So what if these guys were "innocent"? They'd get a well deserved scare for making death threats, good riddance.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Boston PD stops plot to attack Pokemon World Championship
- Thread starter antonz
- Start date
Not sure why you decided to include me in your ranting.
you referred to a 27 year old man as a kid
Yeah I just releazed I typed that. It's something that haunts me to this day.
It's best not said who what or where first of all out of respect and second is not to open any old wounds.
Christopher
BDE (Big Dad Energy)
The fuck is wrong with you people - everything is fucking racist around here ...
got home from worlds yesterday and wanted to post this basically. Good weekend. I think a good chunk of players knew the enhanced security was likely due to that stupid Facebook post. People who are from the two idiots' are have said they're nitwits but not dangerous. They should get jail time but I think the chances of them acting out were low. TPCi, the convention centre, and police handled it perfectly.
Don't think most stories have mentioned it but they had permits for the guns in Indiana apparently so stories are correct that they didn't have a legal permit but they did produce one for the state they were supposedly going hunting in.
They were banned from Pokemon events as soon as they arrived at the venue.
I guess we'll see how the hearings go.
I felt safe the entire weekend and I already knew about the Facebook post on Thursday. Nobody heard they'd been arrested until around the closing ceremonies on Subday. They made the right call IMO as a panic isn't what you want when things are actually fully safe.
Zomba13
Member
That was me making a sarcastic comment on what some people (especially that one guy who dropped into to plead the whole "you people calling them boys are actually super racists" with no evidence at all and actually being hugely off topic leading to a huge derail in which one member is pretty much getting attacked for trying to defend himself).
I probably should have used /s but I thought it was obvious.
Hey buddy, glad you had a good weekend and are safe. Now I'd advise that you read more of the thread, they were from Iowa meaning they technically did not need permits at all. . . in that one state. Also the FBI found more specific threats, including references to the Boston bombing and a direct threat to someone at the championships. They carried far more ammunition then whats reasonable to have in a car at anytime. In fact just driving across state lines with those weapons is often a felony, the evidence is in favor of them planning on doing something.
Mors_Verigo
Banned
Don't fuck with Boston Police. They tracked down the marathon bombers, so needless to say they'll make short work of Pokemon radicals.
If you had to give a percentage level of awareness the general audience had there prior to the news Sunday, what would it be?
gunslikewhoa
Member
Well, they're not going to be convicted of either of those things, so...
Have you kept up with this thread? If not feel free to search through my posts, and read about the new threats the FBI just found. Even the illegal weapons charge is going to carry some serious time, I bet they are going to consider them "large capacity" and that carries a minimum 1 year all the way up to 10 years in prison. If they feel like they committed other felonies (like conspiracy to commit murder) you can go ahead and tack on another 5 year min. for the use of an illegal firearm while committing a crime.
Edit: Also if they still consider the weapon a large capacity that's another 10 minimum. The bottom line is that these two are going to jail for a while, period.
gunslikewhoa
Member
The post which I quoted says nothing about weapons violations. Of course they will be convicted of weapons violations.
As for the rest, no I didn't see the new threats.
What would I learn in this 22 page thread based on people reading news stories over reading threads involving people who know more about the situation than you or the news?
I'm not too sure but everyone I knew locally, players and parents of the younger players, knew about it. After Friday's security people were mostly blaming the Facebook post so it spread even further. Even most of the video game community heard the news I think (the two people in question are TCG players from Iowa).
The fact that the prosecutor shared quotes of them wanting to murder people from a secret not-Facebook forum they had.
I'll just throw these up on this page so other people new to the discussion can see the newly found threats.
^
Maybe that? Or maybe hear some assessments form people who have knowledge in different areas that still apply to this situation. Hell if you took the time to read a bit before posting you'd have seen that the evidence is pretty damning.
I own three and I'd gladly submit to being evaluated.
Good. You should. Everyone who buys guns should.
Yeah I've read those and read discussions of them already. I've also said I think they should both serve time for the gun possession, transport, and threats. I think the situation was handled appropriately. I think it's far too early to say there was going to be a mass shooting based on this information.
Galactic Fork
A little fluff between the ears never did any harm...
You keep acting as if we are looking at the facebook image and stopping there. No... We are also looking at action. The two combined. You have to look at both. I think the problem is that you can't fathom that what is said on the internet can relate at all to stuff in person.
What is "boastful idiocy" and "inappropriate jokes" about actually bringing the guns and ammo after that image and statement they were ready for worlds?
So please actually answer.
And your links... How are they anaolgous to this case? Did the daycare teacher make "inappropriate jokes" about abusing that specific boy online? Did the guy who found the backpack post "boastful idiocy" with a picture on facebook of him holding an identical backpack with a bomb in it and the caption "Well I'm ready for the marathon, Boston here I come.". No! They didn't. These guys did. Do you really not see the difference?
Well in the spirit of full disclosure I personally have little to fear, I've already went through multiple psych, medical, and background checks for the Army so the government has basically all my information at their beck and call already. I could see where people would worry about their right to privacy but until the all sick people in the US get the treatment they need I see it as a fair trade.
Hey that's a fine opinion to have, but illegal gun possession, transportation, and threats are all you really need to assume an active shooter incident is imminent. I also agree police handled this situation well, but it's important for civilians to understand and contextualize the signs so they can better prepare themselves in the future.
Squirrel Killer
Member
I already have.
Those were situations where people rushed to judgement. Of course there will be differences in the details of each situation.
Galactic Fork
A little fluff between the ears never did any harm...
No, you have either:
A) Described their post as boasting and immature (though I'm not sure how proclaiming they're bringing guns to the tourney is "boasting".
And separately:
B) Said there could be a myriad of possibilities for why they brought guns and a load of ammo a thousand miles. Things like going shooting in the woods, or a shooting range. Cause apparently there are no woods in Iowa.
You have not addressed the two combined. Because B) makes A) not just boasting because it's accompanied by actual action. And A) expressly shows the purpose of B) that isn't a shooting range or the woods. So given A and B, do you actually think it's reasonable to think they didn't intend to harm others?
A) Would be enough to stop them at the entrance.. But B) coupled with A) makes it most reasonable that they were going to harm others.
So... You are saying if the guy who found the bombs did post the image of him with the backpack with the bombs and that quote I mentioned, that you'd still say it as too soon to "jump to conclusions." OK, gotcha.
And to your post title: No... analogies need to be analogous (It's almost... almost as if the words are related). I was explaining why they were not analogous. Because the individuals in your examples didn't provide intent beforehand. They are all B without the A.
Squirrel Killer
Member
From my "one final time" post...
(Bolding update to highlight my response.)
My analogy was to the rush to judgement, not the specific situations leading to the judgements.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
This certainly got interesting overnight.
My $0.2
Having lived in the country there was indeed a time where I carried a rifle and a shotgun in my car at all times. I even have a conceal/ carry license for a pistol; though I never 'carried' publically. It too stayed in the glove box in a locked box. It had more practical applications then and it is more common than you probably think. Back then I used to regular shooting ranges with friends and it used to be a thing with me. Not so much these days though. Since then I moved to the coast so having these things lying around for no practical reason was kind of ridiculous after a while so I eventually parted ways with it all. Gun ownership doesn't imply violent tendancies. Not in the least. But as a responsible gun owner I can say that these guys are fucking stupid for the way they conducted themselves and I'm glad to see how quickly the BPD and media reacted. Whether guilty or innocent of actually planning an attack doesn't matter. They did what they did and are getting their due punishment one way or the other and I hope the police respond to things like this exactly like this every time. You don't joke around with guns. Some people take it very seriously and rightly so.
Having lived in the country there was indeed a time where I carried a rifle and a shotgun in my car at all times. I even have a conceal/ carry license for a pistol; though I never 'carried' publically. It too stayed in the glove box in a locked box. It had more practical applications then and it is more common than you probably think. Back then I used to regular shooting ranges with friends and it used to be a thing with me. Not so much these days though. Since then I moved to the coast so having these things lying around for no practical reason was kind of ridiculous after a while so I eventually parted ways with it all. Gun ownership doesn't imply violent tendancies. Not in the least. But as a responsible gun owner I can say that these guys are fucking stupid for the way they conducted themselves and I'm glad to see how quickly the BPD and media reacted. Whether guilty or innocent of actually planning an attack doesn't matter. They did what they did and are getting their due punishment one way or the other and I hope the police respond to things like this exactly like this every time. You don't joke around with guns. Some people take it very seriously and rightly so.
SlaughterX
Banned
Sounds like the building security ar ethe ones that actually stopped it... but yeah who the fuck shoots up a pokemon tournament. This never happened in the cartoon.
Look, Squirrel Killer, admitting that you were wrong and your logic was wrong is fine. Sticking to your guns in face of all facts and evidence is good poltics, but bad sense.
Do you really want people to remember you on GAF for the rest of eternity by this? Look at JHarvey, who gets made fun of for the balloon shit years later.
Do you really want people to remember you on GAF for the rest of eternity by this? Look at JHarvey, who gets made fun of for the balloon shit years later.
Galactic Fork
A little fluff between the ears never did any harm...
Ok... My question was:
"How reasonable do you honestly think it is to think they weren't intending to harm people with those combined facts?"
Your quote just says you find it reasonable, with no indication of how reasonable.
Not everything possible is probable. It is possible that a meteor will kill me in the next 5 minutes, but it is hardly reasonable to conclude it will. So ignore simple possibility. Focus on probability, with all the details and how reasonable it is. Give it thought.
But there is a matter of scale. Maybe that's the issue... you saw all possibilities as equal regarding these two guys. Like just being ignorant of gun laws, was equal to them planning on dragging the guns to the event so they could go to a range later, which was also equal to them using the guns at the event they said they were taking the guns to. All are equal. It's also possible that they were spies sent to foil an international plot at the event, and the BPD totally ruined their op. Great job Boston! Who knows how badly we're doomed. Anyway, so to you, regardless of all the details, being correct is just luck.
Good to know.
Watch out for meteors.
To add my two pence to Galactic Fork, I'd like to note something:
We're not a fucking court of law. We're mundane human beings, talking on an internet forum. We do not need to hold to the strict standards of a court of law, just as NeoGAF need not give a shit about the first amendment. We're incapable of passing any legal judgement on people.
I've seen people essentialy treat arguments about cirme or science as if they should be held to the standards of legal debate or the scientific process. But humans are inherently wired against that kind of thinking -- that's the entire reason courts and the peer-reviewed scientific process exists! To serve as a system against our human impulses. So we should always follow those, right?
The thing I didn't mention is that law and science is really hard. It takes tons of training and practice to actually use them. That's why we have law schools. That's why STEM students take a lot of training. That's why psychology, to name a recent science, took so long to start making sense; psychologists didn't adopt the scientific method in large scale until the last few decades.
if you don't understand something, you'll fail miserably at applying it properly. Squirrel Killer above tries to apply "logic" and legal standards to his thinking, but failed because he got caught up in rhetoric, devil's advocacy, and lack of consideration of probability. Which, regardless of what you see on TV shows about law, is a part of real law.
So jesus fucking christ, stop acting like you're a judge or lawyer. Or a professional scientist. Let people talk about something like normal people. If you're worried about mob justice or whatever, your insistence on the pale imitation of law and science you want isn't going to help.
We're not a fucking court of law. We're mundane human beings, talking on an internet forum. We do not need to hold to the strict standards of a court of law, just as NeoGAF need not give a shit about the first amendment. We're incapable of passing any legal judgement on people.
I've seen people essentialy treat arguments about cirme or science as if they should be held to the standards of legal debate or the scientific process. But humans are inherently wired against that kind of thinking -- that's the entire reason courts and the peer-reviewed scientific process exists! To serve as a system against our human impulses. So we should always follow those, right?
The thing I didn't mention is that law and science is really hard. It takes tons of training and practice to actually use them. That's why we have law schools. That's why STEM students take a lot of training. That's why psychology, to name a recent science, took so long to start making sense; psychologists didn't adopt the scientific method in large scale until the last few decades.
if you don't understand something, you'll fail miserably at applying it properly. Squirrel Killer above tries to apply "logic" and legal standards to his thinking, but failed because he got caught up in rhetoric, devil's advocacy, and lack of consideration of probability. Which, regardless of what you see on TV shows about law, is a part of real law.
So jesus fucking christ, stop acting like you're a judge or lawyer. Or a professional scientist. Let people talk about something like normal people. If you're worried about mob justice or whatever, your insistence on the pale imitation of law and science you want isn't going to help.
Right beneath their username.
Prototype Viktor
Member
Squirrel Killer
Member
No, Galactic Fork, your question was:
Which I answered. To answer your new question, I'm going to separate out what we knew at the time in to three elements:
- Stumbo's Facebook photo of the guns and caption that they were ready for the tournament
- Norton's "killing the competition" reply
- Their illegal possession of the guns and ammo
- Stumbo seems to have used his winnings from past tournaments to buy guns. Possible reasonable non-threatening readings of the photo and caption could be that he's ready to add to his gun collection or that the guns are "trophies" proving that he's earned his way in to the tournament.
- "Killing the competition" is frequently enough used as a competitive boast that I think it's completely reasonable to read it as less than a true threat.
- As I read Iowa's gun laws (IANAL,) having the guns in the trunk would have been legal in Iowa. Obviously, that doesn't make it legal in Massachusetts, and they should face the consequences for their illegal possession regardless of how you read it. But it does make it reasonable to read the possession as two idiots being ignorant of the gun laws in other states.
Ridiculous straw men about meteors aside, why would you assume anyone would say the possibilities are equal? Unless you're talking about a literal coin flip, it's highly unlikely that two possibilities would have equal probabilities. In fact, I even said so...
...of course, I got the probabilities completely wrong, but I am certainly not seeing all possibilities as equal.
Do I really want people to remember me for keeping an open mind and not rushing to judgement? Is that a trick question? Of course I do.
Would you want people to remember you for a knee jerk reaction and rush to falsely accuse someone? How many times do you have to read a thread about a news event that turns out to be radically different from the OP before realizing that rushing to judgement can lead you astray?
We are under no deadline to convict someone in the court of public opinion, and we don't have to be a court of law to treat people fairly. Pardon me for trying to be precise with my language, I'm trying to avoid wild tangents for simple mis-understandings.
kyoya
Member
It was reported last night on an Iowa NBC affiliate last night that Kevin Norton (18) dropped out of his high school his senior year due to bullying and that he attempted suicide a year ago. A female classmate attempted to get help for Norton from high school administrators but alleges they did nothing to help Norton.
It's unclear if Norton finished high school elsewhere or if Norton was hospitalized after his alleged suicide attempt.
Link: http://www.kcci.com/news/former-friend-reveals-troubling-past-for-pokmon-suspect/34917394
It's unclear if Norton finished high school elsewhere or if Norton was hospitalized after his alleged suicide attempt.
Link: http://www.kcci.com/news/former-friend-reveals-troubling-past-for-pokmon-suspect/34917394
For the 56th time in this thread, you conveniently overlook the key point of
4. Them bringing the guns to Worlds
Essentially the "point B" that Galactic Fork was referring to, again showcasing that your reading comprehension is highly selective.
Squirrel Killer
Member
Your 4 is contained within my 3. Just where do you think they illegally possessed the weapons and ammo?
I would consider a forum that values not jumping to conclusions and not falsely accusing people to be a usable result. About as "usable" as most other results a bunch of strangers talking about shit on the internet tend to produce.
I know, I know...
Sigh. No it's not. 4 is specifically the point of them bringing the guns to the very place they threatened. Not just that they were in a state where those guns were illegal. Hence Galactic Fork's post about connecting the dots between And B.
Your "reasonable reading" that the facebook post was about bragging about his trophy guns loses the ability to hold any water when he brought those weapons to the very target that he threatened.
Look, Squirrel Killer. You want people do be fair?
Did your argument style convince anybody? Why did so many people get so angry at you? Do you think it was because of what you said, or how you said it?
I'm a linguist. My job is to analyze language. This will sound like armchair psychologist shit, but your argument style, and this is honest, is very condensending. Maybe you're thinking you're being "precise", but as it turns out, being unpleasant to argue with will cause anybody to adopt a more radical and argumentative position against you, even if they would've agreed with similar arguments. All this happens unconsiously in our brains.
All you've done is convinced more people to be more radical against your position. You can see the actual evidence in this very thread. Look at everybody here. How many agree with you? A handful.
That's not helpful.
Did your argument style convince anybody? Why did so many people get so angry at you? Do you think it was because of what you said, or how you said it?
I'm a linguist. My job is to analyze language. This will sound like armchair psychologist shit, but your argument style, and this is honest, is very condensending. Maybe you're thinking you're being "precise", but as it turns out, being unpleasant to argue with will cause anybody to adopt a more radical and argumentative position against you, even if they would've agreed with similar arguments. All this happens unconsiously in our brains.
All you've done is convinced more people to be more radical against your position. You can see the actual evidence in this very thread. Look at everybody here. How many agree with you? A handful.
That's not helpful.
kyoya
Member
Norton and Stumbo were denied bail again and will be in jail for the next four months awaiting trial.
Link: http://www.bostonherald.com/news_op...5/09/pokemon_threat_suspects_kept_behind_bars