Discussion in 'NFL Football Forum' started by Quest4SevenHomie, Sep 6, 2019.
It's astounding to see the mental gymnastics some participate in for Brown haha.
You have to admire the creativity.
It is not a threat to communicate with someone unless you actually threaten them.
If he texted her hey I saw the article I don’t agree. Would that be a threat? Obviously not. So just communicating with her clearly doesn’t equal threat. So the question remains what in that communication equals threat?
Why did he include her? Probably because he was pissed off at what she said in the article and disagrees with it.
She invited the contact by speaking derogatorily about him in a National magazine article, did she not?
And now you are showing exactly what my point is. You are calling it a threat because you are making the extraordinary assumption that the only reason he would include her is to threaten her. That’s exactly the point. It’s only a threat if you add your belief of what the motivation is AND something in the nature of a threat is made. It wasn’t.
My immediate reaction to the kid's photo was he's done.
To me, it was Not a subtle message.
Could they have ridden it out?
Maybe, but I am already exhausted from it
on my couch 180 miles from Gillette
Has anyone defended him in sports media?
Volume would be 10X if AB was still here
Part of every pre-game & post game story
and in the daily talking head rotation.
A hate revival meet, especially if they play up to potential.
07 all over again.
It was already boiling over
BB did 4 things with the press for the week, 3 of them became about AB
Finally, the team does not need him, nor does anyone really know the man
Started with strike 1 on day 3, then two more issues in the first week.
He had to go.
But it could have been a blast.
Was worth the shot
Hope AB does not become a tragic figure
Sure seems to be playing that way.
If it was a threat what did he threaten her to not do and what were the consequences he threatened to occur if she did?
Without those answers it’s not a threat.
I am in shock people are still defending this guy. It's over. Kraft thought it was wrong, Belichick thought it was wrong, they cut him. He's stupid for doing it, without that this whole thing dies down and people are moving on to the next shiny object.
The answer to that is NO. Clearly and with no hesitations.
No threat here. I'm just posting a picture of a gun in this thread for no reason. Context never matters and a threat can't be implied it has to be overtly spoken, right?
Edit: I should probably clarify - A) I'm not threatening you B) I don't own a gun, I'm just trying to give an example of how a threat can be implied and not stated.
Then you are wrong.
She went to a national magazine to publicly air a dispute with him.
He responded somewhat privately.
Once she went public of course she invited a response.
Correct. A picture of a gun is not a threat. Now you are starting to get it.
Perhaps because you lack the intelligence to follow.
Have a great night Andy!
I think AB has NPD.
We went from AB positive to AB negative.
You have made a point that I think is important to discuss FAR beyond the very narrow and shallow world of Antonio Brown.
What IS intimidating or threatening email in the internet age. Is it threatening if I am a white supremacist who emails the first black student body president at American University pictures of nooses, blazing crosses and white supremacist harangues. Is it only "free speech" to do something similar to a Jewish family...or an Asian family.....or a Mexican family.
So the greater issue here is what constitutes free speech, and what is harassment and threatening behavior. Was the Charlotte white power demonstration free speech, or was it just a way to intimidate minorities? Is it appropriate to allow Hitler (were he alive) or his current proxies to speak on college campuses?
I wish it was an easy yes or no answer, but we all know it isn't. And JUST because the discussion is hard, doesn't mean it doesn't need to be discussed, (though probably not here. ). The real problem in the country right now is that very fact, a refusal to have the will to discuss hard topics without just yelling one side of the issue at the other, with the LOUDEST voice winning (or in our case, the guy with the most money).
All the talk here about whether it was threatening or not revolves around this central question, only the impact of the answer this society will ultimately end up going with, will be a LOT more impact on our society than what a turd who plays football well did.
I think he's definitely unwell in at least one way. Honestly if the sexual assault allegations are not true then all I feel is sad for the guy because he's crashing and burning in pretty awful fashion.
GOD ****ING DAMNIT MODS BAN THIS MAN IMMEDIATELY
I’ll give you my opinion on each.
That would be threatening from anyone to anyone. There is a well accepted meaning of those images.
I think those are examples of free speech. The Charlotte example though is changed by the fact that violence ensued. Free speech and a violent act while exercising free speech should be separated.
My understanding of free speech is that all ideas are treated equally regardless of how good or bad they are. In other words in you ban hitler from speaking it opens the door to banning MLK. A judgment about the quality of the speech causes abuses.
This has always been a problem. It’s the nature of our system. I don’t see anything the founding fathers did that encouraged anything in government to be easy.
The dilemma I see is that the argument is framed for the public by the media (and to a lesser extent the politicians) and those in front of a microphone are almost always the furthest from the middle of the road so the debate centers on the extremes instead if he middle ground.
To me it centers on whether you can take what he did and prove it to be a threat. I don’t see how you can without making huge assumptions that cannot be proven.
Media didn't play me at all. As soon as I read what he did, I knew it wasn't going to age well, because it was threatening and worse yet, it was toward a woman. People who get out and understand how the real world works understand that was a threat and that you don't send text messages like that to a woman, because it's going to be called a threat. They don't need the media to explain it to them. People with no life and a lot of time to kill will spend hours on the internet attempting to troll anyone who will listen though. If you actually need someone to explain to you why that was a threatening, stalking text message, I suggest you try getting some UV exposure more than once a decade. Your delusion is unparalleled.
I would guess all of the allegations are true. I would guess he is an even worse person than what he is being portrayed as.
Separate names with a comma.