Backroads

Amelia King

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

With all due respect, how could anyone be “okay” with what she did? 

I suppose I said that rhetorically. There's apparently been some concerns she's getting off easy because she apologized, not realizing how her words would be taken. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Backroads said:

I suppose I said that rhetorically. There's apparently been some concerns she's getting off easy because she apologized, not realizing how her words would be taken. 

Oh, I meant no offense to you at all my friend, my apologies if it came wrong. 
 

I have an unpleasant feeling that this will end up going down the party line. One side will want to see her do thirty years in jail and the other will say “Nothing to see here folks, move along.” 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't mind one single little bit, if she got arrested, charged, tried, convicted, and sentenced for something over this.

If you're gonna own guns, you get held to various standards.  One standard is if you make vague threats that can easily be interpreted as threatening people's life and safety, you should expect to be thrown to the ground and arrested - perhaps by one of your fellow citizens while they're waiting for the cops to arrive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I wouldn't mind one single little bit, if she got arrested, charged, tried, convicted, and sentenced for something over this.

If you're gonna own guns, you get held to various standards.  One standard is if you make vague threats that can easily be interpreted as threatening people's life and safety, you should expect to be thrown to the ground and arrested - perhaps by one of your fellow citizens while they're waiting for the cops to arrive.

Agree. Her actions are out of control. This is why people think gun owners are trigger happy and just look for reasons to be aggressive. And I own several guns, for the record. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like she realized she screwed up, and took action to keep things from getting worse:

Quote

The Luray Police Department said in a statement on Facebook on Friday that King reached out to law enforcement after making her remarks at the school board meeting, understanding that the comments had caused alarm.

“The statement that was made absolutely caused public alarm, the parent that made the statement realized that, and immediately contacted law enforcement to apologize because the statement was not intended the way it was perceived,” police wrote.

“We have been in contact with the parent who made the statement, she is cooperating with law enforcement.  This incident is still under investigation and no arrests have been made at this time,” police added. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What she said was a clear threat and needs to be taken seriously, she needs to be charged. I hate to say this but if instead of "Amelia" was "John", I don't think the police will be talking about the parent contacting law enforcement and apologizing because the person believes "the statement was not intended the way it was perceived." Ridiculous.

Angry people may shout, insult, use profanity, etc they don't go around threatening people by saying they will bring GUNS to SCHOOL "ready to..."

Unbelievable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2022 at 9:22 AM, LDSGator said:

I have an unpleasant feeling that this will end up going down the party line. One side will want to see her do thirty years in jail and the other will say “Nothing to see here folks, move along.” 

So I agree with this on the leftist side.  They will want her to fry cause you know guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In today's environment where threats are made and then followed through with in regards to school shootings, her statements were extremely foolish.  I think the police departments should take her statements extremely seriously.  I'm not sure how they can assess how likely a school shooter is to fulfill threats, but they need to do a full assessment of her.

I THINK she was an extremely frustrated mother.  I think she said things in the heat of the moment.  That's what I THINK, but that's not enough to guarantee the safety of everyone else's kids.

The following solution is dependent on the state she is in (some states this could go in accordance with the threat of violence laws and temporary fire arm retention, in others it is outright illegal for the state to do currently)

Perhaps the best thing for now is to confiscate her weapons  (or ask her to give them up in the wake of her statements for a temporary time, and she then WILLINGLY gives them up to sway any fears away) for the next six months and then return them after that waiting period is over.  She can remain free, able to do as she wishes, but it also it shows that she really is not going to go shoot up the school. 

IF, as I think, she was just caught up in the moment, I would feel bad if she was imprisoned or fined for how frustrated she must have felt.  AT the same time, seeing the school shootings that have occurred over the recent years, and how many times there are threats prior and then the shootings occur, I think such threats SHOULD be taken seriously.  Even if we think she was not serious, precautions should be taken.  This is why I would hope for some sort of compromise (such as I suggested above, this way she shows that she is not going to actually be able to follow through with the threat as easily, and she still remains free).  I know if someone made a threat like that to a school my grandkids were going to, I would want the police to do all they could to make sure that the threat could NOT be followed through with. 

It's up to the police and judges to decide though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2022 at 10:47 AM, Backroads said:

What are your thoughts on this Amelia King incident? I don't know if I'm okay with a parent thinking she's allowed to shoot up a school or not understand how her words would be taken.

We have parents on both sides of many issues irate at what is going on in the schools now and they care deeply.  I think people get heated and say stupid things. That doesn't make them threats.  I think police, or other officials, get involved and determine if there is any real threat.  If so, they act accordingly.  If not, people go about their lives.

Edited by Grunt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but I'm going to come down firmly on the side of charging people who do such things with a crime. 

In this particular case, King stated that if the masking requirement were put in effect: 

Quote

I will bring every single gun loaded and ready

How is that not supposed to be interpreted as, at the very least, an attempt to intimidate decision makers into implementing her preferred policy?  That very nearly fits the definition of terrorism (the CFR doesn't explicitly denote speech acts under terrorism, see 28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).

Do I believe she should be charged and, if convicted, sentenced to decades in prison?  No, probably not. But community services and fines seem appropriate, because intimidating speech should not be normalized in our public discourse. If we were to merely say, "yeah, but she was exaggerating and wouldn't actually do it," all we do is normalize intimidation tactics. That provides no benefit to our culture and society, and it shouldn't be tolerated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

THINK she was an extremely frustrated mother.  I think she said things in the heat of the moment.  That's what I THINK, but that's not enough to guarantee the safety of everyone else's kids.

Right, she was frustrated. No one spends a pleasant day at the beach then talks like this. 

 

Just being frustrated is understandable, but many of us get frustrated and don’t threaten to bring guns places and settle disputes in shoot outs. Her being frustrated doesn’t give her the right to make vague threats, especially towards children. 
 

Even if she was speaking metaphorically, her actions show a great lack of common sense. Using words like that in school setting, even in anger, will make people deeply concerned in 2022. 

Edited by LDSGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If our laws could convict someone based on what they say our government would fail because the vast majority (99.999%) of elected government officials and bureaucrats would be convicted.    But there is another side of this coin.  It is natural for a cornered creature to warn before it strikes. So we can apply this notion both to those that back mask mandates as well as those that oppose them.  If we are smart we will attempt to diffuse immoveable opinions before they escalate against each other.  Or as my parents often advised me in my youth - are you going to choose to be part of the problem or part of the solution?  What I have learned is that those that think the solution is fixed are most likely to be the worse part of the problem - which seems to me, in this case, is not really about weather to mask children or not.

It is interesting to me that what makes magic seem real is misdirection.

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MarginOfError said:

I'm sorry, but I'm going to come down firmly on the side of charging people who do such things with a crime. 

In this particular case, King stated that if the masking requirement were put in effect: 

How is that not supposed to be interpreted as, at the very least, an attempt to intimidate decision makers into implementing her preferred policy?  That very nearly fits the definition of terrorism (the CFR doesn't explicitly denote speech acts under terrorism, see 28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).

Do I believe she should be charged and, if convicted, sentenced to decades in prison?  No, probably not. But community services and fines seem appropriate, because intimidating speech should not be normalized in our public discourse. If we were to merely say, "yeah, but she was exaggerating and wouldn't actually do it," all we do is normalize intimidation tactics. That provides no benefit to our culture and society, and it shouldn't be tolerated.

The law is mostly clear on what does or does not denote "threats."  If that criteria is not met, you do not have a violation of the law.

 

I asked @Suzie earlier:  What is the clear threat. 

 

In Utah this would be very borderline on the "possibility of success" at trial/prosecution.

 

As a reminder, facts don't care about your feelings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LDSGator said:

Right, she was frustrated. No one spends a pleasant day at the beach then talks like this. 

 

Just being frustrated is understandable, but many of us get frustrated and don’t threaten to bring guns places and settle disputes in shoot outs. Her being frustrated doesn’t give her the right to make vague threats, especially towards children. 
 

Even if she was speaking metaphorically, her actions show a great lack of common sense. Using words like that in school setting, even in anger, will make people deeply concerned in 2022. 

Is that what she actually said?  If so, I missed that part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mirkwood said:

Is that what she actually said?  If so, I missed that part.

No.

Quote

And I will bring every single gun loaded and ready to —

My question is, how did she plan on finishing her statement? I realize it's overreaching and assuming, but why bring loaded guns to a school?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2022 at 7:47 AM, Backroads said:

What are your thoughts on this Amelia King incident? I don't know if I'm okay with a parent thinking she's allowed to shoot up a school or not understand how her words would be taken.

She's a hothead who said something stupid, then apparently realized her stupidity and tried to walk back her words and mitigate their effect. So I'm sure the leftists will all be out in force, pitchforks and torches in hand, looking to punish her to the Nth degree. Because how DARE she!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

Is that what she actually said?  If so, I missed that part.

“All right, that's not happening. And I will bring every single gun loaded and ready to…”

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/590815-virginia-mom-threatens-to-bring-loaded-guns-to-school-over-mask-mandate

 Ready to what? What are loaded guns ready for? 

“Loaded and ready to….” clearly would make a reasonable person concerned for their safety. 
 

I tend to agree that she was speaking in anger, and while my “gut” reaction was to be much more harsh to her, I don’t think she really meant it. However, I have to be fair. If a leftist said this everyone would be talking about how violent those “tolerant” people are, and few of us, including myself, would be making excuses for them. 
 

What she did showed such a lack of judgement that yes, she should pay some debt to society. Community service, anger management, paying a fine, and a stern lecture from the judge. Nothing more. 

Edited by LDSGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, the illuminative thought-experiment has been:

What if she had concluded her remarks with “allahu akhbar”?

That leads me to @MarginOfError’s conclusion.  Don’t throw the book at her; maybe don’t even incarcerate her.  But . . . prosecutors can’t ignore something like this.  They just can’t.

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

But . . . prosecutors can’t ignore something like this.  They just can’t.

Honestly, what do you think the likelihood of success at trial would be?

 

I've had much more blatant "threats" declined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

Honestly, what do you think the likelihood of success at trial would be?

 

I've had much more blatant "threats" declined.

I can’t imagine a suburban Virginian jury filled with soccer moms being thrilled with what she said, but I doubt it’ll get that far. 

Edited by LDSGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now