Warning: this editorial contains graphic language.
On the social media site Twitter, there is a concept known as a “sub-tweet.”
It’s gotten so much traction in recent years that the Merriam-Webster dictionary even now carries a helpful definition of the term: “a usually mocking or critical tweet that alludes to another Twitter user without including a link to the user’s account and often without directly mentioning the user’s name.”
So, a way of talking about someone without actually naming them.
Think of this editorial, then, as a “sub-edit” — although, the fact is that we’ll probably get around to mentioning just who we’re talking about by the time we get to the end of this space.
The Criminal Code of Canada has a section known as 264.1. It deals with the concept of uttering threats, and it reads like this: “Every one commits an offence who, in any manner, knowingly utters, conveys or causes any person to receive a threat (a) to cause death or bodily harm to any person; (b) to burn, destroy or damage real or personal property; or (c) to kill, poison or injure an animal or bird that is the property of any person.”
The offence carries specific penalties: “Every one who commits an offence under paragraph (1)(a) is guilty of (a) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years; or (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction. Every one who commits an offence under paragraph (1)(b) or (c) … is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or (b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.”
To recap: anyone who utters or conveys a threat “in any manner” commits an offence under the Criminal Code.
It doesn’t matter if their threat is hyperbole. It doesn’t matter if they somehow meant it as a joke. It particularly doesn’t matter if you were angry when you went on social media and wrote something like, say, “Put a bounty on their heads!! Break out the banned rifles & shotguns & send them the f— on there (sic) way never to return!!!!”
“Putting a bounty on their heads” is not ambiguous, not when you’re on a Facebook site complaining about a volunteer group set up by the provincial government to plan for new wilderness reserves. Nor is “Grab your f—kin guns and meet … on the highway put the fear of god into the f—king idiots.”
Here’s the rest of the story: people on the Great Northern Peninsula are upset about a government committee that has asked for public input on it protected areas plan.
Public input, they are certainly getting.
But threats of violence? That’s unacceptable, and should be thoroughly investigated.
