Ok, the ACLU is totally over the edge

A 7-the grade student in Rhode Island wrote and essay in which he mentioned wishing to do harm to the President. (Note that there are already several versions of what the student actually wrote, descriptions vary from "unspecified violence" to "destruction" - and yesterday the AP story specifically said the essay was a "death threat"- but that article has been amended). Local police were informed, they in turn notified the Secret Service. The student has not been arrested.

Threatening (even in vague terms) the President is a felony. Period. The Secret Service ALWAYS investigates threats to the President.

The ACLU has started blustering about the young lad's First Amendment Rights. The Reuters folks really went to town quoting those folks. But the local paper has a little better grip on reality than Reuters or the ACLU. Local reaction here.

Excuse me, freedom of speech does not equal freedom from responsibility. Nor does it give one a right to make a death threat. This is the basic "right to swing your fist" argument.

It is also a very, very well known fact that making any threat against the President WILL get you at minimum investigated, and quite often arrested.

You do not have a first amendment right to threaten anyone with death or even bodily harm. Don't believe it? Try making such a threat in public in front of a cop.

Incidently, Reuters is portraying this poor youngster as only a child, around 12-13 years old. The implication, of course, is that a child is harmless.

My 13 year old daughter can shoot a 3-inch group into the 10 ring at 25 yards using a 9mm pistol. Child does not equal harmless. (And would be daters of my daughter, please take note of that fact).......