What was the crime here besides illegal possession of a firearm?
- storing explosives - mostly legal.
- self build bombs? There weren't used, so hard to make a case.
- Spreading misinformation? AFAIk, that's protected under the first amendment unless you really cause tangible damage i.e. Infowars style
One way I can think a case can be made is by portraying the guy as a danger to public safety. In Europe, that would warrant a psychiatrist making an assessment for the court. In the US where people posses more firearms than the total population, I am not so sure of that argument survives in court. And then there is the ancient constitutional right to bear arms...
To be clear, I totally support the FBI locking up an apparent maniac before he goes insane and starts using his bombs. I'm just pointing out that the US legal system doesn't seem to be well equiped for those cases.
For example, the guy who ran the FPSRusia YouTube channel from Georgia, US, was sitting on well over a quarter million worth of firearms and even owned a small tank (!). Apparently that is also legal in the US. Yet authorities only took action when somebody died on his property in what seemed to have been a shooting accident.
Let responsible people have a gun or two given these are legal, have passed background check and did proper safety training, but please keep disarming the apparent crazy ones. Nobody can make a sane case why a single person needs a dozen pipe bombs in a backpack or dozens of automatic firearms and a tank.
The short-barrel shotgun (SBS) (modified or original) without an NFA tax stamp is the holding charge. They're working on determining if was just unlicensed destructive devices (DDs) or there were specific terroristic plans. That's why.
I'm surprised there aren't more defamation lawsuits on the internet.
I've thought it could be a moneymaker for social media firms to automate defamation shakedowns, just like copyright trolls automate copyright shakedowns. Help those defamed find and the messages and send out "Pay $N thousand and this defamation lawsuit goes away now" messages. Back up some of the lawsuits with $$$ to show the threat is real.
- storing explosives - mostly legal. - self build bombs? There weren't used, so hard to make a case. - Spreading misinformation? AFAIk, that's protected under the first amendment unless you really cause tangible damage i.e. Infowars style
One way I can think a case can be made is by portraying the guy as a danger to public safety. In Europe, that would warrant a psychiatrist making an assessment for the court. In the US where people posses more firearms than the total population, I am not so sure of that argument survives in court. And then there is the ancient constitutional right to bear arms...
To be clear, I totally support the FBI locking up an apparent maniac before he goes insane and starts using his bombs. I'm just pointing out that the US legal system doesn't seem to be well equiped for those cases.
For example, the guy who ran the FPSRusia YouTube channel from Georgia, US, was sitting on well over a quarter million worth of firearms and even owned a small tank (!). Apparently that is also legal in the US. Yet authorities only took action when somebody died on his property in what seemed to have been a shooting accident.
Let responsible people have a gun or two given these are legal, have passed background check and did proper safety training, but please keep disarming the apparent crazy ones. Nobody can make a sane case why a single person needs a dozen pipe bombs in a backpack or dozens of automatic firearms and a tank.