Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Crime Government The Courts United States

Net Neutrality Supporter Sentenced For Death Threats To FCC Chairman Pai (reuters.com) 143

Posted by BeauHD from the too-much-passion dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: A California man was sentenced to 20 months in prison on Friday after pleading guilty for threatening to kill the family of U.S. Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai over the regulator's successful effort to repeal net neutrality rules. The Justice Department said Markara Man, 33, of Norwalk, California, sent the email threats "in hopes it would cause (Pai) to reverse his position on net neutrality." Led by Pai, the FCC in December 2017 repealed landmark net neutrality protections, which required internet service providers to provide users equal access to all data, regardless of their kind, source or destination. When Markara pleaded guilty in September 2018, Pai thanked law enforcement and the FCC for protecting him and his family, adding "I am deeply grateful for all they have done to keep us safe." In November 2018, Tyler Barriss pleaded guilty for calling in a bomb threat to the FCC during the December 2017 meeting where the vote to repeal net neutrality was held.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Net Neutrality Supporter Sentenced For Death Threats To FCC Chairman Pai More

Net Neutrality Supporter Sentenced For Death Threats To FCC Chairman Pai

Comments Filter:

  • Death threats... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by oic0 ( 1864384 ) on Friday May 17, 2019 @05:18PM (#58611206)
    When has a death threat ever gotten someone what they want? Do people never learn?

    • Maybe he was just born with a heart full of neutrality [youtube.com].

    • "The enemy of your enemy is... a moron??"

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Solandri ( 704621 )
      Death threats seem to work for the mafia, gangs, the Stasi [wikipedia.org], the Soviets, Hitler, North Korea, shall I continue?

      Death threats aren't frowned upon because they don't work. They're frowned upon because you're attempting to coerce someone into doing something they don't want to do. Rather than convincing them to decide for themselves that they should do something different. Basically the difference between facism and democracy. Between ruling people by subjugating them, and letting them rule themselves.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by novakyu ( 636495 )

        Yeah, but those people have ability to follow through on the threat, as demonstrated by numerous occasions when they did.

        It's not the death threat that's getting the job done; it's the actual killing that accomplished things.

        So, fewer threats, more killing, and the world will be a better place soon.

      • Death threats seem to work for the mafia, gangs, the Stasi [wikipedia.org], the Soviets, Hitler, North Korea, shall I continue?

        Um, the Stasi threats weren't threats . . . they actually killed folks. Which was kind of a joke after the fall from the Berlin Wall, when the chief of the Stasi, Erich Mielke, spoke before everyone, and said something like:

        I I love everybody! I love all peoples!"

        He got laughed out of the Parliament.

    • This was a bomb threat, a little different. I don't know why the article called it a death threat, it's been recently established that most death threats are not illegal. A bomb threat though, which the perpetrator uses to cause the evacuation of a building, that is certainly illegal.

      Also more effective than a death threat: at the very least, you do cause some amount of disruption. Which was likely this guy's goal.

      • Re: Death threats... (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        No the bomb threat was from Tyler, Markara is charged for threatening to kill Pai's family.

      • Re:Death threats... (Score:5, Informative)

        by Bigjeff5 ( 1143585 ) on Friday May 17, 2019 @05:55PM (#58611366)

        All credible death threats are illegal. What is established is that just saying "I'm going to kill you" is not a credible death threat. Joking about killing someone is not a credible death threat. There needs to be more to it than just a simple statement, like actual preparations to carry out such an attack, or evidence they've been monitoring you to find a good time to attack, or other reason to believe that when the person says they are going to kill you they are actually going to try to kill you. Most of the time when people make a death threat, it's not credible, so you're technically correct.

        Calling in a bomb threat is illegal because the recipient of the bomb threat basically has no choice but to assume it is a credible threat in most cases, or else nearly every credible bomb threat will result in a successful bombing. Since basically all bomb threats must be treated as credible threats, they are almost always illegal. There will need to be extenuating circumstances that make it clear the threat isn't real in order for it to not be illegal. It's sort of the opposite of the normal death threat, even though most bomb threats are still ultimately not real.

    • The Spanish Inquisition?

      I bet you didn't expect that.

    • When has a death threat ever gotten someone what they want? Do people never learn?

      I mean, it's either that or do a deep dive on settlement-free peering and QoS a the carrier level, so ...

    • To provoke an overreaction [youtube.com]
    • I know! Right?! Why bother threatening?! Just do it and RUN!

  • Dude shouldn't have plead guilty. He almost certainly sent non-specific and non-credible email "threats". For them to actually get you on the threat, criminally, it needs to be credible. He's an idiot for sending that shit in the first place as well.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Dude shouldn't have plead guilty. He almost certainly sent non-specific and non-credible email "threats". For them to actually get you on the threat, criminally, it needs to be credible. He's an idiot for sending that shit in the first place as well.

      You are the idiot here.

      He sent a list of locations, names, and specific threats against Pai's family including pictures of family members in public in those places he insisted he would kill them.

      It could not get more specific and credible outside of physically being present with a weapon.

    • He probably plead guilty in order to get leniency, if not part of a deal to reduce the charges. More than likely, had he fought it he would have face far more serious punishment. The case against him is very, very strong.

    • I don't know if I've ever heard of a less worthy cause for going to prison. Or for that matter for threatening to kill someone.

  • A false flag agent provocateur lesson (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    This might well be a deliberately introduced false flag agent, to give Pai arguments. I definitely would not put it beyond him.

    Remember that in the NSA leaks, this method was not only well-documented, but there was a list of I think 43 organizations that the NSA ruined or tried to ruin *in one year alone*. Among them Occupy, Anonymous (not a group until the NSA made them one, I know), Wikileaks, some Nazi ones, and even the Tea Party.

    The method roughly goes like this:
    Insert moles, to find differences, and a

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by davecb ( 6526 )
      Sounds "placed"
    • Which Wikileak was that in? I'd like to read it.

  • Ahem, if you are seriously considering sending death threats to someone; you are a fucking moron who more than likely needs to get out from whatever shit group online or off you are hanging with, take a serious step back from whatever argument you think you are engaging on because you have long left it, do a complete reevaluation of your life choices that have led you to the conclusion that sending death threats are an effective way of change, and/or seek serious help form a professional about your current

  • A year and a half since NN went away (after a brief lifespan of two years), and the internet is still here, still delivering content. The apocalyptic predictions of the end of the internet as we knew it have yet to come true.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The vast majority of successful major crimes against property are perpetrated by individuals abusing positions of trust." -- Lawrence Dalzell

Close