University Threatens Criminal Charges Over Firefly Poster

Julianking93

New member
May 16, 2009
14,715
0
0
This is why Universities (American ones in particular) outright piss me off.
They do nothing but demand alike thinking. No one can challenge authority or even be in the slightest bit politically incorrect or else something like this will happen.
Funniest part of it all is that colleges all over boast about how diverse they are but won't even allow a simple fucking poster into the classroom.
Sure, I get that it can be seen as offensive but damn it... the world is full of offensive material. People are offended all the time but it doesn't take something like this to be rid of it. Just get away from what offends you. I'm sure there were plenty of people in that classroom who appreciated the Firefly reference.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
I'm glad my own university is quite lenient on that front. As long as you aren't posting racist-hate posters or porn on the door, it generally flies. Hell, the entire COMS-English dept has pro-gaming posters on the doors to their offices with more "radical" things than that Firefly poster.
 

King Toasty

New member
Oct 2, 2010
1,527
0
0
Redlin5 said:
This seems like a waste of government money. It was clearly a quote and not an actual message to students, threatening them...

[sub]Never seen Firefly.[/sub]
Did... did you just say that?

NEVER seen Firefly? I... I feel so sorry for you.

OT: Yeah, stupid as hell. The university is legally covered, though.
 

King Toasty

New member
Oct 2, 2010
1,527
0
0
Pandaman1911 said:
Seems logical, what with all the school shootings and whatnot. Better safe than sorry. A shame he didn't think stuff through. You know. Like professors are supposed to do?
"All the school shootings"? They aren't exactly common.
 

Ganji

New member
Mar 30, 2011
18
0
0
Are you sure it wasn't a middle school or something that that happened in? Becuase that sounds like the kind of thing that goes down at a middle school.
o_O
 

Pandaman1911

Fuzzy Cuddle Beast
Jan 3, 2011
601
0
0
King Toasty said:
Pandaman1911 said:
Seems logical, what with all the school shootings and whatnot. Better safe than sorry. A shame he didn't think stuff through. You know. Like professors are supposed to do?
"All the school shootings"? They aren't exactly common.
They're a hell of a lot more common than they should be.
 

sleeky01

New member
Jan 27, 2011
342
0
0
Staskala said:
Beryl77 said:
Oh and what in the world is that and why would a university need something like that?
campus threat assessment team
As far as I know, those were established in a knee-jerk reaction after Vtech.
Although I assumed it was for protection against, you know, actual violence not posters that mention "violent acts" or some shit.
Quite the bastardization, even if the idea was somewhat dubious in the first place.
For those who might not know what Staskala is refering to when he's mentioning "Vtech":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_massacre

EDIT: *sigh* Ninja'd again. :(
 
Jun 5, 2010
225
0
0
Lug100 said:
*sigh* yet another news story that makes me lose hope in humanity.... <img src=http://s3.amazonaws.com/kym-assets/photos/images/original/000/126/314/3cd8a33a.png?1306264975>
DAMMIT YOU BEAT ME TO IT. I HATE YOU.
 

Falcon123

New member
Aug 9, 2009
314
0
0
Am I the only one who has some really hilarious images pop through their heads when they read the phrase "Threat Assessment Team"? I mean really, what does that group do when there aren't posters with somewhat vague descriptions of violence to take down? Does the Justice League rent them out to determine whether a super villain has done something that is enough of a threat to warrant Superhero intervention? Or do they just wander the streets stopping every few steps to determine the threat levels of various neighborhood activities and the odds that little Susie will scrape her leg while running down the street? I want answers people!
 

kidd25

New member
Jun 13, 2011
361
0
0
Sparrow said:
You can insult me. You can insult my country. Hell, you can insult my family. But, when you insult the Captain... you've just stepped over the line, buddy.
hold on, this needs to be saved. Also am i the only one that thought of captain jack?
 

Laser Priest

A Magpie Among Crows
Mar 24, 2011
2,013
0
0
Bastards questioning Malcolm Reynolds...

And this is a fucking university. Do they honestly think that a reference to violence is enough to send people on a killing spree?
 

godofallu

New member
Jun 8, 2010
1,663
0
0
First off THERE IS NO UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN! It's UW-Shoolname. For example I go to the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh.

Second off the teacher should have been smart enough to know a poster with a quote about killing isn't school acceptable. This is Wisconsin, we hold ourselves to higher standards then that. I love Firefly and I love that quote, have it on a poster in my own room. Still isn't the sort of thing you place in a school.

Third off if I was the cops I would handle the thing the exact same way.
 

Saerain

New member
Mar 24, 2009
78
0
0
I'm somewhat surprised that most seem to be firmly on the professor's side. Seems like a failure by all involved, and if you ask me, him most of all. What a child.
 

SilverUchiha

New member
Dec 25, 2008
1,604
0
0
I never got into firefly, but this is just plain censorship and infringing on the rights of people. Could they be concluded as threats? Sure, in a vague and illogical kind of way. Regardless, these posters did nothing to offend anyone or anything like that. This is just silly.
 

-Dragmire-

King over my mind
Mar 29, 2011
2,821
0
0
I once called myself the President of FIRE... for some reason people started avoiding me, might have had something to do with my lucky lighter I obsessive compulsively lit every couple seconds though...

OT: Odd reasoning for a post secondary education institution to have even if it is a knee jerk reaction to the Vtech massacre. Maybe they just really hate Firefly/being called fascists... or they're retarded, that's also a possibility.
 

kannibus

New member
Sep 21, 2009
989
0
0
And so we see why tons of kids coming out of universities these days have such a detachment with the realities of life...

Just to be clear, I'm on the prof's side. Jesus, what the hell is this UW thinking? Protecting their fragile little minds from the fact that death and beatdowns happen?

For the record, I didn't pay out my ass for four and a bit years of being babysat.
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
Noelveiga said:
Incidentally, on any legal discussion, whoever uses more instances of "and/or" and "willing/able" is always the biggest asshole. That's a verifiable fact.

Baresark said:
snip
I am fine that America is not the best in any of these regards. But people often times point to the tool being the problem, that is verifiable fact. America has a very diverse group of "citizens". Some with more morals or scruples than others. But to just point to a tool and say that is the problem is just ignorant. If there were no guns, then there would be other ways that people commit violent acts against others. I get that people don't like guns, but where I'm from, no one shoots anyone with guns they have. So, from my perspective, guns aren't the problem, but the people who get their hands on them are. I am a carpenter, I use my hammer every day just about. If people went on a wild hammer killing spree, would it make sense for them to outlaw hammers? No, it wouldn't. Just as with this, just because a few members of a society break the rules and don't respect life at all, doesn't mean that the people who don't participate in such acts need to be punished or have things taken away from them. That is kindergarten politics and I can't agree with it.

It's stupid how people regard some kind of competition about who is more/less violent as an argument. In all instances of this, it has more to do with social moorings or lack there of that is the main problem. It's called an "ah ha" statistic simply because it, in and of itself, is not telling in any way or does not pathologically show the main problem. You would seriously need to look at a lot more than just gun violence to determine the root of the problem in a society where guns are available.



It's the gross, ridiculous, absolutely offensive devotion to just lack of perspective.
It has nothing at all to do with lack of perspective, just different perspective. It most likely makes no difference to you, but there is lots of empirical data backing up the positives of an armed society. I'm not afraid to say, more than that which backs up the opposite perspective. But, people who like to make sweeping and "morally good" social decisions have never needed any kind of data to back up their points, only the nice warm feelings that their decisions leave them with at night. But from a practical perspective, it's not guns that are the problem, it's the members of any society who do not respect life that are the problem.

When everything is said and done, you want to look at a few numbers and say, "nope, your wrong". No one denies there are problems in any place, but people who do not live in America have zero perspective on this. I know that my brother has had to defend his family from criminals. I know that as shocking as it may seem, I don't know anyone who has been on the receiving end of gun violence. Nor do I know anyone who is legitimately afraid of being shot, despite the fact that so many people are armed. Like I said, I doubt you have any social perspective at all about America.

Also, I'm not saying any of this angry or spitefully, I'm just saying that I don't know about the social problem afflicting the UK, Germany, Iraq, Zimbabwe, etc. I can only gather some data from the few sources I have, but I also do not sit and say what is socially wrong with those places. There are all kinds of things you can learn from data. Economics of an area, finding out the the laws that govern an area of the world also tends to be easy. You can find out what people shop for, their GDP, the most popular car, etc., all from data. But you cannot define the social afflictions of a society based on data like this.

Just as a quick point. The violent gun statistics come almost completely from city areas where guns aren't allowed. I'll digress that point though, and say that clearly the social problems afflicting America in regards to gun violence are concentrated there, with that common lifestyle. And I won't say it's caused by poverty or any such thing, but I will say that people who lead lives in those conditions have a social factor in their lives that keeps them impoverished and make them regard life as less important, they think it's ok to take things from others. And this is not a blanket statement for all inner city poor, but it is a statement of fact that whatever is leading them to those conditions in their lives is also leading to gun violence.
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
syrus27 said:
Baresark said:
That is nice "AH HA" statistic you state there. But that is not an indicator of anything. We do have the third largest population on the planet. And law abiding legally armed citizens don't go around shooting people.
The point of course is whether the poster could be conceived as a threat, I never claimed that Americans were overly violent or went around hooting people, only that these facts could legitimately give people worries.
My problem is simply that people can make anything seem like what they want it to in regards to this. Some other social factors may be things like, is the person recognizable? Is the common student likely to be familiar with the content of the poster? People can make anything seem like the slant they want it to, which is my sole problem with this whole sordid affair. Animal rights activists can make the precious poster with kitten holding onto the limb out to be an advertisement to the torture of kittens. Socially speaking, the line has to be drawn or things will just keep getting censored at the whims of a few people.

And it's like I said in my original post. They could have been civilized and voiced their concerns with the professor. After that, if he had not seen their point, then they could take drastic actions. But to take it down and then threaten him with violence and legal consequences is ridiculous. That is the issue here. It started at a poster, and it ended with threats and now he is under review by a threat assessment committee. It's a shame that it turned out this way. As I mentioned previously, this is not the first instance of such behavior by college administrations.