On Saturday afternoon, the Michigan State Police became aware of a chilling message posted to a Russian “confessions” website.
“On October 4th, I’m going to the University of Michigan and blow every single woman I see with an AR-15,” the message began. “There is a violent pro-male revolution coming and you people better get ready for it.”
The would-be shooter said that he (I’m assuming it was a he) was inspired in part by incel idol Elliot Rodger — though he misspelled his name — and by the incel who carried out the recent shooting in Plymouth, England which left 5 innocent people dead, including a three year-old girl. “I watch (sic) Plymouth happen and I had a smile on my face,” he wrote. “It was the first time I smiled in years.”
Here’s a screenshot of the message, which has been removed from the site. (I upped the contrast to make it more readable.)
Luckily — for us if not for him — the would-be shooter was so derelict in his internet security that authorities were able to locate him in the real world almost immediately.
Not so luckily for us, the FBI dismissed the threat as an empty one, and there’s no indication he was arrested.
According to the University of Michigan police in a press release,
The University of Michigan Police Department, with the assistance of the FBI, has identified an out-of-state residence from which the threat was posted. FBI agents interviewed a resident of the home, who they assessed to be responsible for the message.
Based on the investigation, there is nothing to indicate imminent harm to our community.
In another press release, they insisted that
[T]here is no current nor pending threat to the community from the individual responsible for the post. During the interview, agents assessed the individual had neither the means nor the opportunity to carry out the threat.
And the threat itself wasn’t enough for an arrest? Apparently not.
According to FindLaw,
Federal law prohibits transmitting “any threat to injure the person of another” and penalizes such threats with five years in prison. But not all threats are created equally, and the Supreme Court has determined that only “true threats” can be punished. This generally means that the threat must be credible and specific enough that a reasonable person would be threatened.
I guess they decided it wasn’t a “true threat” because, I don’t know, he didn’t come to the door carrying an AR-15 and a map of the University of Michigan campus.
Let’s just hope he never has the means and the opportunity to carry out a similar threat in the future.
Follow me on Mastodon.
Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.
We Hunted the Mammoth relies on support from you, its readers, to survive. So please donate here if you can, or at David-Futrelle-1 on Venmo.
@Surplus
I realize that this is talking to a wall, but part of the reason for your paranoia seems to be confusing “ought” with “is.”
Whenever you encounter an obstacle, you post long screeds explaining that since you did nothing to deserve the problem, therefore the problem should not exist, therefore it MUST have been caused by some malefactor deliberately targeting you.
This is… not logically sound. Yes, things should work smoothly. They often don’t, with no malefactor necessary, especially not one deliberately targeting one of the many people affected by such problems.
Because contrary to your common complaints, things are NOT easy for other people. All kinds of stuff happens to us that we don’t deserve, but instead of dreaming up paranoid fantasies of persecution we deal with them. There is no “magic button that will make things as easy for you as for everyone esle” (as you often demand here), because things are not easy for everyone else, either.
I personally did nothing to deserve kidney failure, but here I am. Nobody gave it to me, and the countless other people with kidney failure are dealing with the same crap I am.
This is because the world is not fair. Most of us learned this by the time we were ten.
“And the threat itself wasn’t enough for an arrest? Apparently not.”
My guess is, they found out he does have a keyboard but doesn’t have a gun. (Though I don’t know for sure, of course.)
@Surplus
It’s normal where I live for students at colleges and universities, and even some secondary schools, to have student ID cards on branded lanyards. The ID cards act as door access cards and library cards too. It can also be used to prove student status for using the university/college buses if you live out of town or getting your student discount on the normal bus services. Every time you enrol you get a new updated card. Some places put the student’s preferred name and pronouns on too, if they want them, to allow for the changes people go through as they mature.
What ‘basic privacy implications’? The schools issue the cards. The schools already have all the student’s details. The cards just have a photo and name, it’s the RFID chip provides the access. When not on college or university property it’s common practice for students here to turn their cards around so the standard blurb (college address, how to use the library, what to do if you lose your card, that sort of stuff) is visible but not their names. Nobody goes round demanding to see IDs and there’s no ‘police state atmosphere’. Nothing sinister about it, and, while Grimsby is grim, it’s hardly the authoritarian hellscape you’re trying to conjure up.
@ North Sea Sparkly Dragon
I like Grimsby. And now I think I understands your nym! But the sea is pretty amazing from that part of the world. It’s like the epitome of “Brrr; I’m glad I live on the land.” And also you’re named after Odin! (possibly).
You even have a cool song!
@Allandrel
I’m so sorry to hear that. I have massive respect for people dealing with hard, hard situations. All best wishes.
@surplus
my college has id card we carry around to get access to a lot of things. and most universe in the Untied states respect a trans or nonbinary identity. you don’t have to have your “legal” name on the card. you can have it set up so that your preferred name is on the card and roster for the school. (yes, even in conservative states like Kansas)
also. sometimes life just isn’t fair. it’s not a matter of deserve or not. I don’t I deserve to have all the fertility issues that I am. I don’t think I deserve to have multiple miscarriages. but these are the cards that get dealt to us by life and no one is dealing you a bad hand. You have just as much problems and struggles as everyone else.
@Allandrel:
“Is-ought” distinction arguments are applicable if the cause of a problem is a force of nature, such as a storm, or volcano, or most medical issues, etc.
They are not applicable if the cause stems instead from human choices, because humans are moral agents and are supposed to take “oughts” into account in their decision-making.
So, unless that erupting La Palma volcano or a lightning bolt or something sent out those bogus BGP packets, rather than a human being directly or indirectly doing so, I stand by my earlier arguments.
@Surplus
Please, don’t throw stones. We’re all living in glass houses. Speaking as someone who works in IT, your assertions that everything should work a certain way remind me of my least favorite customers: the ones who know little to nothing about my job and insist I should do what they want, and don’t want to hear that (pick one or more from the list below):
Okay? Please? I’m asking you to show a little compassion or at least understanding that you may not be correct. That’s one of those “oughts” that are important to human interaction.
@Surplus
I take it you don’t really believe in the concept of human error?
Only in malicious choices made to spite you personally?
I mean, at least it’s internally consistent.
Wanting “Facebook to work the same as it did a few hours ago” obviously does not fall into any of those categories, except possibly that last one, but the only emergency there was one of their own making, not an externality for which they couldn’t be held responsible.
Oh, I do, believe me I do, but I also believe in holding people responsible for their errors.
And only those who made them. I am quite fed up with the current pattern of “if I screw up, I have to clean up the mess or deal with some inconvenience, and if someone else screws up, I have to clean up the mess or deal with some inconvenience” …
@ Surplus
See, as far as I can tell, you only believe in holding other people responsible for errors. I’ve never seen you apologize for making a mistake here, even when other people have pointed out your mistakes as gently as possible. Your usual reaction is to insist that YOU haven’t made a mistake, because it’s actually someone else’s fault, or you just double down on some erroneous assumptions.
To borrow another man’s words: “I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken.”
@surplus.
the worst thing that happened to you is that you had to wait like 4 hours for facebook to come back on. that’s not you cleaning up a mess and what your dealing with isn’t really a problem