Arlington Man Loses Gun License Due To Blog About Tucson Shooting

By Beth Germano, WBZ-TV

ARLINGTON (CBS) – A blog threatening members of Congress in the wake of the Tucson, Arizona shooting has prompted Arlington police to temporarily suspend the firearms license of an Arlington man.

It was the headline “1 down and 534 to go” that caught the attention. “One” refers to Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot in the head in the rampage, while 534 refers to the other members of the U.S. House and Senate.

Police are investigating the “suitability” of 39-year-old Travis Corcoran to have a firearms license

WBZ-TV’s Beth Germano reports.

“We certainly take this as a credible threat, and credible until we prove otherwise,” said Arlington police Captain Robert Bongiorno.

In his blog Corcoran writes, “It is absolutely, absolutely unacceptable to shoot indiscriminately. Target only politicians and their staff and leave regular citizens alone.”

arlington man Arlington Man Loses Gun License Due To Blog About Tucson Shooting

Travis Corcoran of Arlington

Police visited Corcoran’s home and found a “large amount” of weapons and ammunition. Sources told WBZ-TV that 11 guns were removed.

The length of the suspension, or whether Corcoran’s license will be revoked will be determined by the outcome of the investigation.

Corcoran runs an online comic book business,, in Arlington. His views prompted comic book writers like Paul Cornell to tweet his fans, “I can’t stop someone selling my books, but please don’t buy them from HeavyInk.” And another from writer Gail Simone, “You have my pity. May you grow a soul someday, because you desperately are in need of one.”

Corcoran, who has no criminal history, has not been arrested and does not face any charges. Arlington police saying they are working with the Capitol Police in their investigation, and members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation have been alerted.

WBZ-TV’s Sera Congi contributed to this report.

More from Beth Germano
  • kay

    Doesn’t that man have the freedom to speak ? Was that right taken away from us? i may not agree with what he wrote but he has the right to voice his opinion.taking his firearms away as punishment was a little extreme to say the least. The police should be focusing on the “real”criminals with guns.

    • kasser

      He absolutely do have the freedom of speech, up to the point where he is threatening with violence or suggesting violence.

      “Target only Politicians” in my mind, fall perfectly under that criteria.

      The debate about Freedom of Speech for some always fail as some believe Freedom of Speech comes with the right to say anything you want.

      It is Freedom of Speech under penalty of law. Inciting to violence is one such instance

      Wether he meant it as a direct threat or not is indifferent. The stupidity of the remark makes this particular individual one that shouldn’t be allowed to have a small armory at his residence. Yeah – those gun permits comes with a little responsibility too.

      • jaslvgas

        I completely agree with you. Men / Women must be governed. If Freedom of speech continues down this violent path, which seems to have become the “norm” lately, all of us can kiss that freedom goodbye. We have seen this violence before and we will see again. When someone says, ” Target only Politicians,” Well, from this day forward ,we have to take these threats seriously. We no longer have the luxury of just waiting around to see what Massacre lies around the next corner. We have to be aware and alert at all times in this violent day and age. Americans are just not Americans anymore. We have become a sad , disgusting , and mentally sick society that shines all over the world. It seems that we have De-Evolved as a species and at this point in evolution the chimpanzees are gaining ground.

        When a human being acts out in a violent nature every gun and permits( which is a privledge btw)should be GONE. We cannot just go out and kill anyone just because of a temper tantrum. Gotta start thinking things through people.

      • stillrockin67

        His freedom of speech was not stripped from him. He spoke freely. I can cuss my boss. I have the freedom to do that. My boss can fire me, however. His speech may cause him to lose his license to have weapons. He can still speak out.

      • Tony Heaton

        Exercising ones rights can’t result in the lost of another right unless he infringes on the rights of another. He has not. It’s unfortunate that so many people will give up liberty for a little perceived security. Not actual security mind you, only perceived security.

      • Tony Heaton

        Exercising ones rights can’t result in the lost of another right unless he infringes on the rights of another. He has not. It’s unfortunate that so many people will give up liberty for a little perceived security. Not actual security mind you, only perceived security.

        Your boss can search your desk without the need for a warrant also. What does your job and boss have to do with anything?

      • Hocking Hick

        What if he said “target everybody”? Would that be acceptable, as long as he doesn’t show bias?

      • djs

        my goodness, did you even graduate from high school? If you are going to put requirements on the right to own guns, age should not be the only delimiter on voting. Look how much more harm one can do with a vote as opposed to owning a gun!

      • wolfgang

        What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t they understand?

      • Matthew

        I am very pro-gun. I am also for freedom of speech. However, freedom of speech does not mean you can say anything you want without consequences. What he did is close to a direct threat on someone’s life. Do you think you can just go downstairs in the morning, threaten your wife with her life, and then go buy a gun after she files charges against you? That would be immediate denial, my friends. Freedom of speech is one thing, thinly veiled threats, and lunatic behavior is something completely different.

      • Silence Dogood

        What part of “the blood of patriots and tyrants” do you not understand?


      • fairtaxc

        maybe he was being sarcastic…..maybe it was a joke…heard it before about congress ,lawyers..and maybe it was just an opinion…it`s a slippery slope

      • chester arthur

        So we go from some weapons and ammunition to ‘a small armory’?What is the definition of a small armory?Throwing blanket terms around without specifics or knowledge….well,the public discourse also requires a little responsibility.He’s paying the price of irresponsibility for his words,now the ones who inflate some guns for ‘a small armory’ need to a little brighter,or simply learn what they’re talking about.

      • Paul Revere

        Kasser…You obviously don’t know your local history…I do believe our founding fathers voiced opinions in the face of the tyranny that they faced. I might add that it was far less than what we now face on a daily basis…

      • Jake

        Sorry Kasser, “Target only Politicians” sounds like a statement to a third person… not a threat to anyone specific.

        Ans “suggesting” violence is a crime? How about implying violence? Or asking a rhetorical question about violence?

        If someone had acted to stop Hitler millions of lives would have been saved. Is my “suggesting” that the next Hitler be stopped a crime?

        Be very careful criminalizing words lest your words be criminalized. We cannot (yet) arrest anyone for “pre-crimes”

      • ressak

        kasser is right, even if his grammar isn’t.

      • GoogEgg

        This is preposterous.

        a. That CBS can be bothered to pick up the phone and get a quote from Corcoran or attempt to represent his position at all.

        b. That legally obtained and stored guns are confiscated in the absence of any specific threat. Yeah he thinks politicians ought to be hanged. Thats a general, generic statement. But he hasnt menaced anyone with his legal guns nor has he issued any specific threat.

        Just the opposite- his blog give specific information on how he has been spending his time since the shooting and its on installing roof dormers, working on his business, woodworking, writing an online novel and blogging about OED entries.

        There was no proximate threat here at all. He is the opposite of all these crazy leftist who go off and shoot up the Discovery Channel or crash into the IRS- there were no good bye statements and now vague threats about hings changing soon.

        So when the authorities are forced to give his guns back, will CBS be doing a follow up story clearing his name? Its a bizarre state of affairs when you can be branded as a dangerous nut job by the press when you havent harmed anyone and are just using your 1st Amendment rights to criticize the government.

      • The Concerned Citizen

        But, Goog! He had guns, there for he must be DANGEROUS. What gets me is he had a “small armory”. Well, if he had a small armory, I know guys near me that have a “huge armory”. 11 guns? Pssfft! I know guys that have 30 or 40.

        Every constitutional lawyer in the country should beat a path to this guys house pro bono. …and they should torture the ugly face of tyranny until it says uncle, gives back his guns and gets paid damages. This is messed up!

      • icetrout

        If politicians weren’t so SELF-SERVING than they would have nothing to fear./I see no penalty’s for Freedom of Speech in the Constitution.Get some new reading glass’s kasser your LeftLies are showing.

      • granolos

        @ kasser: by you’re own reasoning your right to post your own opinion should be taken away because intended or not your ignorant and emotive response to what amounts to no more than an expression of ones thought is a serious threat to me and many others. you ignorant whiny sheeple better watch what you wish for. quit being such babies! words are only words!!!!!!

      • Karl

        Hey granolos or pebble brain, why don’t you kiss our lower posterior. You sound like an idiot. If the man or women wants to share their opinion with the media, so be it. Your not threated by anyone except yourself. Go back to school and get educated, you certainly sound like you need better one than you got.

      • Dina

        But the democrats make excuses for the nut who threatened a Tea Party member?

      • Mark Matis

        Keep on suckin’ them pigs, dear!

      • Desiderius

        Funny how “Ressak” is backing your train of thought…its also funny how “Kasser” backwords, spells “Ressak”. Interesting, don’ t you think…

      • John Moser

        Please learn to speak English. Thank you.

      • Jeff

        Did you same the same thing when liberals were threatening Bush daily? Just wondering.

      • Jim

        Oh, so now we can’t even suggest violence. Huh, Kasser? How about mentioning violence? Is that prohibited too? Why did they only take away one of his constitutional rights? Are they also going to prohibit his free speech rights or maybe tell him he can’t go to church? A gun hater will look for any reason, no matter how small, to take away our firearms.

      • Christopher King

        Dude crossed the line, and no disclaimer or anything…. coming from me that’s says a lot.

        Christopher King, J.D.

      • EricX

        So the filmmaker that showed Bush being executed is OK?

      • jinaz

        where were you in LV, you sissy

      • jinaz

        where were you in LV, you sissy

      • Antilibturd

        According to the Lib Dim sycophants, threatening Conservative politicians doesn’t count? How ironic since the psychotic freak who shot Congresswoman Giffords was Lib Dim pothead, not a Conservative!

      • Tony Heaton

        I must ask, what is a “Lib Dim?”

      • PRO Gun

        Laughable, your comments bare no resemblance to due process, the Constitution, rule of law. There were no direct threats made. And the government has no right to enter his premises and take anything. Stupid remarks are protected 1st Amendment. Saying I wish Chavez was dead is protected. Tallying up who should be eliminated is protected. It’s called freedom of speech, hyperbole, etc. Direct threats are not protected, these weren’t direct threats. Suggesting violence is protected in certain terms.

      • Bang Bang

        Stupid remarks are not protected speech. Next time you’re boarding an airplane make a joke about a bomb. Then tell the judge you were just joking. Corcoran made direct threats and he’s dealing with the consequences. Too damn bad.

      • Jim

        He Do?

    • Breathe

      And if he had used those guns to kill a congress person, you’d have been the first one to scream, “Didn’t we see!?! Why didn’t you gubmint folks do something?”

      Sorry, you are not allowed to foment the overthrow of your government. Get over it.

    • jeff m

      Isn’t the 2nd amendment pretty much reserving the right to shoot your politicians gone wild?

    • Jerry El

      Freedom of speech does have limitations. You can’t threaten violence or try to coerce others to commit violence. I’m a far-right winger but I do understand that point. There are ways to word a posting that are a direct threat by ones self or to others that do fall under the 1st Amendment.

    • bobnj

      communist regime canceled all freedoms.

    • Dean Pacheco

      I find it frightening that someone exercising their 1st amendment rights, however poorly and ill conceived, somehow makes it OK for a police department to violate the individual’s 2nd and 3rd amendment rights. I do not agree with the statements made but using a blog to petition the Government for a redress of grievances is explicitly allowed under the 1st amendment.

      • Amish

        No more of a threat than a city in Georgia’s Guidestones.

      • Irish67

        He wasnt writing the blog, in this case, to “petition the Government for a redress of grievances”. He was openly advocating violence against elected officials.

        I dont care how disenfrachised someone is with the government, you can NOT advocate violence. Ever. Period.

      • Mark

        What if he had said the same thing but had singled out the President in his statement? Would that have been an acceptable use of 1st, 2nd and 3rd amendment rights?

      • Rob

        This was not a violation of his rights. Threats of violence are not covered under Freedom of Speech, neither is inciting violence or yelling fire in a theater. What he did technically was a direct threat. “Shoot the politician and staff but leave regular people alone” IS a direct threat. Therefore the police had every right to check him out. I am very pro gun, I own a few myself. I also understand that as a gun owner if I were to say what he did, people would have the perception that I was going to shoot someone. As a joke, or angry speech, he should have known better. It’s a lot like the old joke from George Carlin, if a person is quiet and to himself in a bar and another guy barges in and says “I’m going to kill everyone in this f#@kin place, which one are you going to be scared of?

      • HenryD

        The rattle is the part of the snake that warns threatening animals that they doing something dangerous. The rattle is harmless. It is the silent end of the snake that causes the damage. If the rattle is cut off, there will be no warning that the dangerous end about to defend itself. The fact that this nut has guns emphasizes that the snake (the American people) can defend itself. The American government can either back off of their aggressive behavior to the American people (the smartest solution) or try to defang the snake. Any attempt to defang the American people will result in defensive strikes by the people against the governments. Cutting off the rattle is dumbest solution.

      • 1776

        Irish67 – You might be surpised to find out that the founders of this country disagree with you.

        “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

      • Soda Bob Curtis

        @Irish67: Sure you can. Do I think now is the time for violence? No. But because the Founding Fathers advocated violence against a certain government – and put their lives, fortunes and sacred honor on the line for that cause – we have the freedom to be writing our opinions here, now.

        That being said, now is not the time and place. We still have a voice, and a vote, to affect change without violence. Anything the congress (or president) does is our own fault.

      • gotatake

        Irish67 – Then I suppose you will not have a problem with rounding up Imams. Why do we use inciting violence as a reason to persecute conservatives when they make jokes, but not to people who really mean it?

      • Fred

        3rd Amendment? Really? When did they quarter troops in his house? This is seriously interesting.

      • dan

        Better tell Adams, Jefferson, Washington, Franklin and the rest that “you can NOT advocate violence. Ever. Period.” Do you realize the revolution was illegal up untill the minute the good guys won. Had they lost, they would have been hanged, and we would have never heard of them.

    • AFV

      You don’t have the right to yell fire in a crowded theater.

      • DaProf

        One of those things that is so miunderstood…you can yell Fire in a theater for a variety of reasons.

        I’d suggest you all at least google it before you continue to embarrass yourself.

      • Bob Blaylock

          Can you yell “Movie!” in a crowded firehouse?

      • hempstead

        You can yell it if you are willing to live with the consequences…..

      • Guido

        Actually, you do have the right to advocate violence.
        Otherwise, why are the Black Panthers free?
        What about the folks who cried DEATH TO BUSH a couple years back? I seem to remember it being an 8 year death threat to him, but nothing happened. They made plays, filmed DEATH OF A PRESIDENT, made signs, hung him in effigy. Not a freaking peep from the media on that one. You’re here now, but where were you then?
        And how about Rahm Emmanuel, just to remind you, when he sent a dead fish to a guy. OR his famous “They’re DEAD!” speech?
        And how about Obama’s comment, “They bring a knife, we bring a gun” statment?
        Watch a rap video some time. Plenty of violence in some of those.
        Ever seen a Kill Rush Limbaugh sticker?
        What he did was obnoxious, but he didn’t specifically threaten any individual. He never said he was going to go after anyone. He never stated he was doing anything. Obnoxious, but not criminal.

      • cchasecfi

        What if the theater is on fire?

      • ed

        You can if there’s a fire.

      • cluelessinky

        You can, and must, if the theater is on fire !

      • HenryD

        Yes you do, if the theater is on fire. Don’t you have a duty to yell fire if the theater is on fire?

      • icetrout

        & we have the right not to be sold out to the godless communist in china either.

      • jamaljk

        Yes you can – if there really is a fire.

      • michaelj

        This was not a crowded theater. Try something more original or relevant.

      • granolos

        well said hempstead. @irish67 still dont get it? i dont know about actually rounding up imams (gladly burn that bridge when we get to it) but damn if you cant talk freely about your beliefs in that particular solution. perception is subjective, to ban any speach is to ban all speach.

      • Spartacus

        You don’t have the right to yell fire in a crowded theater.

        Yes I do, if there is a fire, you moron.

        Also if the theater is being used for the execution of Quislings like you, after the Second Revolution, and I am in charge of the firing squad!

      • lessthantolerant

        It is not against the law to yell fire in a crowded theater. It’s just ill advised and stupid.

        You poor simpletons who do not understand your rights are sad.

        This man had every right to chose the words he chose. Naturally he has to suffer the consequences of his rights.

        However a police state over reacting is sad.

      • everafterpatrick

        Even if there really is a fire?

      • A

        Of course you have the right to yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater.

        It is the recommended procedure – if in fact there is a fire.

        If there is no fire, then the owners of the theater and the other patrons have a legitimate grievance against you, and you might be compelled to make restitution. More likely you will find yourself ejected from the premises.

        But you certainly have the right to yell Fire!

      • Drew

        Please know of what you are speaking about before using those words:
        [These are bating words and have no force in this argument]

      • JKM

        Not even when there is a fire?

      • Richard

        Well, unless there actually IS a fire…..

        You also don’t wire people’s jaws shut BEFORE they go in, either, just in case they might yell “Fire!” when there isn’t one…..

    • 2mul2us

      I’m almost sure that the Arizona man waived his 4th amendment rights on his own. When the police come knocking, DON’T LET THEM IN. If they don’t have a warrant, why would you let them in. They are on the job. And their job is to do busts.

      • Soda Bob Curtis

        With today’s “no knock” warrants, you never have a choice to let them in or not. It’s not until after they’ve harassed your family and shot your dog that you can explain, “No, I’m not Mr. Smith, that’s my neighbor!” Happens more often than you think…

      • Joel Weymouth

        Wait till some real radical group sets up a swat team executing a warrant on a booby trapped house and you have 30 dead cops. They are “bullying” law abiding citizens which will ultimately radicalize the more unstable and possibly even the stable. You push a man to the wall, you are forcing him to fight. Give him nothing to lose and he will fight like a “berserker”.
        Bill Ayers was a radical that tried to commit murder and got off on a technicality and he is the friend of the President. What if these excesses by the Police and government “radicalize” men with military training.

        The government needs to back off. It needs to exercise restraint. It needs to remember that men do not control events, it is the other way around. Do you think Lord North envisioned 10,000 dead British soldiers, the loss of the colonies, and national humiliation when he sent General Clinton to Concord to arrest Sam and John Adams? And the thing is nobody really wants violence. But nobody wants to back off, and frankly the entity that MUST back off is the government.

    • guest

      yes, we have no freedom to speak. its evident that that bolsheviks have taken over. speak party line only, komrade or its to the gulag for you!

      • TheChairman


        If more people KNEW some basic HISTORY, they would easily see the Nazis, Bolsheviks, and Khumer Rouge all rolled into one with this Obama regime.

        This amounts to ‘thought crimes’ a la Orwell’s 1984. A ministry of ‘pre crime’.

        Soon, certain dissenting journalists will begin to lose their Press credentials. This is the secret reason for downsizing of staff at numerous ‘newspapers’.

    • steve

      OOOHH!! you taxachusessettess people better WATCH WHAT YOU SAY!!

    • Soda Bob Curtis

      Agreed. What he said/wrote was wrong. But he has the right to speak his mind. Furthermore, his property was confiscated from him, with no conviction. Heck, he wasn’t even charged of a crime. Last I checked, the Bill of Rights declared (in Amendment V) that “No person shall… be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…”

    • Michael Ring

      It looks like the government wants to control the story. The web site is down along with a very clear position statement. While he and the commentors have a dark sense of humor, anyone who read the site in context would find that there is neither a call for armed revolution nor the killing of anyone.

      Unlike the cowards, left and right, that have be scrubbing clean their sites of any content in fear of the government, Travis believes debate is the best solution to the problems of our government.

    • Thorne

      “Freedom of speech” does not mean freedom from the consequences of what you say. This man is just plain dumb.

    • joe hultquist

      Kasser-You might have been excused, if so many other posters had not pointed out a tremendous number of threats made by people against Bush, Cheney and dozens of other republicans/comservatives. Without providing a detailed account of how all of the other threats were simply not acknowledged, your remarks can have no credibility.

    • john

      Yes he does, and he still does. He does not have the right to both say those things and own firearms.
      It is very clear what his thinking is. He is making a veiled threat and that is enough to take reasonable measures to neutralize that threat.

      • Michael Ring

        You have an out of context news story with an agenda. You don’t know what his thinking is nor can you find out since the entire site has been pulled. Had the one post been pulled, and the government let you read the site, you would be singing a different tune.

    • kev

      Please learn the meaning of “Freedom of Speech” before you assume that it was taken away from us.

      • lessthantolerant

        You sir had better read the first amendment.

        Ignorance will crush freedon just as well as evil.

    • Stan

      Speak, yes. Threaten, no.

    • Doug

      This man is an idiot and what he said amounts to a felony in this state, which is far more to the right than Massachusetts. We do have the right to speak and participate in the political process, but threatening the lives of members of Congress and their staff members isn’t guaranteed by the First Amendment. If he truly bothered to read the U.S. Constitution and understand the principles in it, he would realize that members of Congressmen and their staff members are “regular citizens” as well. They might represent us better if they’re not afraid to walk among us.

      I have a concealed carry permit and am an Endowment member of the National Rifle Association. If you think having an opinion, guns and ammo gives you the right to do anything you choose, your liberties will collide with those of others just as it has in this man’s case.

      • Michael

        Dark humor and out of context news stories are going to require a lot more jails.

        Congressmen are hardly “regular citizens”. They exempt and give themselves immunity from the laws they expect the people to live under. If Charlie Rangel was a “regular citizens”, he’d be spending the rest of his days in prison. But he gets a pass to continue his crimes and a letter telling him to be more desecrate in the future.

      • stevie


    • Damon Arial

      You can’t yell fire in a theater.

    • John Franklin Mason


      You and others like you apparently believe the Nation should take a wait and see position: let them shoot, maim and murder first.
      People like Richard Poplawski; the Station Heights man who killed police officers, the boys who committed the Columbine High school Massacre and the Oklahoma Federal Building Bombers were all Law abiding citizens until they committed murder and mayham. They to exercised their “freedon to speak.”
      The police do focus on “real’ criminals with guns. That is saying nothing. Police have to focus also on preventing crimes with guns and a lot of people are not criminals until they pull the trigger. Get real eh!

      • Phelps

        Well, the Department of Precrime has spoken. No rights for the Minority Report, either.

        Are we just prosecuting precriminals who disagree with you politically, or are we going to just go with a full on Thoughtcrime prosecuting Ministry of Truth?

    • Baghdadroz

      Sorry, but freedom of speech isn’t absolute. I’d be very upset at the idiot that yelled “Fire” in the proverbial crowded theatre. This guy showed appalling stupidity. Basically, he was saying, “One’s shot, 534 need to be killed now.” I keep wondering how all of us on this comments section would react if this guy was Muslim. I’ll bet a lot of right-wingers would be only too happy to see his First Amendment rights stomped into the ground and his guns taken away so that he wouldn’t use them to arm himself for a holy war.

      • Tony Heaton

        What does someone’s religion have to do with anything?

        Also, you can yell fire in a crowded theatre. There is no problem unless it incites panic. However, most sane people in the theatre would look and smell for smoke and if there wasn’t any they would tell the guy to sit down and shut up. I hope you wouldn’t be “very upset at the idiot that yelled ‘fire’ in the proverbial crowded theatre” if there was a fire.

        Inciting panic infringes on the rights of others. Rights are absolute until you infringe on the rights of others. Until I infringe on your rights, leave my rights alone. If you think this guy is wrong then you better yell at all of you buddies in the movie and book industry. They portray far more violence than this guy. They made a movie about the assassination of President Bush. I don’t recall you or any others on the left trying to infringe their right to do so.

    • Governator

      On FOX and MSNBC, commentators were calling for the murder of Julian Assange. How is this any different? The government’s position must be “everybody is equal under the law, but some people are more equal than others.”

      • bobnj

        FOX?? I listen to FOX everyday. You are a liar.

      • Tony Heaton

        Please provide references for anyone on FOX or MSNBC calling for the murder of Julian Assange?

    • mark c.

      you’re an idiot. this is exactly the kind of speech that officials should look towards when trying to ensure this never happens again. i hope you don’t have a weapon. your reasoning is as sound as the guy from Tuscon. dork !

      • JGuest

        It’s “Tucson.” Must suck when you call someone an idiot and a dork and then misspell the name of a city that has been all over the news…

    • Tony Heaton

      It amazes me that so many people sit idly by as the government destroys our liberties then wonder why this man has no right to free speech.

      It doesn’t amaze me that their are people like Irish67 who want to punish people for what they say. These are usually the same people who don’t want to hold people accountable for what they do. It’s always somebody else’s fault that they commit crimes.

      • Tony Heaton

        I don’t know how this reply got here, I clicked on reply way above

    • WakeUp

      He has the freedom to speak..not threaten members of Conress with assassination you blithering fool.

    • marty kloss

      Sure he has a ‘right’ to say it, but that does not absolve him from the consequences of saying it. You have the ‘right ‘ to call your boss an a–hole to his or her face, but you would face a consequence for doing so.

  • Bill Mitchell

    Gestapo Nation begins right here in Massachusetts!

    What about all these horrible RAP ‘artists’?

    • Abe

      Good point Bill. You have rappers calling for violence against cops, women black people, white people–comedians calling for the death of George Bush, Republicans. You had Alec Baldwen on TV calling for the stoning of Henry Hyde.

      There were no investigations in those cases. The reason this country is failing miserably is becasue all the people in power are so knee jerk and don’t give some deep thought into things before reacting.

      • Michael Ring

        Not just calling for Bush’s death. They wrote assassination books and made assassination movies using footage of bush.

      • Robert Hayles

        I think Alec Baldwin had his rock permit revoked.

    • Booger

      That’s ‘art’ don’tcha know. So it’s protected free ‘expression’.

    • William

      The truly tragic issue, in the current environment, to my mind is that ours leaders apparently don’t want to take the chances or put in the effort they have for the past two hundred years anymore.
      It seems that they would prefer not to have to rely on their “craftiness” to keep them safe, when they destroy the liberties and abridge the freedoms of basically anyone who isn’t them.

  • Michael Crichton

    While it’s hard to feel sympathetic for this schmuck, it _does_ bring up troubling free speech issues. He didn’t say anything objectively worse than the “Second Amendment Remedies” certain politicians advocate, yet I don’t see anyone taking away Michelle Bachman’s guns.

    • William

      Just as troubling to me is that a man described as mentally ill had trouble distinguishing rhetoric from the need to take action, Yet the apparent solution to this problem is, from the reasoned minds of our leadership to act in the same way.

    • Rick

      At least get your politicians right. It was Sharon Angle (who was not elected) who used the “second amendment remedies” line, not Michelle Bachmann.

  • Mike

    Is he a jerk? Yup. What about all the other jerks like the rap artists and the Black Panthers and ELF and PETA that advocate killing people all of the time. Oh I get it now. It is only when you are politically correct that you can threaten to kill someone. Just to reduce confusion on the part of the public can someone just write that into the laws so there will be no misunderstanding? Maybe then we can have our content prescreened by Chief Bongiorno before we post it.

  • jaygee

    Take it easy people, he only lost his license “temporarily”. Once he promises the Arlington police that he won’t kill any members of Congress, they will give it back to him. As for me, I wouldn’t give a license to a guy who makes a living from selling comic books on line.

    • Xenos

      Wait.. Comic book sellers and readers are somehow mentally deficient? They can’t be trusted with guns? What is this 1950s? You gonna argue that Batman and Robin turn kids gay next? Thanks for slandering a whole industry with your ignorance.

    • SEAN

      whats it matter what he does for a living its still his right yea he made dumb coments and should be looked into but he did not commit a crime and will be returned to him

    • Lucenut

      The part that scares me is that there is such a thing as a “firearms license”. Ever heard about the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution? THAT is my firearms license, and it cannot be revoked!

      • Edward T. James

        What amuses me is at a time when no concealed carry permits were being issued, Senator Feinstein just walked in and got two, one for her and one for her husband. With out even having to pass the tests required to receive them. Equal justice at its best.

      • Governator

        Good point. When will we need licences to exercise 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, etc. Amendment Rights???

      • Kevin Schmidt

        What is it about “well regulated” don’t the NRA and gun nuts understand? It is constitutional to deny gun ownership rights to the incompetent, the insane and to those proven to have violent tenancies. Even the Supreme Court agrees.

      • Lucenut

        Kevin, 77% of the US understands the right to keep and bear arms to be an individual right, as well as the supreme court. Not sure why you can find a way to twist it into a pacifistic credo.

    • Bigiceman

      He did not only lose his license. The story says that the invaded his home, and took away private property without ever charging him or making an arrest. I never heard of that in any law. “You are under investigation” so we can raid your home and confiscate your stuff? I am missing a few pieces that indicate due process was followed.

      • kgb999

        Actually, that’s pretty much how it always works. They open an investigation, file paperwork with the judge and execute search warrants.

        Generally perpetrators are charged at the END of the evidence gathering process – if justified. Cuts down on the number of improper prosecutions of you do it in that order – charging someone before an investigation is just asking for trouble.

  • Bob

    Sure take his right to own a gun away, take his right to free speech, then take your rights away, then take my rights away, then they are gone.

    • Xenos

      I consider myself a rabid libertarian. That this jerk uses the same title and yet so stupidly abuses his rights to issue death threats disgusts me. For heaven/s sake people, yes, our rights are in danger. Yet we’re not so far gone that we can’t fix this great nation with our words. Thank God we’re not fighting in the streets like some other nations or in or past. Hacks and nutjobs with big mouths and no brains like this moron give people who do stand up for civil rights a bad name.

      • Mike Bonnett

        You may be many things, a libertarian is not one of them….

        Free speech is free speech, you don’t get to chose who get to use it on who.

        He did not threaten anyone , just made a comment no worse than many make about other people and professions.

        If you think politicians are a special class then you do not deserve to be an American.

        I hope he sues the Arlington Police department.

      • Bilbo

        We’re not that far from fighting in the streets. Right now things are too cushy for people. When times get tough and people have less to lose you’ll have more people willing to give up what little they have left. Things can go quickly…ala Rodney King.

      • David

        Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. – PATRICK HENRY

        Slave holders have no rights more than any other thief or pirate.They have forfeited even the right to live, and if the slave should put every one of them to the sword tomorrow,who dare pronounce the penalty disproportioned to the crime? FREDERICK DOUGLAS

        What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure. – THOMAS JEFFERSON

        I guess these guys should go to jail for death threats..

      • Wendy Weinbaum

        As a Jewess in the US, I say: This guy NEVER HAD any 2nd Amendment RIGHTS, or they COULD NOT have confiscated his guns without charging him! SINCE WHEN do you need a permit to even OWN a gun??? Remember, America wasn’t won with a registered gun!

  • Xenos

    I’m all for free speech and gun rights, especially here in MA where some bozos have giant anti gun propaganda on the side of Fenway overlooking the pike. Yet this guy deserves what he got. There’s a difference between complaining about congress, or even making a joke, and immediately after a mass shooting to call for shooting more members of congress. That’s a death threat. No responsible gun owner would do that. That’s disgusting. The guy deserves a visit from police to make sure he’s not planning to go on a shooting spree here in MA. He got what was coming to him.

    • steve

      OOOHH!! you taxachusessettess people better WATCH WHAT YOU SAY!! or the government will make you pay!!
      hey that rhymes LOL
      but i do agree with the guy, dont shoot innocent civilians, now come get me,
      if you can

  • Ed Dracut

    What if he had said run them down with your car. Would the police then taken his cars? This is a typical over reaction of our leaders to a horriable sitiuation. Mikes post rings so very true.

    • Kevin Schmidt

      Cars aren’t designed for committing mass murder.

  • b

    Sorry, I can’t agree with most replies above. I too have a permit to carry and I hope like hell that I’d get it revoked for saying something that stupid.

    • Frank

      Then you don’t deserved your 2nd amendent rights. You don’t lose a right by exercising another right.

      • Kevin Schmidt

        What is it about “well regulated” don’t you understand? If you prove yourself to be insane, you also lose your right to own and/or operate a firearm. That’s not my opinion, that is the law, which is backed up by many court decisions and many years of legal precedent.

    • Mark Freeman

      I think what yoiu just printed is at least “that” stupid. Does that mean that you have just forfieted all of your civil rights? I cant even see the man’s comment as a threat, merely an opinion of his discust and lack of respect for our current Congress. Tasteless, maybe… but when we become so PC that our freedom of speach is truncated then we have no freedom at all.

    • steve

      shut your mouth! or else… signed the government

      • Kevin Schmidt

        An Orwellian doublespeak sound bite if I ever saw one.

  • Craven Poll

    He is obviously a great patriot!

    • Kevin Schmidt

      Obviously neither of you two gun nuts are a “great patriot”! There is nothing in the Constitution or U.S. law that allows for the violent overthrow of the U.S. Government. Read the First Amendment if you want to legally change the U.S. Government for the better.

  • Guido

    What he said was mildly-inflammatory, but it’s no worse than what’s available on TV, in print, in rap videos (Remember F- The Police?), or on the internet. He did not state an intention, nor did he identify an actual target, nor did he specify anything. I thought to commit a crime you generally had to COMMIT the crime and demonstrate the intent to commit it. Remember Mens Rea and Actus Rea? So the cops have no business invading his home and taking his personal property.

    I thought to lose your firearms you had to be a felon, not an internet blowhard.

    • Christopher King

      Nah dude F the police is different and I wrote on this in undergrad before law school, it is a fine distinction but Dre and those guys were recounting stories about growing up in the hood and being victimized by police oppression, this guy is implying it’s okay to shoot elected officials.

      Now true enough some of these elected officials allow cops to get away with abuse, like Senator Kelly Ayotte for one, but if you can’t see any distinction there I guess we would have to agree to disagree…. But I’m more than happy to talk about it.

      • Bigiceman

        I like being able to agree to disagree. I don’t like being able to be home-invaded and having my property confiscated “temporarily” while they decide if my freedom of speech was offensive enough to have me disciplined by the political correctness squad.

        While the timelyness of his comment showed a lack of tact and taste in the wake of a fatal shooting event, it was only that, tactless and tasteless, not threatening or inciteful.

  • carl

    I agree with him, it wasn’t that one of our traitorous politicians got shot was the tragedy, it was the innocent bystanders

    • Kevin Schmidt

      Please explain exactly what Rep. Giffords did that makes her a traitor? Please explain how violent acts of vigilantism are not anarchy? The real tragedy for you is that you condone senseless violence.

  • Guido

    Regardless of how offended you are, and I really think you have soft skin if you’re all that offended, that’s no justification for violating his rights. The Pastor Niemöller quote comes to mind…

    • Frank

      I wonder why he allowed the police to search his house? With what he said they had no probable cause to get a warrant. Or do they now allow warrantless searches in MA?

  • pete

    you must control speech first and than behavior and then thinking

    • guest

      thats right, but you have it backwards. control thot(schools) then behavior(pc)then speach naturally follows, first as a joke then the joke is over.

  • Hank Warren

    This is all about limiting Free Speech. After all, censorship is everywhere. The gov’t (and their big business cronies) censor free speech, shut down dissent and ban the book “America Deceived II”. Free speech for all.
    Last link (before Google Books bans it also]:

  • astralweeks

    Jared was deranged, this guy is a dumba$$

  • Gary

    Wow 2 amendments taken in 1 swoop…

    • emk

      Hey, more than that! 1, 2, 4,and 5 just all went out the window. Pretty close to killing the 14th here as well.

      • Kevin Schmidt

        Grow a set, chicken little balls!

        I wonder what you would do if someone posted on their blog that you should be shot dead simply for being elected into Congress?

  • meezer

    This is our government in action. They don’t realize the people they govern are tired of all the bullcrud they’re sending downstream. Folks are getting angry. I don’t condone violence, but in some ways I understand the frustration when politicians who are supposed to represent us are only in it for the power and to enrich themselves.

  • Jesus_Loves_You!

    I agree, “1 down and 534 to go!”. Now come get me.

    • Kevin Schmidt

      Perhaps Jesus is already on his way to send you off to Hell.

  • Guido

    Yeah, Jared was deranged. And for that reason, let’s talk about the REAL issue here.
    It’s not gun control, it’s crazy control!
    It’s time we use this issue to highlight the fact that thousands and thousands of freaking crazy people are walking our streets free and should be institutionalized. Lock up the crazies, not the guns. I need a gun to protect myself from crazies. I don’t need crazies.
    We used to lock up the nuts and keep them medicated and safe from harm. Thanks to the leftists, we released them 30 years ago. Since then, most of them ended up on the street, homeless. They commit crimes, do drugs, attack regular folks (Look at San Fran sometime), and are a general pain in the butt for folks on a daily basis. Institutionalized, they could receive the care they need, drugs, and perhaps make something better of themselves. At least if we ID’d and institutionalized the crazies among us, perhaps Jared and other potential Jareds out there wouldn’t be killing us.

  • Detter

    Here we go…just the unintended consequences when playing with the radicals.

    Time to hunker down and ride it out. Prob take 5 to 10 depending your location. Blue states will be knocking on doors sooner rather than later.

    FRom pete

    “you must control speech first and than behavior and then thinking”

    WoW what a trip, eh. Control, it’s all about control.

  • anonymousCoward

    As a matter of law and principle, you may not suppress the exercise of one right, that of keeping and bearing arms, as a consequence of the lawful exercise of another right, that of free speech.

    The standard of the limit of free speech is well established: speech that incites actual, imminent lawlessness is not protected.

    The mere discussion or suggestion of violence, lawlessness, the possible necessity or propriety of insurrection, or the culpability of politicians does not rise to that level.

    Based on this report, the person in question will eventually be cleared, but as they say, the process IS the punishment, and our political class gets a twofer out of the deal: they appear to be DOING something, and they show them there insurrectionist rhetoricians who is boss.

    That’s a lesson Americans have always rejected.

    This sort of thing is trending upwards, we’ll see more before it is finished, and at when the dust settles, I won’t be surprised to see yet another precious aspect of a free society flushed down the toilet.

  • Paul Revere

    Our Founders homes were raided and their weapons siezed by the Goverment that demanded excess taxes and oppressive rule. Som of the colnists gound that tyranny acceptable…as do the liberals and the media today…the rest became the patriots and founders of our once great nation. Patriots awaken, tge enemy of OUR FOUBDERS has infiltrated our society and political system…its time to rise up as John Adams declared we would have to do…its happening during your watch…history will record this generation, as a generation of cowards that urinated on the graves of all those who gave their lives for our freedoms….rise up oh sleeper.

  • Petetm

    In a related story, Wal Mart is still selling guns and amo to any crazy that can fog a mirror. Film at eleven.

  • bill

    So then the liberal media is just as guily and should be shut down when they compain that civilians were hurt or killed when someone tries to kill our troops?
    After all they are then promoting violence against US citizens who just happen to be in the military. For decades libs have always implied it is ok for some nut job to go after someone just becasue they are not a civilian.

    God you libs are so two faced. Nobody or group promotes more hatred or violence than liberals.
    Hell they already arrested another liberal kook in AZ for threatinging to kill someone. The nut job that shot the senator was a left wing nut jobs.
    Even his class mates described him as a liberal pot head.
    The hated bush. Believed that Bush blew up the World Trade Center. (gee now whiich side was putting that idea into his head?).
    Just like when the left tried to calm the New Orleans flood was Bushs fault.
    Nothing but hate comes fromthe left.

blog comments powered by Disqus
Taz Show
Download Weather App

Listen Live