UK Teen Banned from US for Life

Remove all ads!

A UK teen has been banned from the US for life for sending an email, while drunk, to Obama calling him a "prick", and possibly involving abusive and threatening language (the only thing quoted was "prick" and even that was a guess).

Seriously, does this seem a little extreme to anyone else? I mean, even if there were threats involved, shouldn't they at least be investigated for seriousness, first?

EDIT: Sorry, I think this should have gone in AoLS.

 

I actually find that fairly amusing.

Anyone did that to the Queen or the Prime Minister they'd probably get a polite response along the lines of "We extend our regrets you feel such a way, however..." with a brief explanation of non-prickery

 

I find it amusing also, didnt know that americans are so easily offended, I'd advise american politicians to never socialise with Brits

 

I want to do it too! How pathetic, if you can't take a bit of abuse then politics is really the wrong job for you! What a load of pansies

 

Wait, does this guy live in the US?

 

Obama or the brit? Obama lives in the US, of course. The UK teen lives in the UK. He also says he doesn't really care, as he never planned to come to the US anyway, but his mom is pissed at him.

 

I still remember when I worked for Circuit there was a young guy who sent an email to some corporate guy and called him the same thing, "a prick." There was an internal investigation, and they even questioned me because I was standing next to him when he sent the email and it was on the overhead camera. He was fired after the "investigation," but I don't think he was "banned" from the store.

However, in the instance of threats, the police are often called. Generally, making threats will get you banned from a place of employment, so it makes sense that you could be banned from a country that you have made threats against. Making threats against the US government, if you are a foreigner might get you on the no-fly list as well, which can even affect one's status in nearby countries.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-11296303

 

How dare he speak out against the president! You must be a racist, or possibly a terrorist, or even... A COMMUNIST! Send in the law enforcement at once, he must be "reeducated!".

What's wrong with thinking Obama is a prick? So much for free opinions.

Obama is just being childish, the prick. That's right, come get me, America.

 

I think it only works when you're also drunk.

 

Step aside! Drunken bum coming through!

 

Irrespective of what exactly the kid wrote to Obama, it is preposterous to ban him from entering the country for life. The heavy hand law enforcement in the US ... totally excessive. That was a alcohol infused teenage prank for god's sake.

It probably never even got past the e-mail screeners ... odds are Obama never read it, and never had a chance to be offended.

 

OK, first of all, he wasn't banned for calling Obama a "prick". If that's all that he sent in the way of offensive language, that wouldn't get him banned. Any American can do the same thing and not get in trouble either. However, from the article:

Threatening language, on the other hand, is a whole different story. The FBI takes threats against the president very seriously, for obvious reasons. If you make a threat against the president, it doesn't matter if you're a US citizen or not.

While I do find the ban excessive - common sense tells you this kid was not actually going to take any action against the President and that he was just a drunk teenager - I do understand why police investigated the threat. Any American sending such an e-mail would also be investigated.

 

Hah, legend.

How pathetic of the US though.

 

Agreed.

 

They probably get emails like that all day long.

No.

I thought we had the right to secure our own borders? Since the beginning of this last summer the "Arizona" crowd has been preaching about how no one has the right to enter the US. So some drunken kid threatens the US government because of 9/11 and you guys think banning him is "extreme?"

 

Well, why restrict it just to someone who issues a threat that they likely have no intent of carrying out? Might as well be safe, and ban all foreigners from the U.S., because in all likelihood, most non-US citizens have at least had rather unpleasant thoughts about the US at one time or another, and who knows which of those people might actually act upon those thoughts? Better safe than sorry!

 

According to whom? That's what investigating is for - finding out. Should we really dismiss a threat to the president - any threat - so easily? What if he really did mean it?

These two don't go together so well ...

 

Sometimes one should dismiss threats easily. Like when they are quickly found to be unsubstantiated. There is such a thing like limited resources and prioritising. Time spent following up on an unsubstantiated threat is time lacking for something else, like a real threat.

After it was established that this was a drunken teenager and unlikely to ever become a real threat that would have suggested to immediately shift resources and official attention to more likely threats - i.e. give him an stern admonition and close the case asap. Alas, that was not so, and he received his lifetime ban (probably by adding him to a no-fly list), perhaps in order to make an example of the kid. Idiotic.

 

And yet substantiating or unsubstantiating requires investigation. If all you're objecting to is the 'banning,' okay, that may be a bit spurious, although making threats publically does tend to be serious business, whether you just think you're being silly or not. (In the US, there is no worse idea for a joke than making a public threat against the president, because the authorities have no sense of humor when it comes to that.) But investigating threats doesn't seem questionable to me at all.

Or are you personally offering your own guarantee that the kid was no threat and didn't warrant being investigated? If so, how did you come to that conclusion?

 

Not really, since we don't know what was actually in the email, and we don't know much of anything about the background of the person in question. Come on now, using that old excuse?

Wife: "Did you call me a *****?"

Husband: "I don't remember. I must have been drunk."