But the tone and context are not a convincing threat as the comment was made as a joking example how "insane" he was instead of a credible threat targeting anyone specifically.
There is a serious question on proportionality here. Kids do and say stupid things. You cannot bar them from their rights while forcing them to attend school to "protect" them, meanwhile throwing the book at them for every minor stupidity or bad division they might undertake.
Lately I hear more cases of ruining lives by charging minors with ridiculous crimes than school violence... Protecting the youth...
if a drunk guy in a bar says "i'll punch you" to another drunk guy with intent to scare that other guy then that is a terrorist threat? And actual punch is a terrorist attack?
I don't think so, that might just be intent to assault and assault and battery, they probably have a lot of discretion to choose when to charge someone with terrorism. Basically another tool in the DA's arsenal to get people under his thumb.
I think the most relevant items are "threaten[ing] to commit any offense involving violence to any person or property with intent to:
(2) place any person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury;
(5) place the public or a substantial group of the public in fear of serious bodily injury"
Which are certainly serious things to do.