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, HeavyInk.com, 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
Comments

One Comment

  1. kay says:

    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.

    1. kasser says:

      Kay
      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.

      1. wolfgang says:

        What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t they understand?
        http://guerillatics.com

      2. Matthew says:

        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.

      3. Silence Dogood says:

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

        I

      4. fairtaxc says:

        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

      5. chester arthur says:

        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.

      6. Paul Revere says:

        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…

      7. Jake says:

        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”

      8. ressak says:

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

      9. GoogEgg says:

        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.

      10. The Concerned Citizen says:

        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!

      11. icetrout says:

        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.

      12. granolos says:

        @ 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!!!!!!

      13. Karl says:

        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.

      14. Dina says:

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

      15. Mark Matis says:

        Keep on suckin’ them pigs, dear!

      16. Desiderius says:

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

      17. John Moser says:

        Please learn to speak English. Thank you.

      18. Jeff says:

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

      19. Jim says:

        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.

      20. Christopher King says:

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

        http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2011/01/kingcast-note-to-travis-corcoran-other.html

        Christopher King, J.D.

      21. EricX says:

        So the filmmaker that showed Bush being executed is OK?

      22. jinaz says:

        where were you in LV, you sissy

      23. jinaz says:

        where were you in LV, you sissy

      24. Antilibturd says:

        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!

      25. Tony Heaton says:

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

      26. PRO Gun says:

        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.

      27. Bang Bang says:

        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.

      28. djs says:

        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!

      29. Hocking Hick says:

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

      30. stillrockin67 says:

        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.

      31. Tony Heaton says:

        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.

      32. Tony Heaton says:

        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?

      33. jaslvgas says:

        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.

    2. Dean Pacheco says:

      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.

      1. Irish67 says:

        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.

      2. Mark says:

        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?

      3. Rob says:

        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?

      4. HenryD says:

        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.

      5. 1776 says:

        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.”

      6. Soda Bob Curtis says:

        @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.

      7. gotatake says:

        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?

      8. Amish says:

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

      9. Fred says:

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

      10. dan says:

        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.

    3. AFV says:

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

      1. hempstead says:

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

      2. Guido says:

        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.

      3. cchasecfi says:

        What if the theater is on fire?

      4. ed says:

        You can if there’s a fire.

      5. cluelessinky says:

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

      6. HenryD says:

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

      7. icetrout says:

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

      8. jamaljk says:

        Yes you can – if there really is a fire.

      9. michaelj says:

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

      10. granolos says:

        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.

      11. Spartacus says:

        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!

      12. DaProf says:

        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.

      13. lessthantolerant says:

        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.

      14. everafterpatrick says:

        Even if there really is a fire?

      15. A says:

        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!

      16. Drew says:

        Please know of what you are speaking about before using those words: http://www.gunfacts.info/other-docs/fire.html
        [These are bating words and have no force in this argument]

      17. JKM says:

        Not even when there is a fire?

      18. Richard says:

        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…..

      19. Bob Blaylock says:

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

    4. 2mul2us says:

      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.

      1. Soda Bob Curtis says:

        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…

      2. Joel Weymouth says:

        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.

    5. guest says:

      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!

      1. TheChairman says:

        Exactly!

        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’.

    6. steve says:

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

    7. Soda Bob Curtis says:

      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…”

    8. Michael Ring says:

      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.

    9. Thorne says:

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

    10. joe hultquist says:

      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.

    11. john says:

      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.

      1. Michael Ring says:

        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.

    12. kev says:

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

      1. lessthantolerant says:

        You sir had better read the first amendment.

        Ignorance will crush freedon just as well as evil.

    13. Stan says:

      Speak, yes. Threaten, no.

    14. Doug says:

      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.

      1. stevie says:

        agreed

      2. Michael says:

        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.

    15. Damon Arial says:

      You can’t yell fire in a theater.

    16. John Franklin Mason says:

      Kay

      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!

      1. Phelps says:

        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?

    17. Baghdadroz says:

      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.

      1. Tony Heaton says:

        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.

    18. Governator says:

      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.”

      1. bobnj says:

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

      2. Tony Heaton says:

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

    19. mark c. says:

      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 !

      1. JGuest says:

        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…

    20. bobnj says:

      communist regime canceled all freedoms.

    21. Jerry El says:

      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.

    22. jeff m says:

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

    23. Tony Heaton says:

      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.

      1. Tony Heaton says:

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

    24. WakeUp says:

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

    25. marty kloss says:

      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.

    26. Breathe says:

      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.

  2. Bill Mitchell says:

    Gestapo Nation begins right here in Massachusetts!

    What about all these horrible RAP ‘artists’?

    1. Abe says:

      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.

      1. Michael Ring says:

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

      2. Robert Hayles says:

        I think Alec Baldwin had his rock permit revoked.

    2. Booger says:

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

    3. William says:

      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.

  3. Michael Crichton says:

    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.

    1. William says:

      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.

    2. Rick says:

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

  4. Mike says:

    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.

  5. jaygee says:

    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.

    1. Xenos says:

      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.

    2. SEAN says:

      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

    3. Lucenut says:

      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!

      1. Edward T. James says:

        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.

      2. Governator says:

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

      3. Kevin Schmidt says:

        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.

      4. Lucenut says:

        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.

    4. Bigiceman says:

      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.

      1. kgb999 says:

        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.

  6. Bob says:

    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.

    1. Xenos says:

      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.

      1. Mike Bonnett says:

        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.

      2. Bilbo says:

        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.

      3. David says:

        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..

      4. Wendy Weinbaum says:

        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!

  7. Xenos says:

    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.

    1. steve says:

      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

  8. Ed Dracut says:

    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.

    1. Kevin Schmidt says:

      Cars aren’t designed for committing mass murder.

  9. b says:

    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.

    1. Frank says:

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

      1. Kevin Schmidt says:

        Frank,
        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.

    2. Mark Freeman says:

      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.

    3. steve says:

      shut your mouth! or else… signed the government
      move here to THE FREE REPUBLIC OF ARIZONA

      1. Kevin Schmidt says:

        An Orwellian doublespeak sound bite if I ever saw one.

  10. Craven Poll says:

    He is obviously a great patriot!

    1. Kevin Schmidt says:

      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.

  11. Guido says:

    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.

    1. Christopher King says:

      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.

      1. Bigiceman says:

        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.

  12. carl says:

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

    1. Kevin Schmidt says:

      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.

  13. Guido says:

    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…

    1. Frank says:

      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?

  14. pete says:

    you must control speech first and than behavior and then thinking

    1. guest says:

      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.

  15. Hank Warren says:

    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]:
    http://www.iuniverse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000190526

  16. astralweeks says:

    Jared was deranged, this guy is a dumba$$

  17. Gary says:

    Wow 2 amendments taken in 1 swoop…

    1. emk says:

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

      1. Kevin Schmidt says:

        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?

  18. meezer says:

    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.

  19. Jesus_Loves_You! says:

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

    1. Kevin Schmidt says:

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

  20. Guido says:

    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.
    CRAZY CONTROL, NOT GUN CONTROL.

  21. Detter says:

    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.

  22. anonymousCoward says:

    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.

  23. Paul Revere says:

    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.

  24. Petetm says:

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

  25. bill says:

    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.

  26. Freddy says:

    Golly gee then, since most Senators and Reps are lawyers I guess we should place state troopers at Summerstock, the renaiisance fair, dirty back alley playhouses, and numerous high schools and colleges statewide, all ready to confiscate the SAG card of anyone uttering that most famous Shakespeare line from King Henry VI, “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.”
    Then maybe we’d all sleep better :-).

  27. USA Citizen says:

    Guido, define ‘crazy.’

  28. panamacz75 says:

    Virginia is a “right to carry” state with reciprocity in 7 other states. The police have suspended his permit to carry a concealed weapon. There is no such thing as a “firearms license” anywhere in the USA. With the exception of Washington DC and a few other cities that have banned handguns and rifles. Any US citizen that is 21 years old not a convicted felon has the right to purchase a firearm and there is no license required. All states have laws regarding the transportation & safe handling of firearms. Citizens that live in states that allow concealed carry permits may apply and receive such a license after the typical requirements are met. A concealed carry permit is a privilege that is earned and it carries a huge burden of responsibility. With that license one must practice utmost common sense and proper firearms safety at all times. It also requires that the holder keep his mouth shut and not threaten others. His license has been rightfully suspended. Yes he has the right to speak his mind and the state has the right to revoke his permit for making a very threatening and stupid comment.

    1. D Oliver says:

      MA, NJ, IL ( to name a few) require a “license” to purchase/possess any firearm. In fact, in MA you need own to purchase/possess ammo

      1. panamacz75 says:

        MD has tried to enact such control but has not been able to do such. I am not sure about the the other states but the State Maryland does not require a license to purchase/own firearms. http://www.mcsm.org/mdlaw.html
        Cities may enact their own ordnances. Vermont has no such laws requiring a permit to carry a concealed weapon, nevertheless the state does have some guidelines. Look it up it you have the time.

  29. alwanderer says:

    Guido mentions what we ALL know that Bush was HUNG in effigy and humorlessly threatened with dieing by lefty’s who must have viewed these threats as no more then tiring on a new suit. try hanging our beloved leader in effigy. “some animals are more equal” … George Orwell. If Socialist only vented their “good will” helping people that would be fine with me but…….

  30. Mark Matis says:

    Filthy. Maggot. Pigs. They took an oath to “…preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution…” yet they spit on it every day. Damn them to hell for so dishonoring that oath!

  31. carl says:

    Guess I better clarify since the thought police are in full force

    I didn’t actually read his blog post, but I definitely don’t think it’s a tragedy if people start lashing out (even violently) against a system which is stacked against them.

    That’s not what Laughner did; he was just insane.

  32. yogiman says:

    Was he serious or just being facetious? It was a stupid remark made in the time frame.

  33. Guido says:

    cra·zy   /ˈkreɪzi/ Show Spelled
    [krey-zee] Show IPA
    adjective, -zi·er, -zi·est, noun, plural -zies.
    –adjective
    1. mentally deranged; demented; insane.
    2. senseless; impractical; totally unsound: a crazy scheme.
    –noun
    11. Slang . an unpredictable, nonconforming person; oddball: a house full of crazies who wear weird clothes and come in at all hours.
    ——————————————————————————–
    Origin:
    1570–80; craze + -y1
    —Synonyms
    1. crazed, lunatic. See mad. 2. foolish, imprudent, foolhardy.
    —Antonyms
    1. sane. 3. calm, dispassionate. 8. stable. 9. strong; healthy.

    I figure there’s a diagnostic and statisical manual of mental disorders. Look it up. If they’re in it, lock em’ up. The really scary part is how many folks are walking around on various meds. Sure they can function as long as they voluntarily take them, but when they don’t-totally crazy Jerry Springer material.

  34. H. Johnson says:

    There is no requirement for a “license” to own firearms in Virginia. A “Permit to Carry a Concealed Handgun” is required to carry a concealed handgun in Virginia. Open carry is legal in all but a couple of obscure places in Virginia. I’m a big supporter of the Second Amendment and the Constitution in general but what this moron wrote could and probably should be taken as a threat and the authorities are correct to take it very seriously.

  35. cluelessinky says:

    Am I correct, did the police remove the guns and ammo? If so was due process exercised in such a removal? We have to recognize what our rights are and make a stand when those rights are being abused, infringed, or ignored.

  36. Animal Chin says:

    The requirement of a license is unconstitutional to begin with… The US Constitution is very clear in this matter…

    “…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    Nowhere does the US Constitution state the people must obtain a license, attend courses, pay money, be denied the RIGHT to keep/bear based on mean comments, exemptions of the people’s RIGHT based on criminal record, etc. The US Constitution also contains the Supremacy Clause, making the rights identified within the US Constitution the law of the land and NO State or City law can trump the RIGHTS provided within the US Constitution.

    Keeping (storing) OR bearing (carrying) firearms is RIGHT of the people and this RIGHT is not at the discretion of members of law enforcement officers, state/city public officials, etc. Plainly stated, it is a Constitution RIGHT that SHALL NOT be infringed.

  37. Curt says:

    “The tree of liberty must from time to time be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” – Thomas Jefferson

    When TJ said “tyrants”, who do you think he was talking about?

    After reading most of the comments here, it is not to difficult to understand why we are here, and where we are going.

    When you wake up with a boot on your face, you will have no one to blame but yourselves.

  38. A Patriot says:

    What is wrong with what he said? I find it worrisome that in addition to losing his 1st amendment rights, he is losing his second as well. This is what is wrong with this tyrannical government.

  39. Tracey says:

    Free speech is dead and democrats who hate liberty have won. Unless you say that you are going to harm someone, no threat has been made. But in this hypersensitive democrat gun hating environment, this is the outcome we face. Remove all democrats from office by voting them out asap or we will lose the country.

  40. Silence Dogood says:

    “God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty . . . And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. 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.”


    Wow, such vitriol. The author is a far greater offender than the man in this new article. Let’s find this man and take away his firearms, then submit him for psychiatric evaluation…

  41. anon says:

    Hey there.

    I’m someone close to Travis, but I can’t give more details until this is over.

    > I wonder why he allowed the police to search his house?

    Travis did not allow a search. Nor did he speak to the police. He has a top-notch lawyer, he has done nothing illegal.

    Much more will come out, as soon as the local investigation is over.

  42. Joana says:

    To be consistent, the people that had the Sarah Palin effigy hung during Halloween should be prosecuted, as should the one who advocated for Palin to be gang raped etc…too many examples to write about.

  43. john spurlock says:

    Remember … Freedom of speech only applies to minorities, liberals and foreigners. White, convervative, Americans have no rights.

    Welcome to Barrack Hussein Obama’s vision of the USA.

    Please post the name of his online shop, so I can send him ALL my business.

  44. Darin Zimmerman says:

    His comment was stupid, not threatening. I believe losing one’s gun license and access to his weapons for a few weeks during the “investigation” and losing business from his clientel is an appropriate consequence (not necessarily “punishment”) for the crime of public stupidity.

  45. Afraid of the Ruling Class says:

    The message is clear. Do not make idle threats toward the imperial government of the New World Order.

    1. Mr 2nd Amendment says:

      Show me the Amendment that states we need a license to invoke our Constitutional rights! The 1st and 2nd Amendments were put there to deal with “The imperial government of the New World Order”

      1. ByteRider says:

        This guy simple needs to take this through the court system and it’ll be tossed out, it’s obvious. However, I’m willing to bet Arlington will DROP the case because they don’t want to lose this law to the courts. Most people will blindly comply [because most of us are stupid sheeple]… for the 1-in-a-million that challenges it, they’ll let it slide.

  46. RobertG says:

    A license to own arms-a license to be a free citizen with the Rights of freemen–New Speak run wild.

  47. Mr 2nd Amendment says:

    Free speech in the constitution is “Political Speech”. Seems to me that he was talking about Politicians. He should be totally covered by the constitution. That is why politicians are free to lie, deceive, and break promises. Normal citizens would be sued for breach of contract.

  48. worriedmom says:

    Now, I think the movie depicting President Bush getting shot and KILLED was O.K. I mean everybody hated him. You can understand that. Bush was always trying to take away our Constitutional rights..oh wait…

  49. Jeff Bishop says:

    To the clueless boobs bringing up Virginia law, try getting your commonwealths straight first and commenting second. This incident happened in Arlington, MA, not Arlington, VA.

    To the broken records who keep parroting “shall not be infringed” in defense of a criminal jerk who temporarily lost his Second Amendment rights for making a criminal threat far outside the ambit of his First. You keep using that word “infringed.” I do not think it means what you think it means. First hint: I can say “I hate Microsoft” without infringing their trademark, and I can copy your comment to my blog to mock you with infringing your copyright. Second hint: “infringe” is a cognate of “frangible.” If you know what happens to a frangible bullet upon impact, well, let’s just say that any law that does the same to your gun rights is a clear “infringement.” Anything less is debatable.

    1. Yirmin says:

      Sorry but you don’t seem to be able to understand the seriousness of what is happening here.

      The guy basically said, “good job” about someone trying to kill someone. That isn’t a threat anymore than it is a threat to say, “good job” when someone clerk in a gas and go shoots someone trying to rob him. No threat is being made in either instance only an over reaction by a bunch of idiots that aren’t capable of understanding English… clearly the product of a public school education.

      If he had been saying, “shoot senators” or “I want to shoot senators”… well that would have been a threat but what he said regardless of good or bad taste is far from being a threat.

      1. john taylor says:

        Well that’s just what we need…a convoluted, twisted explanation of what is allowed under the 1st. Just what we need to dump on the public so they can take the ball and run with it.

        Nice move, dunce.

  50. JustAGuy says:

    If the feds paid this guy a visit for saying something completely unacceptable, but didn’t visit the New Black Panther guy who was brandishing a weapon in front of a Philadelphia polling place and intimidating white voters after he was also on video advocating murdering white children, then there’s a big problem.

    I TOTALLY disagree with this guy saying 1 down, 534 to go. It’s a horrible thing to say, but he should get a good lawyer and press the issue about the feds giving that New Black Panther a pass.

  51. Anon says:

    From what I can pull from this and other articles is that Corcoran did not make any threats, he wrote that he approved of the assassination of political officials. A truly reprehensible statement, but not a threat.

    It bothers me that the local government confiscated his personal property without proper due process. There is no actual threat, there is no charges being filed and no judge has ordered the removal of his property, yet it was seized anyway.

    If that sounds like I’m supporting Corcoran, I’m not. My interest is protecting rights, even those of people I dislike.

    1. JustAGuy says:

      Well stated!

      1. cbcburke9 says:

        If that’s all he lost, then that’s nothing he should have lost his fredom as well.

  52. Reader says:

    This man has not lost his right to speak as he sees fit. He can continue on as he has. Nor has he lost his 2nd Amendment rights. What he has lost is a license, much as he would lose a driver’s license for operating a vehicale in a dangerous manner.
    The state demands a minimal degree of competence when operating a motor vehicle. If you stand on the street corner advocating that drivers run down people of a certain ethnicity, that would be a big no-no and show that you were not responsible enough to be entrusted with a moving vehicle. Yet here, someone selects a group composed, not of ethnicities but by job description. If he had stated professions like dentists, plumbers or lawyer were fair game for motorists, he would be seen as a dangerous person…a person who had not lived up to his end of the bargain of being responsible.

    The granting of rights is a two-way street. The state is compelled to grant them and the recipient is compelled to act responsibly. As one licensed to carry concealed weapons, I am expected to act in a responsible manner at all times. Brandishing a weapon during a dispute with a waiter would be grounds for losing that reciprocal right.

    The US Constitution enumerates certain rights which it states to be natural law. Those are protected rights the framers felt were those of reasonable and sane men. They did not have to enumerate the varieties of mental illness and social rot that is unacceptable in order to deny those rights on an individual basis. Anyone without a fevered mind understands that our rights are based on our being resonable members of society.

    1. Mr 2nd Amendment says:

      Driving is not mentioned in the Constitution as a right, so ”Governments regulate it as a privilege”. 2nd amendment is not a privilege. It is a right. Giant difference.

      1. Curt says:

        We don’t get our rights from the constitution. The 10 amendments are nothing more than “Thou shalt not trespass”.

    2. Tim says:

      Rights are not granted by the government. Even the Decleration of Independence states that they are given by God. “Reasonable and sane” are not mentioned in the Constitution, and do not matter, in the matter of rights. Would you agree that an unreasonable or insane man should be denied a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury? Should he be denied the right to exercise his religion? If those rights can’t be stripped away, then why ould you think of doing so, with any other, equally important, right?
      “No person shall be…deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;”, according to the 5th Amendment. Clearly, this man as not given any sort of trial by jury. He as not charged with, nor found guilty of any crime. He was not given any sort of due process, before having his property taken. His goverment was wrong in its actions.

    3. BIg Mike says:

      You are contradicting yourself when you say that the state “grants” rights, and then later (correctly) say the US Constitution enumerates certain rights which it states to be natural law. The state can only grant privileges, and some liberal politicians feel gun ownership to be a privilege (while free health care is a right).

      The people of Communist China have the same rights, the difference being that their government reuses to honor them. It cannot give or take them away. And nowhere in the US Constitution does it say that our rights are contingent on possessing a government-issued license.

      When a person violates the law, there is a means of dealing with that, and it is called due process. In this case, the state has failed to show me where they have followed due process by seizing this man’s property because he broke some capriciously enforceable law against speaking freely. When a state agency can arbitrarily decide just how much a person can exercise his first amendment rights before his second amendment rights become null and void, then the Constitution is worthless. Speech that we all agree with needs no protection from repression; it is the obnoxious, objectionable, disagreeable, discomforting, provocative speech from people we don’t like that requires freedom from the threat of government censorship.

      The courts, and not licensing agencies, must decide who has broken a law or is not of sound mind. The former bases its decisions on the facts and the law; the latter is bound by neither and has the arbitrary discretion to act on whim and preference.

  53. me4u2nv says:

    These cops have obviously never read The Onion or they would recognize satire when they read it….how many times have we heard jokes about killing lawyers and politicians and laughed. This guys only crime is really really bad timing.

  54. Judah says:

    Rather than repeat what has already been said, I will give some hope. That hope is that this country has learned a sour lesson from electing such a goon into office. May the next president be Republican Amen.

  55. Rusty says:

    Jail him. Only liberals are authorized to make death threats.

  56. Daniel McCarthy says:

    If he had balls he would know he is protected under the constitution. First he represented his 1st right. When they came to take his guns he should have used his 2nd. Remember people, people died for our rights and we all should be willing to do the same. That day he failed. They have no right to take his guns away and he should have never gave them up without a fight. This Governemnt is your enemy and he was absolutely right with what he said. Too many sheep in this society. Your country is being taken over. Do not accept it!!!!

  57. JJinCO says:

    With a 13% approval rate, there are not enough jails to hold all the Americans thinking bad thoughts about members of Congress.

    The answer is not to regulate thought but improve the membership of Congress … through the ballot box of course.

    Strangely, the real Arizona murderer did things that got himself kicked out of school, but nothing that warranted a law enforcement visit.

    1. jess says:

      My bad thoughts don’t translate into putting a bullet into someones brain. Much less killing a 9 year old child you sick F.

  58. deadwood says:

    Satire apparently has no place in police state America.

  59. Maria says:

    I feel like we are living in China. This is the most repressive government I have ever seen. Heaven forbid anyone talk about the golden boy but, now you can’t express any opion without the FBI knocking on your door.

  60. jess says:

    The people quoting the constitution and their right to “freedom of speech” actually have no idea what they are talking about. PLEASE take a constitution class to understand EXACTLY what it says. It is NOT up for interpretation by YOU. In fact, which you probably didn’t know, the constitution gives the right of interpretation to the supreme court. You really sound like a bunch of kids in high school who once glanced at the constitution of talked about it in history class.

    1. J Craig Barker says:

      The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.
      William Shakespeare
      King Henry VI Part 2.
      SCOUS would let stand convection of ‘inciting violence’

  61. Yirmin says:

    Pathetic…. no only pathetic that the police took action for a statement that was not a threat but also pathetic that so many idiot support the police action.

    The guy was basically saying, “good start” about someone trying to kill a congressman… sorry but that isn’t a threat anymore than it is a threat when some talk show host named Neil Boortz says he is glad a person committing a crime was killed by the intended victim… maybe you don’t agree with the person cheering the shooting of a congressman but ask yourself if you see it as any different from someone cheering the killing of a person that is trying to rob someone. It is the same thing in neither case is the either one saying that they are going to go shoot someone.

  62. Tim says:

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

    S.Adams…Jefferson…Madison…J. Adams…Washington…Paine…
    Ever?

  63. BattleMaster says:

    Does he say that the one id Gifford? Does he say he is referring to congress, or have we given away what we are all hoping?

    Do we really think that he is honestly advoating violence against congress? I don’t think so. Since he is white and not a rap star, then advocating violence is a big nogo.

    “Anyone who clings to the historically untrue — and — thoroughly immoral doctrine that violence never solves anything I would advise to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of Hitler would referee. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor; and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and their freedoms.” Robert Heinlein.

  64. G says:

    PARENTAL FAILURE TO THE MAX !!

  65. steve says:

    i LIVE IN AZ so you leftists CANT TOUCH ME! we dont have “licenses” to revoke and we are FREE MEN
    as King Leonidas said to Xerxes when asked to turn over there arms
    MOLON LABE
    COME GET THEM!!

  66. John Q says:

    More knee-jerk reactions and the thought police out in force. We even have CNN now apologizing for saying the words “in the cross-hairs” on the air as a metaphor, Huck Finn being re-written to not insult anybody, and more infringements on the 1st and 2nd amendments as above. PC world gone crazy… again. People need to be careful what they ask for and get a grip, these types of things solve nothing and only make you less free step by step!

  67. Jeff says:

    The libs fell over themselves making excuses for the guy actually threatening a Tea Partier to their face with death at the recent town hall. He was just stressed they say, nothing to see here. Are the libs going to make excuses for this guy, or do they just make excuses for liberals? I’m joking of course. We all now the libs have two different sets of rules. One for themselves and another for people they disagree with. In the real world it’s called hypocrisy. Oh yeah, I also condemn this Arlington man’s words and think he’s an imbecile.

  68. Christian says:

    Some food for thought:

    – What do you think the NRA would say? I believe they’d say this guy was at fault and that the local authorities were justified in their concern and “investigations”. One can’t immediately assume this man is exempting local and state guv officials in Texas from his indiscriminate disdain. I hope any of you who take the position that Sheriff Dupnik was partially at fault in the Tucson shooting for not taking any preemptive action against Mr. Loughner over the many opportunities he had would agree that this is an understandable move by the local police.

    Flip side:
    – Wouldn’t it be nice if these same standards were applied during the Bush administration years to the idiots and doofuses who publicly longed for GWB’s assassination both online and in printed books (see online reviews and commentary for “Checkpoint” by Nicholson Baker)

    1. Xenos says:

      Wow. A sane gun rights supporter. All my years following the NRA has always had seem saying saying not just about run rights, but about responsible gun ownership. Cheering someone shooting a members of Congress and their staff and calling for people to do more of it is not something any sane libertarian or even any conservative would condone. Even the NRA would call that action completely irresponsible.

      And yeah, as much as I hated Bush and his ushering in of the Patriot Act, why not look after some of these leftist wackos calling for his head on a platter? Of course, to be fair, the big thing is that this was right after the national tragedy of an assassination attempt and I don’t remember any of those being done on Republicans. Most of the ‘shoot Bush’ were done by dumb gun-less hippies.

  69. Jeff Bishop says:

    Yirmin, the guy not only approved of a past attempted murder, he openly encouraged people to go out and murder others. If you aren’t smart enough to understand why that is a threat, then you shouldn’t be allowed to own sharp, pointy objects of any kind, let alone a firearm.

    1. Bill Jenkins says:

      Openly encouraging people to commit crime and supporting past crimes is what open-borders advocates do every single day of the year. Should they be charged with committing a crime?

      You clearly do not understand the freedom of speech and what that all entails

    2. Yirmin Snipe says:

      Unless he said, “I will pay money to the person that shoots the next senator.” then he has not done enough to be convicted of any crime. Otherwise every time you see a rally of people that support illegal aliens we would need to round every supporter up and put them jail. He committed no crime, he expressed his anger over the pathetic job congress is performing in a reasonable and non-violent manner.

      I’m sure you’ve heard the joke, “what do you call it when a plane full of lawyers crashes and kills everyone on board? A good start.” Well clearly that is a joke and no one is going to try to claim the person telling it is threatening lawyers… same goes for this guy and his dislike for the congressmen.

  70. lh says:

    This government allows the Muslims to promote violence and fund terrorists overseas. We should crack down on them.

  71. lizaredawg says:

    Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth. George Washington

    Wow – we need to dig up George Washington because he suggest American’s should be armed to protect our liberty against what – foreign and domestic: Congressmen and Senators – sure.

    This guy I dare say was not making threats, but miss worded his statements. Sometimes people just say the wrong thing: ya they are stupid.

    What seems to be going on here is that Liberals are trying to find desperately Conservatives to toss into jail and remove their weapons. Remember this is a battle about who can own the weapons.

    However, until President Obama is removed from his position, we as Americans will continue to see abuses by local and federal police agencies: those led by liberals anyway.

    Investigate this guy then release him and return his weapons –

  72. Matt says:

    Freedom of Speech exists no more in this country. Eminem and other musicians say they’re gonna kill people all the time… You gonna take his Constitutional rights too?

  73. Diamondback says:

    They haven’t arrested him and don’t know if he’ll be charged BUT they confiscated his legally owned property!

    Folks, THAT IS TYRANNY plain and simple.

    If WE THE PEOPLE don’t stand up and scream loudly and longly, we soon won’t have ANY INDIVIDUAL fundamental rights left.

    1. nofreedomforu says:

      What are you going to do about it??? Throw snowballs at em? The MA SS troopers have control of you as do the homeland “Security” SS troops do! FOOLS you already lost your freedom!

  74. Lizarddawg says:

    ”No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
    ~Thomas Jefferson

    Unless Liberals who hate free men owning weapons can get away with it by saying their preventing a future crime –

  75. Robin says:

    What about a president referring to fellow citizens as “enemies?”

    1. lizaredawg says:

      Excellent point Robin – Obama can say he is sorry for calling Conservatives his enemies, but the truth is that what is in a mans heart comes out his mouth.

      Obama is likely the enemy of free thinking men – and that is as tactful as I get..

      My lovely tweets can be found at @lizarddawg

  76. Aaron Sorken says:

    This was not a threat. It was an opinion. Get over it.

  77. Lucky Bill says:

    He hasn’t been arrested, and no charges files. But they took his guns. From what I see it looks like a bad choice of words for what he was trying to say. It was appropriate to investigate him, but I don’t think the police were correct in taking his guns. In most states you don’t need a “license” to own a gun. That would be an infringement, but the Supreme Court has not dealt with that aspect.

  78. marvl says:

    When did words become more significant than actions? What is utterly insane is the current obsession with political “correctness.” No one has commented on the blatantly illegal actions of the Arlington police, to invade a man’s home and confiscate his possessions without due process. “Corcoran has not been arrested and does not face any charges.” I hope he is wildly successful in his suit against the city. It’s one thing to suggest that politicians be eradicated, it’s quite another to violate an individual’s rights without reason.

  79. JGA says:

    None dare call what we have going on in this country a dictatorship !

  80. Jim Bo says:

    He just had the balls to say what others were thinking… By this standard many of the Founding Fathers quotes would have landed them in jail. Example: The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants….

  81. Lee Reynolds says:

    Firearms license?

    Unless they’re talking about the 2nd amendment then I’m not sure what that is supposed to mean in the first place. How it can be suspended without due process of law (aka a criminal conviction) is doubly baffling.

    As for him, he is encouraging people to murder and should be held accountable for that. Charge him accordingly, convict him, and lock his ass up.

    1. Bilbo says:

      Lee, in MA you can’t own a firearms of any kind (or even pepper spray for that matter) without a firearms license and that only with the permission from the local police. And if you move, you must notify the police in both towns within 30 days so they can track you…this is EVERYONE, not criminals. Renewable every 4 years for around $100. The patriots of Lexington and Concord would be disgusted with the trash that now occupies their state.

  82. WH says:

    As a card carrying member of the NRA and a strict constitutionalist let me say, we have created a system of government which Governs by the consent of the people. Govt’s main goal is to secure our unalienable rights of LIFE, LIBERTY, HEALTH, PROPERTY. When someone threatens to take those away from any lawful member of society, they are breaking the laws put in place by the consent of the majorityand should be punished. This is precisely what the Govt. is doing here and was created to do..SECURE OUR UNALIENABLE RIGHTS. This lowlife has clearly made a threat against the rights of another law abiding citizen. Someone brought up the first amendment and free speech, only a fool would assume that the right to free speech includes threats of violence. When a person knocks on your door and tells you he’s going to rob you soon you take that threat seriously lock the door, load your guns and call the cops. You don’t say well it’s his first amendment right NONSENSE! We want to change our Govt. then use the peaceful and democratic system the Founders put in place. It obviously is working as we saw in Nov, nobody has hampered or hindered your right to vote.

  83. FreemonSandlewould says:

    This counterpoints how the left does not have a sense of humor.

    ………what he said was funny. I doubt it was meant seriously. And even if it was it was NOT a threat by any stretch………

    This is the problem when you make gun RIGHTS as given by the 2nd amendment a privilege like a drivers license. It is NOT a privilege. It is a RIGHT guaranteed by our constitution

  84. Lawrence D. Wood says:

    It is called the 1st Amendment and the 4th Amendment, and he has the right to say what he wishes. Saying and doing are not the same thing.
    Only libs get to speak their minds, calling our troops, Christians and gun owners terrorists–Nancy Pelosi and Janet Napolitano.
    If we can have porn in our libraries, then we can speak harshly about our leaders when we disagree with them.
    The US is virtually bankrupt because of a socialist agenda. And, now, free speech is attacked. Just more feel good don’t do as I do, do as I say malarkey from the left.

  85. DJ says:

    Don’t support taking away his guns… but the guy clearly has an IQ deficit.

    What a moron.

    1. ByteRider says:

      I disagree… I think he was just expressing his anger. He never said he was gonna kill anyone.

  86. Alan says:

    If these same comments were make by a wacko progressive on a leftist site like there were daily during GW Bush’s two terms the lame stream media would have ignored and marginalized them. However since the Presidency and Congress are dominated with leftists it’s reported as a major threat that needs to be investigated. It’s sad that our once fine Country has become such a joke.

    By the way “1 down 534 and a man-child president and idiot vice-president to go”!

    1. Spartacus says:

      By the way “1 down 534 and a man-child president and idiot vice-president to go”!

      Seconded.

      I am Spartacus

  87. Jett says:

    Will they now “investigate” and confiscate property from all the leftist goons who called for Bush’s assasination, burned him in effigy and the like? Our society doesn’t necessarily need to be more civil. Our society needs to grow some stones and a basic understanding of hyperbole and sarcasm.

  88. Joseph says:

    Where do I submit my comments in advance of publication? Shouldn’t there be some sort of government office that will review my statements first? Or maybe there’s an opportunity for private industry here to provide screening of all commentary to eliminate any sarcasm or non-PC content prior to publication.
    Really, admit it, this was just an excuse to confiscate guns–which is what The Left wants more than anything else in the world. Once the guns are picked up there’s nothing anyone can do about a government out of control. Sieg heil, comrade.

  89. Andrea says:

    So, if I post the following joke:

    What do you call 1000 dead lawyers? …A good start.

    Does that mean I should have my firearms permit revoked too?

  90. bilbo says:

    This is what I’ve said all along about MA. It’s a POLICE STATE already. When you need the police permission to validate your constitutional right to bear arms, you by definition live in a POLICE STATE. There’s no such thing as a licensed right. If you need a license, it’s not a right. your license can be revoked. So MA citizens no longer have the RIGHT to own firearms. It’s GONE. You gave it up already. That’s why I moved and why thousands of others have left this cesspool state. What’s next for the slave taxpayers in MA, an ID card to speak freely? This country would be a lot better off if all the politifcians lived in terror of retribution from the people they claim to represent than in it’s current state where they take care of themselves 1st and then dump on the common man.

    1. Rob says:

      If you were paying attention when you were living in MA, you woul know it was a MA SJC decision that itwas not an individual rigt to own firearms. Now lets see it play out after recent US Supremes decisions

  91. ByteRider says:

    I don’t live in Arlington, and I have more guns than the US Army.

    So I’ll say this–

    May there be a Jared for every Liberal in Congress.

    1. movedoutofMA says:

      It must have been a crazy fool who stated these statements:

      The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

      God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty…. And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. 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.

      “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” (Quoting Cesare Beccaria)

      The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.

      No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.

      The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all.

      A free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate.

  92. Roy says:

    Typical government kneejerk reaction is all this is. That Laughner guy was running off at the mouth for years before he snapped so for a while anyone that says something like this will come under more scrutiny than they otherwise would have before. Doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that out. Give it some time and we the sheeple will be able to go back to criticising our betters in government (sarcasm).

  93. Russ1449 says:

    I had firearms confiscated and I never got them back. In order for him to get them back he will be made to jump through hoops. They will delay and use obscure laws to thwart his efforts and yes, they will even lie. I wish him well.” We certainly take this as a credible threat, and credible until we prove otherwise,” said Arlington police Captain Robert Bongiorno. In other words guilty until proven innocent.

    1. Philo says:

      I had a friend many years ago who’s house was raided cause the nieghbor said he was a drug dealer. He was not, and in the end was never even charged. However, he and his father were avid gun collectors and often had booths at gun shows. The law took all of his stuff. By the time the court was finished monkeying around with his “case”, the “storage fee” alone was so much that he never got any of his property back.

      Think about that for a minute folks.

  94. Philo says:

    I just don’t see a threat there. No class for sure, but a threat? I’ve heard people make comments like that my entire life. Remember all those t-shirts from the 80’s about hanging lawyers and politicians?

    I think this is just the inevitable result of a tragedy: the government goes hog-wild overboard trying to stop something that cannot be stopped and ends up burning all the good folks who had nothing to do with it.

  95. SJH says:

    I’m a staunch Conservative Republican, and, NRA member. This guy needs his guns taken from him if for no other reason than by posting something so absurd, I question his intelligence to handle a firearm.

    1. PatriotTRUE says:

      being a republican in a yankee state is like micheal vick being a dog sitter! The 2nd Amedment was created to protect the first Amendment and your a fool for being hunter and not a patriot!

    2. 1916home says:

      Whats freedom of speech if you cant say something , even stupid? By the way, you fit the NRA perfectly, slowly eroding gun owners rights over the decades. I recommend real patriots move from NRA to GOA – Gun Owners of America. The only no compromise group in DC fighting for gun owners!

  96. Michael Ring says:

    Where’s Julian Assange when you need him.

  97. cj says:

    Polite speech needs no protection. The freedom of speech allows for (or used to allow for) one to speek their minds, threatening or not. Our country is being destroyed, our freedoms hampered by political correctness run amok.

    i do not agree that violence is the answer, but until violence is acted out, it is NOT against the law.

  98. Chino Moreno says:

    In that case, SJH, you neither deserve citizenship, nor an NRA membership. I see that in just over 200 years, we have gone from all men are created equal, to some men are more equal than others, and some people should lose fundamental rights if they say something the government disagrees with.

    This country has less than 25 years left, and I’ll be happy to see it collapse.

  99. Henry Bowman says:

    East Germans regularly risked getting bullets in the back in order to escape fro behind the Iron Curtain. Massachusetts residents need only to take a pleasant drive over any of five borders to throw off their chains. Those who have not yet done so are either too lazy to trade their chains in for freedom, or somewhere way down deep actually enjoy the chains.

    I, too, popped a bottle of champagne when I learned that Teddy had served his final term, but nobody no-knocked me. That just doesn’t happen out here in real America.

  100. Freedom says:

    Freedom of speech is being destroyed by politicians with motives to rule over the people. But you fools in Taxachusetts, do not know the difference; you have lived in a do as I say not as I do state for many years. Hard to believe Lexington / Concord is where freedom began for this once great nation. You have out of control welfare, illegal aliens working everywhere and people being taxed to death! The police work for the politicians (via laws the idiots create to protect their own money and control) The police are not protectors of the people, the police will do what the laws created by the politicians have stated they will do, because most cops cant think for themselves and most do not understand the constitution or its purpose. This man is being punished by the strong arm of the politicians (the police) because he spoke out against the politicians and said what many people believe needs to be done. Sure you can have freedom of speech, but when you do you can not have the right to bear arms. That is control over the people by tyrants, both in the political arena and the police blue, all one entity. There is no threat, except from the control freaks, there is no motive, and no intent to commit any crime. SO WHY ARE HIS WEAPONS being removed. TO CONTROL THE PEOPLE, that is why!!!!

  101. Ed says:

    If you think what this guy wrote was bad, you should see what the American Founding Fathers wrote!

  102. Jeff says:

    Ed, the American Founding Fathers committed treason, knowing full well that they would hang for their crimes if the revolution failed. They certainly didn’t rely on any lame arguments that they had rights as Englishmen to do what they did. If you think Corcoran willing to face execution for openly calling for the murder of Congressmen, then I guess he’s your equivalent of a founding father. Otherwise, your analogy is only slightly less insane than Corcoran himself.

  103. Abilene says:

    First, a question for the east coast elitist who wrote the strory: Which Arlington?

    Next, I spent 22 years defending this clown’s right to say stupid things. I defended the right of all clowns to say stupid things. Give me a break, folks. I’m sitting here watching Fox News, and I’ve heard Obama, his little side-kick Howdy Doody Biden, the propaganda minister Robert Gibbs, Harry Reid, and a myriad of clueless people in the Congress defending the Health Care Extortion Act, I’m trying to find the difference, other than stupid people elected some of them.

    It’s a given that Mr. Corcoran is an idiot, but that’s not a crime in this country, given the other idiots I’m exposed to on the news every day. Don’t insult those who served, and the many who gave the ultimate sacrifice, so that people could be idiots and say stupid things. Stupidity knows no race, creed, social status, or political persuation. Meanwhile, would someone who knows Mr. Corcoran please slap him upside the head for me? Thanks.

  104. Dan says:

    “Badges? We don’t need no stinking badges!”

  105. LibsAreCommies says:

    This is clearly an overreaction designed to have a chilling affect on every gun owner and blogger.
    Welcome to Commie ghetto gangsta gov’ment, yo!

  106. Mic says:

    I hope he cripples the city with a mega lawsuit, also consider this site and others for slander. Good luck to you sir.

  107. boiz says:

    Goodbye freedom of speech!

  108. Kevin says:

    True freedom of speech was taken away from U.S. in 1986 with the sexual harassment laws. Offensive speech i no longer legal in this “free” country….

  109. Reffek says:

    Free speech is the first casualty of a liberal government. Do you think you want liberalism??? Well this is what you will get.

  110. Jason says:

    A thought and a statement do not always equal action. This is just another example of action without though! This zero tolerance policy that has erupted in our school systems and most of society is getting old. I surely hope that this country somehow regains it’s balls!

    1. J says:

      thought, not (though)……

  111. Phelps says:

    So… there’s no charges, no arrest, but his property has been seized with no due process or just compensation?

    So we blow out the 1st, 2nd AND 5th all at once?

    1. cj says:

      Phelps: that’s a great point. It appears that is exactly what’s happening.

    2. 1916home says:

      YUP. Pretty much. And now we have the Chinese flag waving around DC. What happened to America?

  112. Buckeyebubba says:

    There’s no laws against carrying a gun unconcealed. Maybe everyone should strap one on, or tote that 12 ga. to work today in protest.

  113. Freedom says:

    Exactly what process did Arlington police use to ascertain that Corcoran himself actually wrote the alleged comments? Are computers and the blog website 100% immune from tampering and access by others? Considering that huge banks and stores with multi million dollar security budgets have been hacked recently, it seems a bit implausible that a simple blog site could not be compromised.

    I would want to see proof that he wrote the comments before any action. Otherwise imagine the chaos caused by police searching your house and seizing your possessions because some joker posted something somewhere on the Internet that looks like it may have come from you.

  114. tdg54, IL says:

    I have a sense of humor AND a FOID card. I’m a firm believer in the 1st and 2nd amendments, but I have no problem with the State limiting this Jamoch’s access to guns.

  115. John says:

    If his comments did not warrant his being charged with a criminal offense, then what is the legal basis for the state moving to impose a sanction against this citizen (said sanction being the revoking of his gun license).

    What you think of the comments is irrelevant. The issue, and problem here, is that the State has imposed a sanction on a citizen in the absence of any criminal charge. The only basis apparent is that the State did not “like” his comments. Not that the comments rose to the level of a chargeable offense like making terroristic threats, mind you, just the totally subjective level of a bureaucrat functionary not “liking” the comments.

    Of course, who are we kidding here? The Bill of Rights was revoked on a de facto basis a long time ago.

  116. Bill Jenkins says:

    Telling people who may be targeting politicians to only target those politicians and staff and not the general public is not a threat. It is just very poor advice.

    Poor advice is given by many people and is not a crime.

    Better advice would be “do not do it.”

    A troll, who also is covered by freedom of speech, could also give poor advice like “kill your family and then yourself”.

    The ultra-PC crowd gets on my nerves more than the worst politicians do.

  117. Jeff says:

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

    He should have stopped at credible threat. This sounds more like guilty until proven innocent.

    his guy may have been a little too vocal, but he has a 1st Amendment right to say what he wants. Now if he went to Washington with the weapons, that is a different story.

    So will he be charged with some asinine law like “making terrorist threats”?

  118. jb80538 says:

    OIfficers removed 11 guns from his house. Did they even have a warrant to search? Doesn’t say that in the article. He has not been charged and I’m guessing most likely will not. His weapons need to be returned immediately! if he actually made a threat, then yes, his CC permit should be suspended. If he was only making a “Free speech” comment, then leave the guy alone.

    People have pretty thin skin when it comes to making comments about dems but when someone makes a comment about hanging Pres Bush, it rolls off like water off a duck!

  119. Big Ugly, Wyoming says:

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

    Remember the part about, “Innocent until PROVEN guilty”?
    It is clearly THEFT OF PRIVATE PROPERTY on the part of the Gestapo ….. er, Police.

    Politicians can target each other?
    People can target a certain budget.
    “Target” is simply a goal – and I agree with him ….. the goal, the ‘target’, is to REMOVE any and all ‘elected representatives’ who do not support and defend the Constitution – AS THEY HAVE SWORN TO DO.
    If they fail, and breach their OATHS, they are guilty of TREASON and must be held accountable.
    Should politicians be threatened – By God, Yes! They should be threatened with removal from their office ….. lawfully …… and according to the Constitution.
    The police have, also, sworn to uphold the Constitution ….. First and Foremost. Did they fail in their obligation and their OATH, most certainly. Should any ‘officer’ involved in this Breach of God Given Rights? ABSOLUTELY.

    What has happened to Rule of Law in this country?

  120. PrinceOfSquirrels says:

    1> What if this gentleman suggested that the congress be stomped on by Godzilla ? – Is this OK because it is movie-speak ?
    2. Would they have gone after another person describing the same hunt-down of congress if they had NOT owned a gun ? ( We may kill with cars, autos, medicines or anything strewn about a home (Including baseball bats and various sports equiptment etc.)- Probably Not.
    3. Perhaps we should install video cameras in every citizens home so that we may moniter their purposeful and deemed appropriate use of everyday objects including kitchen knives…..- This will come soon.
    4. When do we start as a nation to punish ACTIONS and behavior towards others first and rhetoric later ? – Not anytime soon.
    5. What sort of software will be able to determine correctly someones sincerest meaning when they exclaim ( ” I’ll kill that Guy !” ) on their cell phone out of anger ? – Can you distinguish these ?
    6. Will only certain people be able to exclaim, orate, publicly protest etc. based on their past profile that has been pre-screened as “CITIZEN ACCEPTABLE”?- This is happening now.
    7. What happened to innocent until proven guilty ?
    8. What if I openly dream of every single Bush family member being brought to trial, convicted and then justly hanged ? – Are you, the media or our Government going to concentrate on the first part of this statement, that is the part that calls for bringing these people before a magistrate, or are you going to concern yourself with the predication calling for their HANGING – Probably the latter.

    This Country is spending too much time nit-picking, petty pandering, postering, tweeting, tweaking, smoking, playing and NOT BEING RESPONSIBLE for our own DOING AND ACTIONS TAKEN. This goes for both politicians and we, their constituents.

    1. J says:

      Way to go Boston!

      Without trial, you’ve taken a man’s property and denied his rights, just for telling an off color joke.

      Hope you like the taste of those boots, Bostonians. I’m sure King George would be happy to know he finally took your city back after all.

  121. George says:

    Please try to see this as law enforcement might see this: we know he has weapons; we do not know whether he is sane. Let’s check him out and make sure we do him no harm. . .

  122. Thomas Savino says:

    What a farce the Constitution has been reduced to. We live in a police state run by Abe Lincoln’s wet dream AKA Henry Clay’s American Plan, a blended and almost merged entity of gov and big business.

    Shame on the “greatest generation” for sell their kids to the State for a few penny’s and shame on the Baby Boomers for having even less character.

    And pity for all freedom loving people. The world’s great beacon of freedom is just another country, just like Obama says and wanted.

  123. liberalism is a mental disorder says:

    the democratic liberal obama way of life there is us, and then there are all of you peons.

  124. liberalism is a mental disorder says:

    congress is not above its citizens they actually work for us the PEOPLE!@ and if we need to “fire them” from there job. we need to. pelosi and reed you are unamerican failures. please let my freedom of speech work here, and not wind up like this guy who talked to the wrong democrat.

  125. RoBoTech says:

    What bothers me is the compressing of what is considered an “Armory”.
    I am a retired Civil Servant. Throughout my life, I have always loved guns and other fine machinery. My paycheck just never allowed me to purcahse what I wanted.
    Now that I am retired, I have 11 guns myself. and at least 200 rnds + for ech caliber.
    Why? because I no longer have the responsibilities that prevented me from acquiring them in my early life.
    So, NOW, because I buy several weapons a year, and lots of ammo (while it can still be had at prices I can afford) what I have is considered an ARMORY?
    I have had a CCW in my State for 26 years. Never had to pull my weapon, and 99% of the people I meet don’t even know I carry.
    I have never been arrested, and faithfully support my Local Law enforcement. I do have Conservative principles, and that doesn’t include killing people over their Ideology.
    But NOW, I am considered dangerous?
    You see where this is going? I do.

  126. Gregory Pokorny says:

    WITH GREAT POWER THERE MUST ALSO COME – – GREAT RESPONSIBILITY! Stan Lee. This guy owns a comic book store. Do I have to say anymore?

  127. rickster says:

    who does he think he is
    only keith dopeyman or chris tingle thigh or john stewwart can say something like that without anything happening to them. repercussions are for the right they do not apply to the left.

  128. A.J. Kaufman says:

    3rd Amendment? I don’t think anyone was quarterin troops without compensation.

  129. Joe-NRA says:

    It seems that at least several people commenting on this are missing another major point altogether. Free speech issues? Yes. Judgement in what you publish? Sure. Did he break any laws? Absolutely not. Has no one else ever spouted off with such comments, and no intention of ever acting on them? Right…
    But the entire concept of having to be issued a license to own a gun is in blatant violation of the Constitution, and to then have that “priviledge” revoked with no due process is ludicrous!

  130. James Woods says:

    I agree with it, should be permanent.

    Freedom of speech and your first amendment shouldn’t give you the right to threaten someone.

    If you want to live in a country where you can make threats to people move to mexico and threaten em down there.

    If we can’t conduct ourselves civilly any ‘rights’ we have will be taken anyhow for ‘security’ reasons.

  131. Cynic says:

    Someone else may have made this same comment. Although his decision can be appealed to the Court the reality is that the local Chief Of Police decides who does and who doesn’t have a Gun permit. The reasoning behind this is that the Chief would be more familiar with the people of his own City or Town. He has the power to deny the permit for any reason or no reason.

  132. Troy says:

    “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

    Ben Franklin ~ 1759

    Too many Americans today are all too willing to give up their liberty. Why? They assume that Government is their protector and friend.
    “It is neither” Troy 1/19/2011

  133. SharpShtik says:

    In general, government employees are authoritarian, arrogant, over-reactive, bullying, shallow-thinking idiots, which includes most Democrats and some Republicans, including Bush. They overreact against the general public while they miss the people like Loughner they should actually target. You can see this in the way they pat themselves on the back for “serving” while forcing taxpayers to pay them double or more than what private business employees make and in the way they and their close cousins in the news media acted as if Giffords was vastly more important than all other victims combined. Deploying their power is their addictive high. Many have Golam’s addiction to “one ring to rule them all.” Retire them from government and they become better people again. In this particular case, he should have said what he was thinking with less inflammatory and sarcastic rhetoric about his disdain for Congress as a whole, perhaps for mostly-Democrats but Republicans too digging a 14+ trillion hole during a century of incompetence. It’s doubtful he was posting a death threat against Congressional members. I think government employees know that (or do they since they are shallow thinking) and are out to embarrass him. Deploy power to make an example out of him for everyone disgusted with US government. It looks like his follow-up statement was designed to point out left-wing nutcase Loughner targeted Giffords while everyone else was a random victim. It goes to show how crazy and detached Loughner is to shoot anyone, everyone. Like his friend said, he wasn’t shooting at individuals, he was shooting at the world because of the left-wing anarchist colostomy bag his mind had become. He may get his firearms back, perhaps with an expensive lawsuit, but only after thorough embarrassment and destruction of his business. That’s a very heavy price to pay for inflammatory, sarcastic rhetoric, especially to be lumped in with the likes of Loughner. Remember, the police didn’t even target Loughner like this despite knowing he was crazy. They are taking out their incompetence and deploying their get-tough crackdown on this guy – similar to sending national guard troops to airports with empty M-16s after they missed the real terrorists.

  134. MarkinIdaho says:

    Based on what they said, this man needs to have his firearms removed from him, and probably sent to a looney bin. That kind of talk has no place in a free society.

    Responsible gun ownership does not include making threats with weapons, nor does it allow people with weapons to make threats. No person that believes in the Second Amendment can rationally support this man. “A well-regulated militia, being necessary for the common defense, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged”. There is nothing well-regulated about giving guns to mentally unstable or insane persons.

  135. Morty says:

    Better not comment or this or you may be in the crosshairs of a ferderal investigation. Oops, I said the “C” word.

  136. J Holmes says:

    All this sort of reaction does is train the bad guys on how to conduct business. You all think he’s a lone wolf for saying what he said? I talk to people nearly every day, and meet at least a couple a day that voice the same comments.

    “taking things seriously” is what has got us where we are, changing our lives to suit the “security needs” that we are told are for our own good. It’s too bad he doesn’t live in a state that doesn’t require “firearms permits” just to own a gun.

    Read your history, violent talk to and from and between congressmen has been the NORM for our entire history. He just said what a LOT of peiople are thinking, and now they see that they were right – “big brother” will try to hurt you for speaking out. So with no outlet to vent their feelings, or rather the wrath of the government coming down on you when you DO – those feelings of resentment and rage will just bottle up, until they inevitably blow out in a more violent manner than just venting a few words.

    Alien and Sedition act all over again

  137. Donald says:

    Just as the lying progressives INVENTED that the right and people on the right were responsible they INVENT that this guy is a threat. he was spouting off and made no credible threat yet this is exactly what the police say he did. What threat did he make? Whom did he specifically threaten? All of congress because he said “1 down 534 to go?” He is sick of congressmen and women and most all are corrupt. Many in this country would live to se them ALL gone and replaced. But no, we are PURPOSEFULLY over-reacting to all things to create the atmosphere where the state can always react as strongly as it does so that it never has to answer for its abuse of power when it does. Think people…this is a little bit by design more than you’re willing to admit

  138. truthinmotion says:

    If everyone would just pack a side arm and know how to use it safely and operate it within the confines of the law (2nd amendment specifically), you’d see crime drop through the floor. Anyone attempting to go off on politicians would be stopped within seconds. This country would be so much freer and everyone would rest peacefully. Seriously! Guns aren’t the problem…they are the solution to a peaceful resolution in our country. Everybody stays in check and nobody gets out of line…civilians OR politicians. How simple is that?

  139. SharpShtik says:

    This is the same incompetent, abusive, bullying, overreaction that shallow-thinking idiotic government employees engaged in when they incompetently missed the 9/11 terrorists. They made more idiots federal employees, sent national guard troops to airports with empty M-16s and banned nail clippers after they missed the real terrorists with box cutters and explosive devices (faux or real). Here, they attack the general public again based on sarcastic rhetoric after missing Loughner despite knowing he was crazy after several run-ins with him. They didn’t do this to Loughner, but its not too late to do it to the general public.

  140. Stu Chisholm says:

    Gonna have to dig up and jail ALL of the founding fathers! Maybe toss the authors of political thrillers into the klink, too.

  141. 312capri says:

    I’m glad I’m 75 years old. I don’t want to watch our once great country fall into socialism or even worse communism! The “Progressive Liberal’s” are winning!

  142. Michael Ring says:

    Someone is now tracking the commenters to the site and controlling their access to the internet. What liberals so wanted Jared Laughner to be might well happen as the government cracks down on the internet.

    And to think liberals got upset when Bush listened in on terrorist’s calls without a warrant.

  143. jake says:

    If a person thinks that the murder and or attempted murder of someone is a good thing then it is completely reasonable to question their mental health and evaluate if they should have access to firearms.
    Since he did it in an extremely public way and then seems to think more murder is a good thing it is even more appropriate.
    I fear those people that only value the lives of those that agree with them.

    1. Phelps says:

      So we should have questioned the mental health of everyone in America who wanted Osama Bin Laden assassinated after 9/11? Disarm the whole country?

      1. jake says:

        My comment was on topic.Screaming 9/11 is really impressive phelps.
        Usama Bin Laden would not be able to legally buy or carry a firearm in this country, but if things were the way you want things to be he could.
        Take a deep breath and get your brain back if possible.

      2. Phelps says:

        You didn’t qualify. You made the blanket assertion, “IF a person thinks that the murder of SOMEONE is a good thing” then that person is presumed insane.

        There’s lots of other examples. Julian Assange had a lot of people calling for his head. Sarah Palin gets threats on twitter every day. Hollywood made a small industry out of fantasizing about GWB’s assassination.

        You essentially proposed that we generally prohibit firearms in this country, because of what people might THINK. And I called you on it. Get over the butthurt and start thinking about what you say — just like you are telling this guy.

      3. jake says:

        Im sorry , ill try typing slower…
        I have a bad habit of considering the actual problem or situation before me.So far you have no position , this man , in particular, in this case, in particular, acted out in such a way that it was prudent to evaluate him….. Now as far as the shadows in your mind that are coming to get you thats your deal. I live life, own weapons,and do not publicly call for violence.

      4. Phelps says:

        I’m sorry, I’ll explain more. I have a bad habit of assuming that any new rules will eventually (if not immediately) be enforced by my worse enemy. I am seldom wrong.

        Starting to rule that says, “if someone says something that I don’t like means that they should lose their rights to arms” scares the hell out of me. Because I know that it will eventually be enforced by someone who doesn’t like ANYTHING I have to say, no matter how “moderate”.

    2. tea party vik says:

      What extremely public way on his blog?? How many hits does his blog get? What the cutoff point where i have too many visitors to say anything i want. Words don’t kill.

  144. Roy says:

    “until we prove otherwise’ ? ? ?

    There is NO way Law Enforcement can “prove otherwise.”

    This Guy will always REMAIN a THREAT…regardless if a Psysh says different.

    1. Michael says:

      Roy’s right .If people post in a blog:

      believe that assassinating politicians is sometimes valid (Hitler)
      believe that it’s better to assassinate a small number of politicians rather than kill a large number of draftees (WWII)
      agree that it’s sometimes legitimate for citizens to rebel against democratic governments
      agree that the ends do not justify the means, and are not willing to cause massive war for little purpose
      agree that the Arizona shooting was a tragedy
      agree that it is not legitimate to assassinate politicians in the US today
      have said some tasteless things among friends in your life that had the potential to play very poorly in a different audience

      they needed to be culled from society. Is it not better to lock up a hundred million Americans than to risk open debate?

  145. tea party vik says:

    How many muslims have had their homes raided over a blog?? How about Rev Wright and his anti govt statements? Has his house been raided? Of course not. Its only PC to raid white guys homes.

  146. John C says:

    Celebrating the death or injury of a political opponent, as is so common with the left, is inappropriate, irresponsible, disrespectful, juvenile, mean and intolerant. They should knock it off, and those on the right shouldn’t start. Political discourse should be confined to differences of opinion and ideas, and should avoid the sewer of personal attacks motivated by emotions of anger and hate.

  147. Stoshio says:

    Corcoran would have been left alone if he could just keep his big mouth shut. His words were hateful, uncalled for and just plain dumb. His mouth started running before his brain engaged. He’s not very smart because the authorities will definitely take seriously threats or perceived threats against public figures. By the way, when he referred to the remaining “534 to go” he was wrong. It should be 434. However instead of the reporter checking facts and doing some thinking she just passed on the bad information.

    1. Michael says:

      It was 434, but one of his dark humored commentors ask if there was going to be a separate scorecard for the senate, so it was changed to 534. Civics has really gone to hell in this country. Are you even aware there are 3 branches of the federal government?

  148. Oscar Mendoza says:

    this is a big misunderstanding. On the otherhand, there are people on youtube who routinely have videos depicting firearms and links to paypal accounts with indicriminate offers to sell re-manufactured ammo.
    this one guy “gwargwar1981” is currently involved in an online dispute with a woman who moved out and fled to NY. there are about 200 youtube users batting the threats back and forth over a 10,000 dollar donation he solicited though his mentor in Long Island NY. This has surged into retalitory rhetoric surely to escalate intoviolence soon. This man brags about his Massachessetts pistol permit, and his over the top alcohol use and depression.
    what would a son have to do to report such a threat to the greater public not to mention his girlfriend, which makes it a domestic violence case, which requires the termination of the Pistol Permit, and the Mass state purchase authorization.
    I know when this girt gets hurt, they will be blaming someone.

  149. davec says:

    LIARS, LIARS:

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

    1.) that was already done when he passed background checks
    2.) THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FIREAM LICENSE.

    WHOSE LYING AND WHY?

    Simple. The “license” is a concealed permit, and taking that doesnt accomplish anything for the Gubmint. They have to invent a “firearm permit” (WHAT CASTROS CUBA DID IN THE 1950s) and use that bald faced LIE to have an excuse to confiscate them

  150. BKG says:

    Don’t we still have the right to yell “Fire” at a crowded book-burning?!

  151. Steve Adams says:

    One Massachusetts gun owner down, 150,000 to go.

  152. Brandon says:

    Does this “terror” spreading fool not realize we are living in the last best country on Earth?
    Hey, Corcoran!, if you don’t like it here then MOVE out!

  153. Ben says:

    This is really taking an issue too far and I think it sets an unacceptable precedent. I do not condone someone writing what he did, but there was no real threat. As others have mentioned it will be very hard to draw a line of acceptability. I would only suggest this level of police involvement for cases where there are direct threats and when someone feels there is a risk to their life.

  154. mackle says:

    Good Grief, get over yourselves already. From what it looks like to me is that everyone knows we need to fix the problems in America and pass it onto the world. It appears that people feel that the representatives are not doing a good enough job and the people are through with talking, they are done. For what its worth, we should re- evaluate our purpose as human beings, and how we provide for each other, and what we are doing to each other the world over. We are the leaders, this great country of immigrants. At best, after we are weaned we all have an average of 60 plus years to enjoy life, family, and friends and visit the countries. This may sound funny, but it is also what most everyone of us would like to do. Do a good job and enjoy life.

  155. Natt Bugg says:

    He may well get his license back but the writer here has ensured that he will lose business and lose face by the unnecessary details contained in his story. Thanks, media, for once again carrying the torch for one side.

    1. Neuromancer says:

      It is equally possible that he’ll get his license back and, because of the notoriety, get more business. Oddly enough, however, I thank the media for pointing out how the police are making a mountain out of a molehill.

      Our language is filled to the brim with military references. It permeates throughout our sports and entertainment industries. Those supporting the overreaction here will have no room to complain when the thought police come for them.

      I personally found what this man said to be offensive. I will fight to the death, however, for his right to say it.

      Oops. I used the D-word. Gotta go… I hear a knock at the door.

      1. Michael says:

        Didn’t you watch the video. If there’s knock at the door, it’s the media. The police will just let themselves in.

  156. newjerseybt says:

    How many times have you heard in your lifetime from the mouth of an individual…”You do that and your gonna get shot!”

    Decisions, decisions is it a real threat? Shall we rewrite the Constitution because of a handful of idiots? It is NOT a perfect world. And everytime we try to make it so, we lose more of our God given rights and Liberties. And we can only blame ourselves.

    1. Michael says:

      I blame law enforcement. You have a violent drug addict well known to the police, with years of threats to a local politician also well known to the police, and rather than investigate or have a police presence at Gabby’s public events, they do nothing. Not even report this to the FBI.

      An arrest for the drugs, violence, or threats would have triggered a no buy for the gun Jarred bought for the shooting.

  157. Karl says:

    Xenos, I see your acting true to form. I told you once before you sound like an idiot and you haven’t changed a bit.. You make some really stupid remarks. The fact of the matter Xenos is that some people just need to be eliminated. The World does it every day, the public just doesn’t hear abolut it. About the only thing I like about you is that you seem to be for protecting the right to bear arms. Other than that, I doubt we could ever be friends ——— . Basically were foes who agree on just a couple of points. Enjoy the eastern United States, if that’s where you live, and please stay out of Texas, we don’t need you down here.

  158. Dudefromixie says:

    Can’t take his guns for that comment. there is no requirement in my state to have a permit to own a gun and there shouldn’t be one. And there is no law that can take away a persons guns because of threats. Unless he is convicted of something he can’t eve have his carry permit revoked.

  159. Joe Johnson says:

    Just curious, by reading this article am I now subject to a police search?

  160. Henry Krinkle says:

    Do all these people who advocate overthrow of our government expect that the government is just going to lay down and let them? Where in the Constitution say that violent overthrow of the government is what the Founding Fathers desired? Just because some wackjob teabaggers, whiny babies who don’t like what the will of the people gave them in 2008, are having a hissy fit? Checks and balances, babies. That’s what it’s about. Try and overthrow my government and see what happens, dummies.

  161. Der Jakl says:

    權利,你沒有權利在人民共和國的馬薩諸塞州

  162. Looks like a WordPress blog. Hahaha. Reminds us why we all have to watch what we say online. Never know who could be reading. And those who say this is a police state probably have never been to Singapore. =)

  163. Jasonn says:

    Sounds to me like a lawsuit and I’d just love to be on THAT jury.

  164. Your Neighbor says:

    You never target anyone.

    Politicians can be voted IN or OUT. So, support those you want voted IN. Don’t support those you want OUT. Pretty simple!

    The Zero Tolerance Policy from grade schools are now being used on adults. Too funny! Are we that immature? Please grow up.

    Just wait until the ‘double standard’ shows. You know that when certain police, reporters, certain ethnic or religious groups, or politicians make those same opinions(or threats), they’ll get away with it with a little warning if any. The normal citizen won’t get away with anything and be overly punished to set an example.

  165. E Simon says:

    “What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.”
    -Thomas Jefferson

    It seems our founding fathers would have had to give up their guns. What a shame that some of you are so ignorant.
    Our government is SUPPOSED to fear an armed populace according to the fathers. They are SUPPOSED to be afraid to dismiss us ( as some argue they did with that terrible health care law).

  166. Ray King says:

    and now we can all see that the Rich are More Equal than Others.

  167. Ray King says:

    Government does not give us Freedom, Government can only Take Freedom Away.

  168. Jon says:

    It sure is a good thing there weren’t more “irish67’s around in the 1770s or we would all still be living under British rule. But then again, many consider the government we live under now to have grown even more tryannical than King George. If many of you would actually bother to research history and understand the founding of our nation at anything more than a gradeschool level of understanding, you would understand that to overthrow a tyrannical government is not only a right, but a DUTY of the People. The framers, in their wisdom, gave us the electoral process so that such acts could be carried out without forcing us to resort to violent redress of grievences. If, however, that electoral process utterly fails, it is the right and DUTY of the People to overthrow tyranny be any means necessary…including violence. Violence is simply a tool. The manner in which it is used is either good, or evil. To violate one’s civil rights based on how certain actions or words MIGHT be interpreted by someone is the single most amoral and tyrannical act I can think of. Continued acts of said tyranny will only lead to ever increasing levels of rhetoric and, eventually, violence against the tyrrant. Any lesser act disqualifies one to be a free American.

  169. Henry Krinkle says:

    “If, however, that electoral process utterly fails” In other words, if we whiny babies don’t get our way and the American people elect someone we don’t like, we’ll threaten a violent overthrow of the government. You vocal whiny minority can’t terrorize the rest of us for long before you’re put in your places. Don’t forget that. You’ll be defeated. Count on it. All of your bluster notwithstanding, when push comes to shove, you’re the lunatic fringe, a minority of malcontents.

  170. Tanicia Wood says:

    To the feeble, daft, incapacitated cognitions adding their “thoughts” to this bit of disgusting news to which the entailments are “words are just words” or “LeftLies” or how this act by the authorities shows how the freedom of speech had been raped of us: introspection is key? Look into your deepest pits of (bottomless?) associations of “self” (might you have one? My guess is that is a big no, seeing as how you prove your inability to think outside of your automaton upbringings) it is here that you will see that you are the very reason REAL rights are being taken away from us and the idea of 1984 is ever a possibility. You make the rest of us look as pathetic, sick, and robotic.
    By the bye, these are indeed just words. My guess is you feel frustration when you read this anyway.

  171. jlewis says:

    I’m not sure which side of this to ultimately come down on, but either way, this man has been made guilty by this media before ever seeing a trial of any kind. This man shouldn’t be singled out for saying publicly what many others have probably thought to themselves. Nor should politicians have to live in fear for making unpopular decisions, they’re humans as well and have families and want a happy life. They do have an obligation to listen to us and make decisions that will allow us to prosper long term. We all need to pay a lot more attention and be involved, the public at large needs to be involved and pay attention to the decisions being made and how they will affect us. Logic, reason, and the Constitution need to be applied by lawmakers. Then and only then if things are going downhill can we say the system is broken.

  172. Keith C. Parsels says:

    Just exactly did he expect from the liberal northeast?

  173. jake says:

    535 is just a start. Freedom of speech prevails, if the powers that be are afraid, then they better damn well listen.

  174. RABIDPATRIOT says:

    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”—- Abraham Lincoln

    Should this man have been silenced?

    “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants”. – Thomas Jefferson

    Maybe this man?

    1. Antilibturd says:

      RABIDPATRIOT- Watch out! The Libnut thought police have been mustered, don’t want any quotes which could be construed as a “threat” or the police will come busting through your door, confiscating guns and suspending your Constitutional rights indefinitely?!

  175. Antilibturd says:

    A stupid remark, no matter what you gun grabbing nazis think does not mean that his Constitutional rights can be trampled on! 1984 style thought police coming to a town near you! Asinine and outrageous to trample on his rights for that comment which in and of itself is a flippant remark and in my opinion is a generalization, not a threat!

  176. zzt says:

    and what kind of response did he expect, fng idiot , making a fool of himself and anybody who has a legal firearm

  177. Jack says:

    It looks like some cops need to get sued, because that a pretty clear violation of a well established Constitutional right. Somebody needs to introduce these bozos to the First Amendment and Supreme Court cases like NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886 (1982); Hess v. Indiana, 414 U.S. 105 (1973) (per curiam); and Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969) (per curiam),

  178. Welcome to the Idiocracy says:

    Two things come to mind rather quickly:

    a.) he said what I think more than a handful are thinking
    b.) his “punishment” makes his case (tyranny)

  179. K says:

    Der Jakl:

    Your Chinese is grammatically incorrect. “You have no rights in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts” in grammatically correct Chinese is 在馬薩諸塞人民共和國你沒有權利。

  180. Antilibturd says:

    His remark may have been an attempt at “black humor”, inappropriate and even callous? It may be as disgusting as that group which pickets funerals of fallen soldiers and wishes death upon them? It may be something many wouldn’t agree with, BUT he has Constitutionally protected free speech and when this goes to court it will be hard to prove that he made any DIRECT threat to Congress, which from what has been printed of his “statements” it appears there is no direct threat at all! It also appears that authorities are just looking for any old excuse go “gun grabbing” and I predict they will be successfully sued in court if they continue the stupidity!

  181. Del Wasso says:

    @ Wolfgang: What part of “well regulated” don’t you understand?

  182. Ike says:

    I see over a dozen commenters that just made DHS ‘list’;
    just sayin’…

  183. PJ says:

    Ok so when are they going to take away the guns of the rap artists threatening to kill cops, their girlfriends, their rivals and almost anyone? If the blogger was something besides white would that make it ok? Maybe we should just forget all that “equal protection” garbage.

  184. John in Tennessee says:

    Gun License? What is a Gun license? Why would one need such a thing? I’m glad I do not live in a state with a gun license, my only gun license is the United States Constitution.

  185. PJ says:

    My apologies. I’ve just been informed of my error. Politicians are a protected, special class. We lowlifes outside the beltway can threaten, shoot, stab, run over each other all we want. But our rulers? Well, of course they can be offended. Or pay for their own health insurance, retirement, parking tickets . . . .

    Silly me.

  186. Joe says:

    We all need to realize that anything that we post online can be used against us by those that disagree with what we say. Just because you believe something, you should consider what you post.

    Especially if you make threats, even if you are joking, someone will take it the wrong way.

    I am not just talking about this guy, I am talking about everyone.

  187. Jen says:

    What the hell kind of scare story is that? Why don’t you play some spoooooky music to go under it to?

    “Working with Washington DC police?”
    “Credible threat?”

    feh. The guy was blowing off hot air on a blog. Like you’ve never said something callous in front of your friends.

    No wonder no one believes you guys anymore. You do know people can doublecheck your stories themselves these days, right?

    Enjoy obsolescence, CBS.

  188. Fred says:

    I’m fine with this guy losing his license for threatening violence though I’m guessing that an argument can be made that he was only speaking hypothetically or was not saying that he himself would become a shooter. However I do have to wonder if all the people in the Arlington area (and I’m sure there were a few) who tweeted or blogged a hope for Sarah Palin to die are going to have any of their licenses removed…

  189. mjazz says:

    After the incitement charges the Left has leveled against everyone, one of them says being against Obamacare makes you a Nazi.

  190. A. Levy says:

    What he said is his “political opinion”, and as such, is protected speech. Also, the police had no legal right to take his “lawfully possessed” firearms from him unless he was being charged with a crime and arrested, which he was not. One of the things the mindless sheeple of America didn’t quite understand was when the Marxist-in-Chief said he would change America. What he meant was, change it from a free country, to what we have now.

  191. Alex says:

    Proof of why licensing is not a right. The co-opted NRA loves to speak of how they have increased gun RIGHTS and lists the concealed carry LICENSES as evidence. This is a way they can hide that they have NOT worked to repeal gun laws which infringe on gun RIGHTS. Why were they not working on repealing the horrific 1968 Gun Control Act??? They had a pro-gun Congress and White House…supposedly. Because they are only interested in taking your money – not doing anything . Join the Gun Owners of America which was formed by people tired of the controlled opposition of the NRA.

  192. Robert Frost says:

    The constitution does not place qualifiers on free speech and it does not put limits on the right to bare arms. The limits of the constitution are on government. I think the cops in this case are violating this man’s rights. Any time free speech and gun rights are followed by
    “yeah, but” or any other qualifier or notion of limits, you take freedom from the people and add power to the government.
    Remember on inportant thing about the Bill Of Rights, it is there to ensure our freedoms and to give us guidence in dealing with a government that has become like ours…

    Just saying

  193. John Franklin Mason says:

    Now that Paul Cornell has had his guns taken away Libertarians will have to rely more on mouth to mouth communications under cover of the TEA Party and reduce their public exposure.

    A stale bag of Libertarian favored leavings seeped in an evaporating puddle of Republican secretions is the recipe for the elixir being marketed by TEA Party Pirates from the backend of a Trojan Horse. Served with Limbaugh Cheese and Fox Droppings will produce a foul gas and fungus among us requiring a Liberal dosage of the United States Constitution to clear the air and eradicate the malfeasant spores.

  194. wallace1303 says:

    Sounds like Katrina all over again.

  195. Charles Clever says:

    Threats are a form of assault, especially if the threatened person believes them true.

    Yes we do have the right to change our government–that is what elections are for, and if they want a new constitution, vote for change, but don’t threaten or kill–it is still a violation of God’s law that says: “thou shalt not kill.”

  196. TEOTWAWKI says:

    This needs restated. Is it any surprise that our stupid/crooked government picked the dumbest option. Salute! to HenryD for getting it in all caps!

    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.

  197. John W. Redelfs says:

    So a person has to have a license to own a gun in Arizona? Incredible! Any law requiring a license to own a firearm is a violation of the Second Amendment.

    1. Antilibturd says:

      The person who is the subject of this story does not live in Arizona but in Massachusetts where you need a concealed carry permit to carry concealed and it’s not a “shall issue” state but is at the discretion of the local authorities who tend to be hoplophobic antigunner types who don’t like to issue permits to regular citizens, of course people like Bwaney Fwank and others of his ilk are part of the elite class (bourgeois) so they are not put through the gauntlet like the members of the proletariat are in that antigun state! In Arizona you do not need a license to carry a firearm since they still have some freedom in that state. I can just see the authorities busting a door down cause some teenager tells him or her friend,”if you post that on Facebook I will kill you” or some other pedantic comment because it’s perceived as a threat by these idiots? If they pursue this moronic line of reasoning then I fear we are seeing the end of a free country and the beginning of an oppressive dictatorship.

  198. DJ says:

    What about what Ex-Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa. said about Florida’s new Republican Governor Rick Scott on October 23:

    “That Scott down there that’s running for governor of Florida,” Mr. Kanjorski said. “Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have him and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him. He stole billions of dollars from the United States government and he’s running for governor of Florida. He’s a millionaire and a billionaire. He’s no hero. He’s a damn crook. It’s just we don’t prosecute big crooks.”

    Fee speech or a threat? I don’t like what they have to say but they have the right to say it. Sounds like the government is starting to go after people for “pre-crime.”

  199. Jerome Borden says:

    Wendy identified the real problem. Since when do you have to have a “permit” to own firearms? The tragic thing is that the Second Amendment was actually born in 1775 in Concord. That is what Paul Revere’s Ride was all about.

  200. steven says:

    he had every right to make comments…. if some buttwipe doesn’t like it too frakkin bad..

  201. james says:

    If a person breaks the law then prosicute them with due process and if found guilty then remove his license but to remove his license without due process IS a crime

  202. FRANKOAMERICAN says:

    IF YOU GONNA SHOOT, SHOOT. DON’T TALK. ELI WALLACH IN “THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY”.

  203. Marty4650 says:

    I don’t approve of this behavior at all. This really was a veiled threat.

    But I wonder… why is this considered a serious problem when it was no problem at all when Alec Baldwin suggested we “go to Washington and find Congressman Henry Hyde and kill him and his entire family?’

    And why was it no problem at all when Air America host Randi Rhodes said “I wish someone would take President Bush fishing, then plug him like they did to Fredo in Godfather I?”

    I mean…. come on. Doesn’t anyone else see the bizarre double standard here? Veiled and even direct threats made by the left are never treated as problems or even cause for concern.

    And considering how violent these people are…. shouldn’t we take them seriously when they say these things?

    1. Antilibturd says:

      Curious? How come the authorities are not busting in the door of Baldwin or Rhodes? Sounds like they made a direct threat to me against members of the government? Oh, I get it, it doesn’t count if it’s against Conservative members? Only if it includes Libdims? Sycophants!

  204. Dannawally says:

    Guns don’t kill people, deranged liberals do.

  205. Red Ruffansore says:

    Sounded like hyperbole to me but then I’m not a member of the thought police squad and don’t have the brainwave reading equipment they have. Was his particular line cloddish, yes. He should have called them all Nazi’s and gone on at length about how he wished Sarah Palin was dead or even George Bush, there’s still a little gas in that tank. Obviously he was quite misguided, in this day and age you should know who you can threaten with death every day, day in and day out with impunity……conservatives.

  206. TheQuestion says:

    whatever happened to innocent till proven guilty?

    1. Bang Bang says:

      Because threat of violence isn’t protected speech. Nitwit.

  207. pourshot says:

    As a Mass certified firearms instructor living in Virginia I say send him to us. He can still live in Arlington and not have to deal with the thought police.

  208. Bubba says:

    1st Amendment:
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religions, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press……………… It doesn’t say unless someone objects. It is what it is.

    2nd amendment says I Have the right to keep and bear arms, PERIOD. I don’t need permission from anybody else. It is what it is. Quit trying to rewrite the Constitution

    These Amendments were ratified 12/15/1791. They haven’t changed

  209. egoist says:

    Obviously, you can’t claim that threats are protected as free speech. Well, given some of the comments, I guess it’s not obvious. Beyond him being a threat, he strikes me as stupid to think posting threats wouldn’t cause his cage to be rattled.

  210. Bob says:

    Losing gun rights should be the least of the penalties for running a WordPress blog with the default TwentyTen theme.

  211. Jim says:

    But it is OK to make a movie about killing President Bush. That is free speech.

    1. Bang Bang says:

      Yeah, it is. If the idiot Corcoran wanted to make a movie about the murders of all members of congress, he can go right ahead. But when he starts advocating for their real and actual murder, apparently that’s where the line gets drawn. He’s getting what he deserved.

  212. johnnyB says:

    His statements are advocation of insurrection, It’s quiet proper under the constitution to suspend civil rights during insurection, or havn’t you dolts read it?

  213. Bobo says:

    Free speech is not a one-way street, you morons!

    You anti-free speech morons are a bigger threat than the elected officials – because you voted them into the offices! You all ought to be removed from the planet!

  214. Herb says:

    Wow , now we have to watch out for the “Insensitive police”

  215. DM81 says:

    What this guy said may have been tasteless. Even though perhaps alot of us were thinking the same thing.
    But he made no direct threats.
    If that disgraceful kansas church can protest funerals of soldiers and even the AZ murders than this guy should be able to say what he said.
    This is a result of a hypersensitive govt that now is in fear of it’s people. What’s next? We can’t say we disagree with them? We can’t have any guns? This iis no more than the fed flexing it’s guns.

  216. 1776Federalist says:

    As a gun owner, concealed carry permit holder and member of the NRA, i applaud the authorities for removing his privilege to have a license for a gun. Gun ownership means you are a responsible member of society, and while disagreement is fine in debates and discourse, it also means you do not threaten the life of anyone, unless they mean you harm and you intend to act in self-defense.

  217. TheRandyGuy says:

    The founders knew the time would come when the government would become oppressive and the people would have to use force against it. Writer 1776 stole my thunder, but the idea that the people have to accept the actions of the government NO MATTER WHAT is flat wrong. Congress members should review their oath of office and remember they derive their power from the consent of the governed.

  218. Mitch says:

    If this guy’s rights are violated because he exercised free speech, then Sarah Palin should have HER right to speak publicly taken away as well; after all SHE’S the one who used crosshairs to target Gabby. I don’t agree with advocating violence, but I see this situation as no different (and far less severe) than, say, an administration’s pattern of lying to the American people for the sole purpose of illegally invading a country and slaughtering hundreds of thousands of its citizens (are you listening, Dubya, Cheney and Rumsfeld?). If this guy’s license is taken away for speaking freely, then everyone in the Bush administration who played a role in the mass slaughter of innocent civilians should be imprisoned for the rest of their miserable, pathetic and pitiful small lives.

  219. Torbach says:

    Murdering, or suggesting murder against elected politicians is not redressing grievance because assassinations is not how justice is dispensed under the Billl of rights.

    Don’t make the mistake of confusing the 1st amendment with absolute freedom. Just because you have a right to not be censored, or peaceably assemble doesn’t absolve from committing a crime. I do believe threats towards, say, the commander in chief, (or elects) who ironically is their job is to defend that freedom some of these comments are insisting result in prosecution.

    look into the shield laws for journalists; Branzburg v. Hayes was a 5:4 against these rights. A reporter has some rights to keep sources/info anonymous or away from authorities to continue doing their job, but can still be prosecuted. If they are aware of a crime, they have a duty to the people that would be harmed. Judith Miller went to jail for not giving away her source on the WMD story that was echoed by the Pentagon.

    She is not the law yet was found in contempt of court for not disclosing her source. Disclosure of her source would have meant her career and thus the freedom of the public, (for which the press is surrogate) to obtain and exchange information (hence freedom of speech).

  220. William says:

    You can say “fire”, horseshoe, granny, or anything you want. There is no word police. However if you knew or should hve known saying something would result in injury or death of someone, you can be held responsable. It is actions not words that are important. Did this man intend to act dagerously? Did he know or should have known others would act dagerously as a direct result of his words?

    Words are not illegal, though they be horrible, shocking, disgusting or whatever.It is actions which are important and actions only. The minute we start banning words and taking awy rights only on the speaking (typing) of a word or words, then we create our very own hell and we deserve to live in it.

  221. EndTheFed says:

    I was under the impression that there is no need for a license when it is a right. Is the 2nd amendment a right or a privilege (rhetorical)?

  222. Paul Pechonis says:

    I wonder if someone ratted on him or if this just one more example of an internet police witch hunt. The erosion or our first amendment rights is a priority for the forces seeking to oppress us. Whether we like or dislike what was said, we cannot allow our freedom of speech to be challenged, if we do it becomes a stepping stone towards a big brother policed state. Never mind, it has already happened.

    1. Michael says:

      The Arlington police did say they found the post while reading a comic book website written by Laura Hudson who excels in out of context writing. So you could say it was both.

      1. Paul Pechonis says:

        interesting reading material for the police, wouldnt you say.

  223. Jeff Adamson says:

    Permit? You people need a PERMIT to own a gun? Oh, that’s right, you live in Bahsten, Massachuesetts…you have no 2nd Amendment there.

  224. Chuck says:

    All speech is protected!! Don’t you morons have anything better to do than try so hard to shift the blame from the person responsible?? Gun Control is hitting what your aiming at!

  225. MDM says:

    That, “Bang Bang” applies in airports, where there is an implicit surrender of rights in order to board a aircraft. Stupid remarks, even yours, are protected in ordinary conversation and publication.

    The question in this instance would seem to hinge on whether a credible threat was made. The Magic 8-ball says: “No.”

    Grab some popcorn. The real fun starts when someone reads the Heller decision and realizes that Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 and Section 242 specify that the police department has just committed Federal felonies.

  226. T Fries says:

    Freedom of speech is dead.

    He did not make a direct threat unless YOU choose to perceive it that way.

    Freedom of speech is dead.

    Hail victory.

  227. RAY says:

    GEORGE CARLIN PRESENTED A DISCOURSE ON WORDS THAT YOU CAN NOT SAY ON TELEVISION. BUT, THAT WAS WAY BEFORE THE TIME OF MANY OF YOU. OR, MAYBE YOU BELEIVE ANY LANGUAGE IS SUITABLE TO LITTLE KIDS. AND, YOU PROBABLY THINK RAP IS ACTUALLY MUSIC.

  228. BB says:

    I can’t say that I don’t think that this man was somewhat irresponsible. But if some our “prominent political leaders” can publicly advocate terrorism and suggest that one who they don’t like should be assassinated. then they should be held accountable also. We don’t need the Clinton, Palin, etc. mentality in our country. If they are allowed to get away with irresponsible statements then he should also.

  229. Do not understand says:

    Its really strange that this person is targeted for his comments, when everyday these elected people are depriving average person the right to live, the only difference here is the weapon of choice they do it by economic deprivation and manuipulation.These politicians threaten other nations and even have started wars with false base and plenty blood on there hands.
    What this has shown that we do live in dictatorial land its a police state. People this will get worse the rich and powerful will continue to control regulate to there advantage, the police serve the elite not average person the elite control there pay checks., Yes police do capture some bad people however if they focus there attention on these rich & political people they will also see the blatant criminal activity in plain view. Sorry that USA is now in hands of the powerful greedy & oppressive people. A lot of us do not want death and destruction but thats ultimately with human behavor sad but true just live for the moment and hope for change where peace and a fair life will be available for everyone.

  230. lasisblog says:

    New York Law School’s legal journalism blog recently published a piece on the legal issues behind the seizure of this retailer’s guns. Maybe he shouldn’t have been penalized for his views – take a look: http://www.lasisblog.com/2011/02/22/dangerous-threat-or-politically-challenged/

  231. pewPhyPeBef says:

    die Volle Geschmacklosigkeit

  232. geonerstiem says:

    thanks

  233. BuyTrafRu says:

    Уважаемые пользователи!
    Мы рады сообщить вам об открытии новой универсальной системы покупки Clickunder трафика http://buytraf.ru/. Добавляйтесь и начинайте зарабатывать на Вашем сайте прямо сейчас. Мы будем рады сотрудничать с Вами. Цена за 1000 хостов (BodyClick) – 1.7$ за страну Россия
    1.2$ за страны Великобритания, США
    1.0$ за страны Белоруссия, Нидерланды, Украина, Казакстан, Азербайджан, Грузия, Бельгия, Германия, Киргизия, Латвия, Польша, Узбекистан, Бельгия, Болгария, Китай, Испания, Польша
    0.8$ за все остальные страны

  234. легкие металлоконструкции says:

    Eto dolzhno byt’ v citatnike

  235. recessed lighting wholesale says:

    Oh my goodness! an excellent article dude. Thank you Nonetheless I will be experiencing trouble with ur rss . Don’t know why Struggling to sign up to it. Perhaps there is any person finding identical rss difficulty? Anyone who knows kindly respond. Thnkx

  236. Veronica says:

    Hey,

    Wonderful post! I like this info.

  237. Kiera Hain says:

    Your writing is very motivational and you really took command of the subject. This article is a must read. It was a pleasure to read this article I am look forward to your future articles.

  238. appliances repair says:

    This article on boston.cbslocal.com gives the light in which we can observe the reality.

  239. proviron says:

    I greatly appreciate every one of the informative read on boston.cbslocal.com. I most certainly will spread the phrase about your site with people. Cheers.

  240. kupyterr says:

    http://buyduramale.org Duramale ,Duramale is an Herbal Remedy. Long Lasting Results.Order Now!

  241. Quinn car insurance quote england says:

    Loved ones are very important part of our everyday living. It will help people in increasing our character. It also helps us inside surrounding our life. This teaches people the worthiness of love, devotion …Ubezpieczenie zdrowotne w Uk

  242. Joe says:

    Leave Massachusetts, just move outg of Massachusetts. There is no real freedom anymore in Massachusetts. Join many thousands wh have mved out of Taxachusetts, and have a better freer life.

  243. Air Berlin Fluege Billigflug Tuifly says:

    Useful Stuff,knee single hard direct top life variety nobody except attack examination daughter alright let early generally thanks foreign file equipment come once parliament thus nor rapidly leave available investigation survey simple understand hospital war thanks yet already claim second obviously admit deep criminal afraid switch grant call first odd enterprise mother manager than director regional write burn detail management wonderful cheap anything procedure sleep question respect great staff turn traditional towards give burn force teaching advice receive enjoy its plate contact heart per star examine cos please dinner constant himself

  244. real estate,real estate listings,real estate foreclosures,remax,real estate value,commercial real estate,real estate careers,google real estate,real estate companies says:

    I’ll right away clutch your rss feed as I can’t find your e-mail subscription hyperlink or newsletter service. Do you have any? Please allow me recognize so that I may just subscribe. Thanks.

  245. live channels online says:

    You understand thus considerably when it comes to this topic, made me in my view imagine it from so many various angles. Its like men and women are not interested until it is one thing to do with Girl gaga! Your personal stuffs great. All the time deal with it up!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

More From CBS Boston

Summer of Savings
Download Weather App

Listen Live