, although it’s not a very responsible expression of free speech in my opinion. I’m fure the possibility exists you could get questioned but they wouldn’t have much to go on. The second statement is a direct threat. It would set off enough alarms that you may have a Secret Service agent come a rap rap rapping at your chamber door. ---
**Author:** ![FilmGeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b19c9b/32.png) [@FilmGeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FilmGeek)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2004, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-threat-against-the-president/271573/7 "2004-10-28T18:30:16Z")
There’s a stink going on on LiveJournal right now about this. Assuming it’s true, someone posted a satiric comment about GWB, inflammatory in nature, and someone else reported the post to the FBI. The secret service showed up at her door and she now has an FBI file as a known dissenter. I don’t know if it’s true or not, but it wouldn’t surprise me at all. > **[a word to the wise](https://anniesj.livejournal.com/331112.html)** > > For all my LJ-loving friends, this is a word of warning, a word to the wise, and a word of utter exhaustion after the wringer I've been put through in the last twenty-four hours. A couple of weeks ago, following the last presidential debate, I said... ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2004, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-constitutes-a-threat-against-the-president/271573/8 "2004-10-28T18:46:48Z")
There’s an informative [thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=283337), in the Pit of all places, that talk about this event. The consensus there is that a third party reported the post to the Secret Service who thus felt obligated to check it out. They did so politely. They did nothing wrong. The woman has acknowledged herself to be at fault. Does she has a permanent file? Probably. yes. That’s not exactly meaningful. Nobody’s rights were violated and nothing Orwellian occurred. She was stupid. Stupidity kills. If that’s not a bumper sticker, it should be.