In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: threat and non-threat. Threat is a statement that someone will be hurt or harmed, especially if the person does not do something in particular.

Example Input: Comment: JJ,  But it does bring up a rather interesting thought or two.  It seems now that if a black is shot and killed by police it brings immediate protesting and usually some level of rioting regardless of justification or lack thereof.  Additionally, there is no protesting when anyone of another race is shot and killed by police.

To me, this reaction is the issue that the BLM can't overcome for it to become a popular movement.  Dragging the anthem and flag into it doesn't help, I believe it to actually hurt the movement and spurs letters like above.
Example Output: Non-threat

Example Input: Comment: I find those who chant do so because they either have such a slim argument that they don't want to be drawn into it, or because they lack the mental prowess to mount their argument in a rational manner.  It is for that reason that the "Lock her up," chant is offensive.  

I should point out too that the main perpetrators of the chanting phenomenon are unionists, "Hey, Hey  Ho, Ho.  Fill-in-the-blank has got to go!"   Clever eh?   The "progressives" particularly the enviro-nuts, are no better,  “U.G.L.Y.  Corporate scum you cheat you lie.  You UGLY, uh, uh, you UGLY.”   That intellectual gem and many others are found on the website tarsandsblockade.org

Chanting has no place in rational debate, none.
Example Output: Non-threat

Example Input: Comment: Oh and while Clinton was accused of affairs, those were consensual. If you think that's a moral equivalent then you are seriously sick man.
Example Output:
Non-threat