Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
×




Details

Submitted on
December 19, 2012
File Size
3.0 KB
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
508
Favourites
13 (who?)
Comments
35
×


The Connecticut police put out a statement in a press conference saying anyone "spreading misinformation about the school shooting will be prosecuted"

What?

Why?  Isn't the official story a crazed 20 year old gunman with asperger's syndrome snapped, and entered a school with a gun killed over 20 people and then killed himself?

How is "spreading misinformation" a problem, if the investigators know who did it, why they did it, and there is indefinitely no other shooter?  Investigation is done, everything else is just procedure.

People's facebook's are being suspended/banned for talking about the school shooting and asking questions. DID YOU JUST READ THAT.

"Spreading misinformation" means asking questions about this whole incident.

They are trying to take our 2nd amendment rights, and now the first amendment seems to be following.

I am not saying there is more to this story than what it is, BUT A SECOND MAN WAS ARRESTED IN THE WOODS WEARING CAMOUFLAGE PANTS AND WE HAVE HEARD NOTHING ABOUT IT

WHY?????????????? WHY!!!!

Don't even say because they are protecting his identity because he didn't do it(I dont know if he did anything or not)....

The police don't need to release his identity to talk about what the hell this guy was doing in the woods, BUT, THE MAN WAS CAUGHT IN THE WOODS THE DAY OF A SCHOOL SHOOTING. I don't think it is a lawsuit waiting to happen for his identity to be released...

On top of all that THEY RELEASED THE WRONG NAME AND PICTURE OF THE GUNMAN WHEN THIS FIRST HAPPENED. The lawsuit argument holds no water.

WHY ISNT THE MEDIA TALKING ABOUT THIS GUY IN THE WOODS.

Remember Operation fast and furious when the DHS/ATF was selling guns to the Mexican Mafia? Yeah...

News articles from my journal :::::::::::click here

Eye witness says 2nd  man was arrested in the woods on live television ::::::::::::: click here

Facebook users being suspended for talking about shooting ::::::::::::::Click here

News story, second suspect in custody :::::::::::Click Here <-----This link got taken down.

If you go to google and paste this "second-connecticut-school-shooter-suspect-in-custody/"

the story from fox shows up, except they took it down.
...............
Add a Comment:
 
:icon4eversasuxsaku:
4eversasuxsaku Featured By Owner Dec 31, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
Got a point
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Dec 24, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
At this point, do we have any rights anymore? Seems like politicians are using any tragedy as an excuse to step us of our basic liberties.
Reply
:iconmsklystron:
msklystron Featured By Owner Dec 23, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
There was a lot of misreporting immediately after the mass shooting in CT. Both internet and traditional media were releasing details that were unconfirmed and even contradictory in the same article, just to get the scoop. The police initially identified the culprit incorrectly because he was carrying his brother's ID. This should never have made it into 'print' before it was verified.

What I take from your piece above is that in spite of all the coverage and talk on the net and in traditional media, we aren't getting the news we need. People everywhere were shocked by the sheer horror of this shooting. There is a natural desire to attempt to sort out what happened and why through private and public discussion. Talk in coffee shops, around kitchen tables and water coolers isn't censored, why should it be censored on facebook and possibly elsewhere on the net is a valid question. Imagine if coffee shop owners started booting out people for talking about sensitive news issues. The only reason I can think of that facebook should agree to censor a comment (they rely on others reporting 'abuse' to them, but facebook has the ability to examine the language and context of the supposedly offending remark) is when it incites Hate or violence. There are some pretty sick trolls and flamers out there willing (and able because of anonymity) to say just about anything to get a reaction. I'm fine with them being banned (although tend to show up again with a new name and account.)

I agree, Facebook is clearly placing protecting itself from possible lawsuits above free speech. The thing is, it can do this and it doesn't have to protect your rights or mine, because we 'signed' them away by joining. Also while news media generally have to answer to their audience/ readership or allow space for editiorials, audience opinion and corrections, social media combines audience and content. Facebook readers are the writers too. Facebook itself contributes the venue or the framework, not content. It typically only responds to user complaints as far as I know. No one complains, then potentially offensive, even illegal material remains uncensored.

The person caught in the woods probably had nothing to do with the shooting, but a short sentence explaining this certainly should have been part of thorough news coverage. Some would still assume conspiracy, but censoring leads to much greater mistrust of the media and authorities and more deeply rooted misinformation and conspiracy theories. As for the police, they did respond promptly to a report of a social media user threatening to commit a mass shooting, which is good. But can they stop the spread of misinformation on this particular case or any other? I doubt it. They are limited by the laws of the land and can only arrest people for criminal actions. I expect it was a kneejerk reaction that came out of the frustration of trying to conduct an investigation that would be fair to the accused (even though he was among the dead), his family and the victims. In other words, hot air.

Regarding the writing of this piece. It's straightforward and has a point, which is supported. A deeper look at how facebook handles complaints and its 'privacy' agreement might be worth adding. Also some discussion of the impact of the net and social media on the fifth estate and what that means for democratic societies with free speech.
Reply
Flagged as Spam
Hidden by Owner
Flagged as Spam
Hidden by Owner
:iconneji-deidara:
neji-deidara Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012  Hobbyist Artist
so not to be mean but were u there at the shooting or did you just reseach it online
becuse this is the first time i heard of a secont person and y cant we know his name
Reply
:iconflipswitchmandering:
FlipswitchMANDERING Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012
sweet dude.

a guy who was their said he saw a second guy get arrested, and news reports said so.

some of you are just so fucking idiotic it is unbelievable.
Reply
:iconneji-deidara:
neji-deidara Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012  Hobbyist Artist
k
Reply
:iconflipswitchmandering:
FlipswitchMANDERING Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012
sorry......... I thought you were someone else from yesterday.

I got you confused for someone else.

I apologize.
Reply
:iconneji-deidara:
neji-deidara Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012  Hobbyist Artist
its ok
Reply
:iconjamese82:
JamesE82 Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012
Obama said that this shooting was a reason why he should be allowed to raise taxes… I don’t want him prosecuted, but impeachment would certainly brighten my day.
Reply
:icondelasea:
Delasea Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Excuse me! We only accpet stories into #Literature4ever not information about what recently happened!!!!
Reply
:iconflipswitchmandering:
FlipswitchMANDERING Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012
so delete it then.
Reply
:icondelasea:
Delasea Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
I already did. I'm just trying to remind you....
Reply
:iconflipswitchmandering:
FlipswitchMANDERING Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012
I dont care. Go away, go play authoritarian somewhere else.
Reply
:iconjmelahman:
JmeLahman Featured By Owner Dec 19, 2012  Student Digital Artist
Well, spreading misinformation is called libel and it is not guaranteed by the first amendment. It's actually currently illegal.
Reply
:iconflipswitchmandering:
FlipswitchMANDERING Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012
Spreading misinformation is not libel.

You have to defame somebody, and even then there are stipulations to that regard i.e- if you are famous someone can basically print anything you want about you, defamatory or not)

Who would be defamed in saying "there might have been more than 1 shooter" or just flat out making shit up?


Who is the victim of this "libel" you speak of?

I am sorry you don't believe in the american constitution or the first amendment, but that is your thing.
Reply
:iconjmelahman:
JmeLahman Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012  Student Digital Artist
"i.e- if you are famous someone can basically print anything you want about you, defamatory or not" is the dumbest thing i've ever heard.

Uhmm perhaps the guy who you firmly believe was a part of one of the worst public shootings in America. Imagine if they released his name to the public... I can almost guarantee you he and his family would get bombarded with death threats. If he were then found innocent, he could then sue the news stations which falsely reported on him. The risk-reward of releasing his name is just not favorable for anyone (except for conspiracy theorists).

"I am sorry you don't believe in the american constitution or the first amendment, but that is your thing." Said the anarchist.
Reply
:iconflipswitchmandering:
FlipswitchMANDERING Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012
they dont need to release his name to release what the hell he was doing.


again, way to use your brain.

"Uhmm perhaps Uhmm perhapsUhmm perhapsUhmm perhapsUhmm perhapsUhmm perhapsUhmm perhapsUhmm perhapsUhmm perhapsUhmm perhapsUhmm perhapsUhmm perhapsUhmm perhapsUhmm perhapsUhmm perhapsUhmm perhaps"
Reply
:iconjmelahman:
JmeLahman Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012  Student Digital Artist
He was wearing camo pants while in the woods. What more do you want from them?
Reply
:iconflipswitchmandering:
FlipswitchMANDERING Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012
what the hell was he doing in the woods the day of a school shooting. People don't just walk in woods next to schools.

You may be ok eating bullshit...I am not.
Reply
:iconjmelahman:
JmeLahman Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012  Student Digital Artist
That's not eating bullshit. It's just the available information at the time. Be patient and what for the official police investigation, Christ.
Reply
:iconnofxmike06:
nofxmike06 Featured By Owner Dec 19, 2012  Hobbyist Interface Designer
Last link either doesn't work or the article was removed.
Reply
:iconflipswitchmandering:
FlipswitchMANDERING Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012
yeah I checked the links after I posted them and they were working...

if you click the link "Facebook users being suspended for talking about shooting" there is a print screen of the article that was taken down in the video.
Reply
:iconnofxmike06:
nofxmike06 Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012  Hobbyist Interface Designer
The article I saw was from the Newtown Bell. Is that a local newspaper or an online blog?
Reply
:iconnanashi89:
nanashi89 Featured By Owner Dec 19, 2012
Walmart, Dick's Sporting Goods, and Cheaper Than Dirt are withdrawing guns, online, retail, or both.

It's goin' down....
Reply
:iconmelalina:
Melalina Featured By Owner Dec 19, 2012  Professional General Artist
I understand where you're coming from and why, BUT, I personally would prefer it if NO MORE information comes out until they've investigated the hell out of this tragedy. This is one of the most horrific events I can remember, and it has changed me in ways I don't even want to think about. Misinformation makes it way more painful than it needs to be. In that respect, I think I speak for most of the nation.

Misinformation and too much information also gives the copy cats, who will probably pop up eventually, a killing program of their own to build upon. I realize we NEED to know enough information to be prepared in the event that this happens again, but the wrong information does not help us protect ourselves.

We had the same kind of scare in Philly (USA) years ago when the MOVE organization was bombed. Reports that some of the more dangerous adults had escaped the bombing and were on the loose. Citizens were jumping at every stranger, which could've been an even more dangerous situation. Someone could've been hurt out of fear and suspicion, because it turns out that the reports were premature and incorrect. Can we trust unsubstantiated "eyewitness accounts"?

Sometimes misinformation and too much information too soon, taints the real information, thereby hindering the investigation. I would rather see a thorough investigation than be traumatized by sensationalism, which is already happening to some extent. I know the amendments are there for us to live and be governed by, but just because we have an amendment, doesn't mean we should be reckless, heartless, and irresponsible in the face of such extreme and heart-wrenching issues. Some thought should be given to the harm this particular freedom can cause. Not to ignore the amendments, but to exercise a GENTLER interpretation where possible.

A huge chunk of our future has been destroyed with the killing of these babies, and that loss, by itself, should be respected without controversy and protest over such a comparatively small and potentially damaging issue. In conclusion, I want information as much as the next person, but I want it to be REAL information, not rumors that only serve to scare and hurt me and (this country) further.
Reply
:iconjmelahman:
JmeLahman Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012  Student Digital Artist
Great points and a very thoughtful argument and mature stance.
Reply
:iconmelalina:
Melalina Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012  Professional General Artist
I'm glad to know there are folks out there who feel that way too.
Reply
:iconmelalina:
Melalina Featured By Owner Dec 19, 2012  Professional General Artist
As I predicted, the copy cats are starting to come out of the woodwork, according to the media.
Reply
:iconmichel-le-fou:
Michel-le-fou Featured By Owner Dec 19, 2012  Professional Writer
RIGHT ON!!!!
Reply
:iconjbeverlygreene:
jbeverlygreene Featured By Owner Dec 19, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
God bless you for standing up for the truth! they are cowards & can't stand the light.
Reply
Add a Comment: