Let's do another such test, much simpler. Who the fuck is in prison for offhand comments such as the one I made? Fucking nobody. If it was illegal, I'd have enough time racked up to justify the incarcerations of every single black in the history of the US plus more. You're fucking wrong.

Have you come up with an answer?
The answer is not simply that martial artists must register themselves, it's that there isn't a fucking lethal weapons register to begin with. The entire premise of the idea is bullshit.
Alright, so what does this have to do with the initial argument?
It is a premise of law that all people must follow the law (with exceptions like diplomats and saudis) regardless of citizenship, as long as you are within an entity's territory. Let's test the idea that threatening people is illegal (in general).
There is a movie called The Interview. Google it. In it, Kim Jong Un dies a very tragic death due to intentional actions of Americans. Is this movie illegal due to American citizens, portraying Americans, killing a depiction of a real life, well known individual? No it's fucking not.

And you @bethorien, let's do a little exercise in critical thinking that I'm sure even your mind can handle. The basic concept of this exercise is to take a probably retarded idea and litmus test it to see if it is in fact retarded or if it holds weight. This process basically tries to see if a parallel and similar circumstance also fits within the rule.
Possibly retarded idea: Martial artists who have achieved the rank of black belt in a formally recognized art must register themselves as lethal weapons.
I can think of three ways off the top of my head to test this (besides the obvious answer of actually looking it up). Here's two hints for you.
1. I'm pretty sure in every state, the lethal length minimum for a knife is at most 4.5 inches. Most general purpose kitchen knives are ~6 inch blades. You can also purchase 28 inch machetes over the counter at most sporting good stores.
2. Not all formally recognized arts use the belt system.

Yes @cryoenthusiast it is a stupid fucking argument which is why I have no fucking idea why you morons hopped in to begin with; this was solely between me and @rosalinas. I have every right to be aggressive, perhaps even more so than I already am, because of you fucks who for some unfathomable reason are unable to detect basic written sarcasm.

Virginia v black makes it illegal to cross burn if intent to intimidate is proven. Extrapolate this to speech in general being illegal if there is (intent to) intimidate, which under the original context of this is still not applicable.

That’s specifically against the president of the United States you stupid cunts.

There is a single specific law against threatening the POTUS. Now find me one that applies in general that disregards context/intent.

Walk me through your reasoning for your argument that a threat doesn’t have to be credible. I’m having a very hard time imaging you’re one of those retards who are too stupid to realize that if you’re gonna argue law, you need to use the legal definitions.

A threat implies credibility, otherwise the statement "gas the jews" would be illegal by itself which it's obviously not.

I'm sorry, I shouldn't say you're picking a fight for no reason.
You probably believe at least one of the following:
1. I'm coming off too aggressively and need to tone it down
2. I'm being bullied and need to be protected
to which I respond
(1) I really don't think I've said anything terribly harsh. In fact, I think I'm rather reasonable in understanding that we're trading shit talk and nothing more. If I chose, I could totally interpret ros as being a massive cunt but I've been on the internet long enough to understand that this probably isn't the intention
(2) Thank you but that's probably more insulting than you intended, and I'm gonna ask you politely to fuck off; I can take care of myself in any verbal spar.

True threat: a threat that a reasonable person would interpret as a real and serious communication of an intent to inflict harm (Merriam-Webster's legal definition)

So either you're picking a fight for no god damn reason, or you're being a pusillanimous toad.

Rabbits are invasive. Badly invasive according to most sources. Apparently URLs aren't allowed in comments anymore, so feel free to google "are rabbits invasive". Feel better now?
Also beth and dr, no they're not. A threat has to be credible, which is why I haven't gone crying to my local police about how I'm being bullied online because I'm not.

I'll gladly take you with me

49 hour week: 7h/d*7d/wk.

That's a unicorndog which is not what was desired.

Don't forget that this is only seven hours a day as opposed to eight, but assumably you also work seven days a week. 80*7*7=3920/wk. Lets say you get two weeks of vacation for holidays and jacking off and whatever, so multiply that by 50wk/yr for 196k/yr.

I wanna say Akame ga Kill because of the front girl but I know that's not right

well I didn't notice until you said something
To answer OP, depends on the market you're appealing to.

Jesus dies