[LINK] Death threats to Australian climate scientists

[David Boxall]

This started out as one thing and developed into something else. I hope 
the climate science and media angles keep it relevant for Link.

<http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/05/3235810.htm?section=justin>
...
> A number of the country's top climate change scientists, including several at the Australian National University (ANU), have been targeted by death threats and abusive phone calls for months.
>
> But the situation has now worsened, and ANU has moved its scientists to a more secure location and introduced other security measures.
>
> Professor David Koroly from the University of Melbourne says he receives threats every time he is interviewed by the media.
>
> "It is clear that there is a campaign in terms of either organised or disorganised threats to discourage scientists from presenting the best available climate science on television or radio," he said.
...

In January, congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was shot. Thirteen other 
people were wounded and six died. Before the March NSW elections, the 
lives of the children of the Labor candidate in my seat were reportedly 
threatened <http://wollombi.nsw.au/news/display/2177>. An alarmingly 
hysterical rally against carbon pricing was held in Canberra shortly 
after. Now this.

The common factor? Feeble minds, inflamed by intemperate rhetoric.

Sarah Palin infamously targeted Giffords 
<http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-01-09/news/27086902_1_gun-ban-sarah-palin-gun-incident>. 
Commentators like Alan Jones and Andrew Bolt benefit handsomely by 
promoting extremist views. They commonly employ inflammatory rhetoric to 
do so. The threats to climate scientists are probably consequential.

When the worst happens, shouldn't the intemperate be held to account? 
When inflammatory rhetoric incites feeble minds to violence, who is most 
culpable? To me, the incited are less responsible than the inciters. 
Much as the weapon is less to blame than the one who uses it.

We have a right to voice our views. Our exercise of that right carries 
responsibility for the consequences. Is it time to legislate that 
responsibility?

-- 
David Boxall                    |  All that is required
                                |  for evil to prevail is
http://david.boxall.id.au       |  for good men to do nothing.
                                |     -- Edmund Burke (1729-1797)