Blog post prompts police to seize weapons from Arlington businessman.
Remember Travis Corcoran, the owner of HeavyInk.com who lamented that the man who shot Representative Gabrielle Giffords didn't kill her? Well, he's under investigation by the Arlington police department for his comments.

Police have seized a “large amount” of weapons and ammunition from an Arlington businessman while investigating if comments he allegedly made online were intended as a threat to U.S. Congressmen and members of the U.S. Senate.

Arlington Police Chief Frederick Ryan has also suspended the firearms license of Travis Corcoran, 39, who runs the online comic book business HeavyInk.com in Arlington.

Police Captain Robert Bongiorno said Monday that police suspended Corcoran’s firearms license on the grounds of “suitability” pending the results of an investigation into whether a comment Corcoran allegedly made online was intended as a threat in reference to the Jan. 8 shooting in Arizona that left six people dead and 13 wounded.

After U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head in the rampage, Arlington Police Captain Robert Bongiorno said police received information that Corcoran posted a comment online saying “one down 534 to go” in reference to Giffords and the other 534 members of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate.

Bongiorno said police found the comment reposted on ComicsAlliance.com in a story that said Corcoran first made the comment in a blog. Bongiorno said Corcoran has since redacted the comments, but police consider the threat to be credible until they can prove otherwise. Police have also contacted federal law enforcement agencies about the comment.

Corcoran, who did not immediately return a phone call requesting comment Tuesday, has not been charged with a crime, Bongiorno said.

Corcoran surrendered his weapons and ammunition to police at his home on Evergreen Lane in Arlington last week after his firearms license was suspended, police said.

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

Source.

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

chikane
2011-01-20 06:31 pm UTC (link)

That's a logical fallacy, though: A lot of crimes should not be persecutable if that argument had any merit.

The reason we have courts is to check things like this and make sure the cases are handled right, and correct it if they aren't.

Over here, we have two paragraphs that specifically address threats and death threats, and allow a punishment of up to 3 years depending on context. Threats made in a not-serious manner tend to be dismissed in court, minor threats get a fee (usually about 2000 Euros) and only the really big ones get prison sentences.

Still, the law exists, and oddly isn't used to shut up innocent commenters (who usually don't make death threats in the first place, anyway - I see no reason to wish death on anyone, not even on a war criminal like Bush)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	cmdr_zoom 2011-01-20 06:41 pm UTC (link)
	persecutable prosecution != persecution (My grammar note for the day.) (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	chikane 2011-01-21 11:47 am UTC (link)
	GAH. Thank you, I am never sure which of the two I should use. Stupid second language. I hope I can remember it this time. (Reply to this)(Parent)

ladyvorkosigan
2011-01-21 05:13 pm UTC (link)

I'm not saying there shouldn't be any laws on death threats (and I have no problem with the prosecution discussed here). But the fact that the courts can throw out unreasonable incidences of prosecution doesn't justify vague laws. Even if the courts were perfect at doing this (which they're not), the mere fact of being investigated or prosecuted is chilling, can absorb incredible time and resources, and can be traumatic on a personal level. This is especially true where certain communities and populations have a long history of being treated inequitably by law enforcement. Again, not saying there shouldn't be any laws; I'm saying it's not a simple matter to define what constitutes a prosecutable threat and leaving it to prosecutorial and law enforcement discretion causes a huge number of problems.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -