DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**spravka.ua** · 11-04-2011, 12:28 AM

As a matter of curiosity, if those who are instigating this boycott are, as is the case in this matter, agents of the government including police and fire, is there not a reasonable implication that such a protest might result in the withholding of public services? This isn't Sammy and Suzie homemaker pushing this agenda, it's the very people that are charged with the public service of protecting life and property.

(bolding added) If that different additional situation arises, it will depend on the legality of such a move. What I offered to answer pram's question was the frequent definition of 'common' extortion in statutes, i.e., its main and most commonly agreed character.

Statutes can certainly vary to a degree on a state-by-state basis in how they cover this genre of crime. For example, some states might have an extortion law that extends to threats involving the use of legally actionable conduct itself more so than just criminal conduct, e.g., including civil tort and breach of contract conduct within the scope.

This bank is obviously a financial institution. WS has a specific statute on that: Extortion Against A Financial Institution, a felony. It's defined as follows:

2010 Wisconsin Code

Chapter 943. Crimes against property.

943.86 Extortion against a financial institution.

Whoever for the purpose of obtaining money, funds, credits, securities, assets, or property owned by or under the custody or control of a financial institution threatens to cause bodily harm to an owner, employee, or agent of a financial institution or to cause damage to property owned by or under the custody or control of the financial institution is guilty of a Class H felony.

943.86 - ANNOT.
History: 2005 a. 212. 2010 Wisconsin Code Chapter 943. Crimes against property. 943.86 Extortion against a financial institution. :: Justia Law

That's not being implicated here. That doesn't mean that such conduct might not be otherwise criminally and/or civilly actionable depending on the facts and results if someone threatens to withhold public services, e.g., cops saying they won't come to your aid in need unless you do what they want on something, as that might trigger some kinds of sanctions depending on what kinds of laws apply in each jurisdiction. Obviously, though, sufficient evidence must exist for such things to be triggered.

But with extortion, as you can see, it's a genre of crime that deals with unlawful threats and to get the person to agree to hand over property or do things on account of such threats. In this situation, that's not happening by the reported conduct that they are making unlawful threats to force the bank to hand over its money, etc.

11-04-2011, 12:28 AM	#40
spravka.ua Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 408 Senior Member	As a matter of curiosity, if those who are instigating this boycott are, as is the case in this matter, agents of the government including police and fire, is there not a reasonable implication that such a protest might result in the withholding of public services? This isn't Sammy and Suzie homemaker pushing this agenda, it's the very people that are charged with the public service of protecting life and property. (bolding added) If that different additional situation arises, it will depend on the legality of such a move. What I offered to answer pram's question was the frequent definition of 'common' extortion in statutes, i.e., its main and most commonly agreed character. Statutes can certainly vary to a degree on a state-by-state basis in how they cover this genre of crime. For example, some states might have an extortion law that extends to threats involving the use of legally actionable conduct itself more so than just criminal conduct, e.g., including civil tort and breach of contract conduct within the scope. This bank is obviously a financial institution. WS has a specific statute on that: Extortion Against A Financial Institution, a felony. It's defined as follows: 2010 Wisconsin Code Chapter 943. Crimes against property. 943.86 Extortion against a financial institution. Whoever for the purpose of obtaining money, funds, credits, securities, assets, or property owned by or under the custody or control of a financial institution threatens to cause bodily harm to an owner, employee, or agent of a financial institution or to cause damage to property owned by or under the custody or control of the financial institution is guilty of a Class H felony. 943.86 - ANNOT. History: 2005 a. 212. 2010 Wisconsin Code Chapter 943. Crimes against property. 943.86 Extortion against a financial institution. :: Justia Law That's not being implicated here. That doesn't mean that such conduct might not be otherwise criminally and/or civilly actionable depending on the facts and results if someone threatens to withhold public services, e.g., cops saying they won't come to your aid in need unless you do what they want on something, as that might trigger some kinds of sanctions depending on what kinds of laws apply in each jurisdiction. Obviously, though, sufficient evidence must exist for such things to be triggered. But with extortion, as you can see, it's a genre of crime that deals with unlawful threats and to get the person to agree to hand over property or do things on account of such threats. In this situation, that's not happening by the reported conduct that they are making unlawful threats to force the bank to hand over its money, etc.
	Quote