Judge Pirro was on. I wasn't watching it; someone else was, and I was trying to eat in the same room. But I couldn't help watching it. First off, what the fuck kind of courtroom has an applause sign? That sets the tone. There was this case where a girl tried to break up with one dude, and he was freaking out. He threatened to kill himself, or kill her new boyfriend in front of her, or some third boring thing. There was a ski trip after the breaking up, and he convinced her to have sex with him one last time, and blah blah blah. It was pretty standard. The reason it stuck in my mind, was because this guy (the plaintiff) had threatened the girl and her boyfriend over the phone, and actually said "I'll kill him and make you watch." Judge Pirro responded with some self-righteous hysterics, saying that "the SWAT team should've come over, kicked down your door and had you in cuffs," or at least something very similar to that. (To non-stop applause, of course.) She did mention SWAT.
Of course she wasn't saying what she believed should have happened because he deserved it, but rather what should have happened with the system being what it is. At least, I would have thought so, but that damn sign got stuck. Now, I understand that if someone has threatened your life, that is some heavy shit that you do not take lightly. But this guy was nineteen. She mentioned that he was "an adult", but no one is really an adult at nineteen, and if you are, it's because you had to grow up way too fast. No one is an adult at nineteen without either being surrounded by death and tragedy, or raising a kid. (I'm not trying to compare those things; I have no idea. Those are just the two completely separate possibilities.) I'm not apologizing for this guy, either. I don't think that he was the one and only villain that all disdain should've been directed at. My point is this. Who has not made a death threat at some point? I know I have. I did when I was like six or seven. But I didn't mean it. People rarely mean what they say. There should need to be a demonstration of intent, however small, to actually come and arrest someone. When the SWAT kicks down your door because you said something you shouldn't have, that's like a fucking police state. How is that even freedom of speech?
But I understand, you can't just disregard everything anyone says just because they're pissed off and barely legal. So why not just tail them for a few days, see if they buy guns out of someone's trunk or maybe visit a Pitkin's and a Radioshack within a few hours of each other? If I bought a bag of fertilizer the day after I got pissed and told someone "I'll line your house with explosives and watch you die in a fucking fire!" then I would find it perfectly reasonable that some guys in suits were crouching behind my car with 9mms. And if I was seriously suicidal/homicidal, then my car would already be rigged with more sophisticated explosives for that very contingency, but they would have diffused it already, and then I'd be tried with attempted murder. That would be reasonable, even though it would only actually play out that way if life were a movie. Not that people never do these things, or even that kids can't do them sometimes, even when it just seems like a melodramatic cry for help.
I'm starting to meander here a bit, so let me just wrap up with my point again: if you can't get away with an empty death threat here and there, then freedom of speech is bullshit. No wait, that doesn't sound right. When people are just barely old enough to held accountable for their actions, and they still try to model their lives after shitty teen dramas, you can't take them seriously. The plaintiff might've figured the other man would just be in a coma a couple of weeks and wake up played by a new actor.
Oh yeah, Merry Christmas! It sure seems early this year, doesn't it?