McIntire, a 19-year-old student at Boston’s University of Massachusetts, appeared in federal court Friday and has been charged with one count of unlawful possession of an unregistered destructive device and one count of malicious damage by fire of any property used in interstate commerce.

https://archive.ph/PI9fY

    • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      America does have a greater than zero percentage of spineless bootlickers, more interested in upvotes and likes than their own freedom, unfortunately.

    • arrow74@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Plenty of fiction media describes how you should treat collaborators

    • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      him* possibly them*

      -The article says the suspects full name is “Owen McIntire” being the only hint to suspect gender.

      • Secret Music@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I kinda both like and dislike that something as arbitrary as long hair and no beard can cause this kind of debate. In the '80s, the assumption probably would’ve just been that they’re a fan of hair metal lol.

        I like it because it means that it’s a lot easier to bend gender norms (and be seen as bending gender norms) than I thought and it also just proves how full of shit people are when they claim they “can tell” and that at least half of their perception of the world is dictated by their culture.

        I dislike it for the same reasons though. Because it means that this world is still a lot more puritanical and prone to pearl clutching than I thought. It means that boys with long hair who don’t like sports are going to be getting beaten up and bullied for being ‘gay’ or whatever. It means that sightly butch women won’t be able to use public bathrooms without judgmental, psychotic people wanting to make that woman’s genitals their own business. It means that I’m living in a world with people who still think in terms of long hair = girl, who haven’t ever expanded their minds or considered that their own cultural norms don’t apply to everyone in the slightest.

  • peoplebeproblems@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    They really are this dumb.

    They think this will discourage targeted destruction of an oligarch? Decades for worthless cars?

    If you get decades for that- make sure to get the rest of the lot. Bonus points for for a factory.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I mean, arson itself is usually punished very harshly because it can easily get out of control and kill people (and most of those laws predate modern fire safety standards). It might be a good idea to look for alternative ways to vandalise Tesla’s that don’t have harsh punishments associated with them. Or if you do, try not to get caught.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        It might be a good idea to look for alternative ways to vandalise Tesla’s that don’t have harsh punishments associated with them.

        One popular method of destroying cybertrucks is simply treating them like a normal car. Perhaps Owen should have vandalized their neighbor’s car by giving it a good rinse? That tends to brick these dumpsters

        • jonne@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m talking about why arson in general has harsher penalties compared to other forms of property crime, I’m not talking about specific instances.

      • Encephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Tough talk from a keyboard warrior. I expect the next act of civil disobedience to be tagged “this one is for Lemmy fam” or you’re full of it.

        Nothing but false bravado from russian subversive operators as far as I see.

        • RedPostItNote@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Why would you ask someone to do this? I like this place. I’d rather not see that happen.

          Human beings are being pushed too far right now in America. I would have a healthier fear of it than you seem to.

          • Encephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Conversely to shut them up. It’s all impotent frustration that isn’t going to pan out to shit. Real gradeschoolers in the playground vibes.

            I wouldn’t call your fear healthy until it is about something happening. Right now you’re empowering their BS tbh so some self-reflection might be in order on your part.

          • Encephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            So, you’re saying only incompetent people espouse violence on social media? I’d agree with that except the person I’m criticizing is not american so I cannot in good conscience presume incompetence.

  • Formfiller@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Too bad he wasn’t a right wing kid shooting liberal protestors to death because he’d be hailed as a hero and given awards and tv appearances.

    • muusemuuse@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      You know what? I know this was a joke but this is a fantastic idea. A way to protest that even the old and weak can take part in. What are you going to do, outlaw feeding birds? Good luck with that.

  • WFloyd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I used to drive on State Line past that lot full of Teslas daily, always saw a ton of Cybertrucks just sitting. Once Musk started getting so much (more) hate I figured it was a matter of time before someone torched it.

    Also, I always find it funny how it’s totally just a road that divides the states, I’d drive to work and be “in” Missouri and drive home “in” Kansas lol

    • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s honestly better if that inventory sits on the lot unpurchased. It costs them money to store it and it looks bad for them having old inventory around months or even years out of date. Torching it just gives them a nice insurance payout.

    • w3dd1e@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I work in KS and live in MO. Love paying income tax in two states! /s

  • Eldritch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I really don’t like jury duty. And would do plenty to get out of it. If I got called for this one. I would happily nullify it as hard as I could.

        • hddsx@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          No it’s not. Discussing nullification would get be booted off a jury. However, if considering all the facts, I were to vote not guilty, it would not.

          • blandfordforever@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Think whatever you like but jury nullification is when a juror votes “not guilty” when they actually think someone is guilty of a law that they disagree with.

            • hddsx@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Okay. Apparently you think I’m fighting you for no reason. Is it nullification? Yes. Don’t call it that. Don’t talk about that. Because it will get you booted off a jury.

              • Necroscope0@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                On the plus side mentioning Jury Nullification during the selection process on a case you do not want anything to do with and they will cut you so fast your head will be spinning. Just knowing about it makes you a threat to the prosecutors.

              • blandfordforever@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Haha, I mean, we’re definitely arguing over semantics but you’re saying something equivalent to, “No, don’t eat ice cream. Put some in your mouth and then swallow it, but don’t eat. We never eat.”

                • meco03211@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Except the point is that if you say you would eat ice cream, you don’t get the ice cream. Legally speaking as a juror you are supposed to uphold the law. If the judge or prosecutor has any inkling you might nullify, they’ll boot your ass out of the pool in a hurry.

      • Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Only if nullification was not a possibility. Nullification sends a much stronger and important message. Namely we don’t give a fuck if they’re guilty or not. Because this is a bullshit show trial that does not have Justice in mind. Yes I’m aware prosecutors often ask for the largest applicable sentence possible eventually negotiating down. That doesn’t make this any less bullshit.

  • 52fighters@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m not a lawyer but the feds claiming it as a federal case because cars could be used in interstate commerce seems lame. Should be a Missouri case, not a federal case.

      • SSTF@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I loves me Wickard v. Filburn which held that a farm not doing interstate commerce could be regulated by the Commerce Clause because the lack of commerce affected interstate commerce.

    • SSTF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Oh boy you are late to the party. The interstate commerce clause has been twisted for decades to basically allow a Federal hook for anything to exist.

      In this case however, I think the Destructive Device charge alone would have sufficed as the hook.

  • Chozo@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    How can you possibly blame this kid when Cybertrucks have been known to self-immolate? They have faulty batteries that catch on fire left and right; the rustbucket was likely already on fire before he got there.