Ancient Art Christmas Tree - Common Sense Applies

Who is currently sponsoring him? Lewis seems to be pretty good at digging his own grave. I tolerated the Christmas Tree thing as the publicity stunt it was and was not surprised when word came that glitter and other shit had been left. But this threatening and pretty vulgar Facebook crap is too much. What an immature tool.  

Eliot Augusto wrote:

I've been seeing so much of this over the past year or two. Not that I enjoy reading Andy's comments, but it is his right to say them. Everyone's response on here is their right to call him out on that bullshit. Hes not sending the online equivalent of a nasty letter signed in blood.

If I missed something, please inform me. I'd rather be wrong than ignorant.

 I think the part you missed was the actual charges -- harassment, not assault.   Pretty clear he comitted a crime:

'(b) makes contact by means of electronic communication and insults, taunts, or challenges the recipient of the communication or any person at the receiving location in a manner likely to provoke a violent or disorderly response;

'(c) makes contact by means of electronic communication and threatens to inflict injury, physical harm, or damage to any person or the property of any person;'

Eliot Augusto wrote:

I've been seeing so much of this over the past year or two. Not that I enjoy reading Andy's comments, but it is his right to say them. Everyone's response on here is their right to call him out on that bullshit. Hes not sending the online equivalent of a nasty letter signed in blood.

If I missed something, please inform me. I'd rather be wrong than ignorant.

"Slap them in the face and grab them by the pussy."

If that isn't encouraging people to sexually assault women then I don't know what is. It would be one thing if he had cut it off at "you stupid cunt go fuck yourself", that would just be public being a huge asshole. But encouraging others to sexually assault specific people should be considered a form of a threat. How would you like it if a celebrity told people to go grab your daughter by the pussy?

eli poss wrote:

"Slap them in the face and grab them by the pussy."

If that isn't encouraging people to sexually assault women then I don't know what is. It would be one thing if he had cut it off at "you stupid cunt go fuck yourself", that would just be public being a huge asshole. But encouraging others to sexually assault specific people should be considered a form of a threat. How would you like it if a celebrity told people to go grab your daughter by the pussy?

I'd hate every second of it and I do at this moment in time. I hate that people even think its ok to think things like that, much less have the ability to spew those toughts to the masses. I'm not defending what he is saying in any way. I'm defending the right to say it. Talk is one thing, action is another. He posted it online and his sponsors said "fuck you buddy!" And I agree and I like 5.10 even more for doing that. If he had been kept around...

If he were really capable of such a thing, and actually convincing others to do it, he wouldn't talk about it. He would just do it. So I feel it is an exaggeration of the circumstances. The people actually assaulting women and committing crimes don't talk about it. That is because even the stupid backwater douche bags know you don't write about your crimes.

Free speech has limits. Speech that threatens violence or incites others to violence is not protected. Hate speech is not protected.

Referring to this as "sharing his opinion" is seriously downplaying what he said here, in my opinion. For those having trouble understanding the difference, would it help to imagine that instead of gendered, this was racial? That instead of sexual assault he was advocating lynching?

This is hate speech. A violent threat. A call for sexual assault on specific named members of a vulnerable population. I for one am thrilled it's been taken seriously (at least by some) and if the "slippery slope" some of you are all so concerned about leads to a social norm where this is NOT ok, then that's a slide I'm ready to jump on and ride all the way down. 

Sounds a lot like our president. if you want to call the cops on people for saying stupid bad shit start with trump.    even with racial bigotry if someone says somthing horrible in a fit of temper tantrum does that mean they really mean that or are they just talking shit? do all the pro athlets now get locked up for their trash talk against each other on twitter??? certainly trump gets a pass  for his twitter rants.   I feel it really hinges on how isolated the incident is. If andy is stalking her then by all means lock the little turd up. if he is just a natural  born asshole saying stupid shit????   a good question to ask is  does the victim feel genuinly threatened or is she just really pissed off and gloating that he fucked up and she has him by the balls?

Nick Goldsmith wrote:

Sounds a lot like our president. if you want to call the cops on people for saying stupid bad shit start with trump.    even with racial bigotry if someone says somthing horrible in a fit of temper tantrum does that mean they really mean that or are they just talking shit? do all the pro athlets now get locked up for their trash talk against each other on twitter??? certainly trump gets a pass  for his twitter rants.   I feel it really hinges on how isolated the incident is. If andy is stalking her then by all means lock the little turd up. if he is just a natural  born asshole saying stupid shit????   a good question to ask is  does the victim feel genuinly threatened or is she just really pissed off and gloating that he fucked up and she has him by the balls?

Give me a break. The dude won't end up in jail.  He'll get a slap on the wrist a little probation and maybe a fine. Enough with the hyperbole.

Em Cos wrote:

Free speech has limits. Speech that threatens violence or incites others to violence is not protected. Hate speech is not protected.

Referring to this as "sharing his opinion" is seriously downplaying what he said here, in my opinion. For those having trouble understanding the difference, would it help to imagine that instead of gendered, this was racial? That instead of sexual assault he was advocating lynching?

This is hate speech. A violent threat. A call for sexual assault on specific named members of a vulnerable population. I for one am thrilled it's been taken seriously (at least by some) and if the "slippery slope" some of you are all so concerned about leads to a social norm where this is NOT ok, then that's a slide I'm ready to jump on and ride all the way down. 

Hate speech is protected, not sure where you heard otherwise.

tim wrote:

Hate speech is protected, not sure where you heard otherwise.

I apologize for using imprecise terms. I was trying to describe his speech as both hateful and violent. Let me try to clarify. 

You can say "I hate puppies." You can say "I hate that one puppy, Howard." You can probably even say "If Howard died a horrible fiery death I wouldn't be sad about it." When you say "Howard the puppy lives in this town, and the next time someone sees Howard at the dog park you should please light him on fire.", then you're crossing the line. *

*You possibly can threaten animals, for all I know. I used an animal example cause I didn't want to use a human example. 

Nick Goldsmith wrote:

Sounds a lot like our president. if you want to call the cops on people for saying stupid bad shit start with trump.  

I think people did, but sadly it got dismissed (at least the law suits) as politically motivated.  He got elected and got sort of an immunity.

I personally applaud Eve for her courage to call the cops - like many of you said, yes Andy may just get a slap in the wrist and many people would be discouraged by the prospect of going to the court, getting their name dragged in the papers and social media. To me, his post sounds every bit threatening. I don't know how other people feel, but if someone called on my employer to slap me in the face and sexually assault me I'd feel at the very least very uncomfortable. 

Eric wrote:

Only "true threats" of violence are not protected by the 1st.  

Courts thus must distinguish between "true threats”’ versus mere “political hyperbole.”

Where an individual at a anti-military draft rally said: "f they ever make me carry a rifle, the first man I want to get in my sights is L.B.J", SCOTUS reversed his conviction, the speech did rise to level of a "true threat".

And yet, the anti draft, anti war movement became the majority opinion, with time, lynching is not acceptable, and MLK day is a national holiday.

The "I can do anything I want, anytime I want, because I'm me" attitude crumbles sooner or later, whether it's  leaving glitter on a rock, or you have the power to order the national guard out to shoot protestors.

Hate speech may be protected, but hate crimes are not (not applicable here, just saying). 

And, yes, I am willing to argue on both sides here, because there is a lot of temptation to lump refugees in with terrorists. Until someone clearly crosses "that line" (wildly subjective and changes with public opinion), even hate speech has to be protected.

Andy's actions and speech have crossed enough of a line to be deemed worthy of legal scrutiny, which takes more than a little effort, usually. Someone has to think he can be prosecuted successfully or they don't bother.

I work in a library, where free speech is a big deal.

Best, Helen

Andy's celebrity (though fairly minor), the size of his platform (18,000 followers) and his proximity to the people he threatened are all factors that I can guarantee were taken into account. If you have a platform like Andy's, the effects of your speech are magnified and you have to take that into account. 

Danforth wrote:

Andy's celebrity (though fairly minor), the size of his platform (18,000 followers) and his proximity to the people he threatened are all factors that I can guarantee were taken into account. If you have a platform like Andy's, the effects of your speech are magnified and you have to take that into account. 

Not to mention his 129,000 follows on Instagram. 

does he have any sponsors left after that  temper tantrum?

A wise man once said, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will create emotional scars that will never heal"

Eliot Augusto wrote:

That is because even the stupid backwater douche bags know you don't write about your crimes.

I wouldn't be so sure about that... What about all the Facebook Live BS that's been going around?  What about the idiot boy scouts leaders who pushed over the hoodoo and filmed it and put it on youtube...   They walk among us...

Nick Goldsmith wrote:

a good question to ask is  does the victim feel genuinly threatened or is she just really pissed off and gloating that he fucked up and she has him by the balls?

From my view point as a woman, this is spoken like a man who has never had to concern himself with sexually violent threats, direct or indirect (nor worry about any supporters who might just take it upon themselves to defend their nut job friend/idol out of a sense of maintaining pride for his image). 

Let me just say that my perspective is that yes, yes I would be very unnerved and probably afraid to some degree if some man told hundreds of thousands of people this should happen to me at the soonest opportunity. Regardless of how many people are on my side. 

It's easy to diminish something you've never really had to worry about.    

jason.cre wrote:

 I think the part you missed was the actual charges -- harassment, not assault.   Pretty clear he comitted a crime:

'(b) makes contact by means of electronic communication and insults, taunts, or challenges the recipient of the communication or any person at the receiving location in a manner likely to provoke a violent or disorderly response;

'(c) makes contact by means of electronic communication and threatens to inflict injury, physical harm, or damage to any person or the property of any person;'

IMO, this conversation should have stopped here. He broke the law and deserves to be punished for his crime. Hopefully the media attention this has received will prompt others to think a little bit harder about using their social media platform to incite violence against others. With the number of followers Andy has (had) on social media, this feels similar to having purchased a newspaper ad in the local paper in order to call on members of the community to assault three named people. Nick, would you still have such a problem with Andy being prosecuted for his actions if he had carried them out through a more traditional media platform?

Momoface wrote:

does he have any sponsors left after that  temper tantrum?

Gibbon Slacklines still list him: https://www.gibbon-slacklines.com/en/team/andy-lewis/

If you wish to contact them: https://www.gibbon-slacklines.com/en/contact/