53
   

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

 
 
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Fri 5 Jun, 2020 10:52 pm
@coldjoint,
intolerance and ego, joints pot and kettle routine again.
Below viewing threshold (view)
jcboy
 
  8  
Reply Sat 6 Jun, 2020 03:36 am
How come you ain't never see no black or Arab men proudly carrying assault rifles in public to celebrate their open carry liberty? If white hillbilly redneck yokels can do it, everyone should have the same fun. Hey gays, let's get assault rifles, paint them rainbow colors, and stand outside some churches. It's apparently protected free speech.
MontereyJack
 
  4  
Reply Sat 6 Jun, 2020 04:11 am
@coldjoint,
That's true, She's rational.
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Sat 6 Jun, 2020 04:17 am
@MontereyJack,
Wrong again. Glitterbag is not capable of rationality. All she does is spout childish name-calling.

Coldjoint is highly rational however.
0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
Below viewing threshold (view)
Below viewing threshold (view)
Olivier5
 
  3  
Reply Sat 6 Jun, 2020 04:28 am
@oralloy,
She was the dangerous thug. And he did protect himself from her by filming the encounter and virtualy smoking her arse. Niw she's jobless and I suspect more than a little lonely for a while. Should give her some time to think about her behaviour and her prejudice.
Below viewing threshold (view)
Below viewing threshold (view)
Below viewing threshold (view)
Olivier5
 
  4  
Reply Sat 6 Jun, 2020 04:34 am
@oralloy,
No but false testimony does.
Below viewing threshold (view)
Below viewing threshold (view)
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Sat 6 Jun, 2020 04:55 am
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:
I heard the comments he made, and her dog wouldn't have been in any trouble if she would have put it on the leash like it was suppose to be. From what I understand that area is a leashed area because it is used for bird watching, dogs like to chase birds and make it difficult for bird watchers to enjoy their hobby. The facts are she was breaking the law and he had every right to ask her to put the leash on.

He didn't have any right to threaten her for not having the dog on its leash.

She had every right to protect herself from him.


Baldimo wrote:
lying about the man.

She didn't lie about anything at all. Everything that she said was the truth.


Baldimo wrote:
She acted like he threatened to rape her and **** her dead eye sockets, which clearly wasn't the case.

That is incorrect. He did threaten her.


Baldimo wrote:
I'm sorry to say, but in a place like NYC, you leash you dog in places where they say to leash your dog, that's is way to cramped of a place to do what you want because you want to be the biggest Karen.

That doesn't give you the right to attack people who break the rules.

If you attempt vigilante action against someone for committing a minor infraction, they have the right to defend themselves from you.


Baldimo wrote:
The only thing threatening about such a person was that he was black, and she played that **** up to the max.

The fact that he was making threats made him pretty threatening.


Baldimo wrote:
Prior to the police on the phone, she sounded like one of the most smug bitches I have ever heard.

She sounded like she wanted him to go away and stop menacing her.


Baldimo wrote:
Her dog wouldn't be running anywhere if it was on a leash, and that was his point.

It doesn't matter what his point was. He threatened her. She had the right to protect herself from him.


Baldimo wrote:
Then she put on the panic voice once the cops were on the phone and made the situation out to be much more than it really was.

Her description of the situation was completely accurate. She was right to feel panic considering the way he was menacing her.


Baldimo wrote:
If you noticed, once she put her dog on leash, he said thank you and walked away. His comment before the video started was meant to get her to put her dog on leash, nothing more, nothing less.

It doesn't matter why he was threatening her. She still had the right to protect herself from him.


Baldimo wrote:
There's that word again but you aren't using it correctly, that lady was more thug like than the dude,

He was the one who threatened her.


Baldimo wrote:
People can call the police all they want to,

Not when they lose their jobs for doing so.

People who feel threatened by a minority are not going to want to involve the police when it will result in the loss of their job. They are going to take care of the problem themselves.

And when some innocent person ends up being killed because someone perceives them as a threat, that's going to be your fault.


Baldimo wrote:
The funny thing about this is that he actually did nothing wrong, we have free speech do we not? If the police would have showed up, she would have gotten a ticket

I would think that you'd find that situation preferable to her gunning the guy down in self defense.

But by making it impossible for people to call the police, you don't leave them any other option.


Baldimo wrote:
and he would have been laughing are her.

He would have likely have gotten a stern lecture about how dumb it is to threaten women in secluded areas.


Baldimo wrote:
She also would have likely gotten arrested for filing a false police report.

There was nothing false in her report.


Baldimo wrote:
She got everything she had coming to her.

People do not deserve to lose their job for calling the police when they have been threatened.


Baldimo wrote:
She wasn't protecting anything,

She was protecting herself from the thug who was menacing her.


Baldimo wrote:
calling the police on the guy for calling her out on her bullshit,

She called the police on him for threatening her.


Baldimo wrote:
she was 100% wrong in all facets of this discussion.

There is nothing whatsoever wrong about her protecting herself from a dangerous thug.


Baldimo wrote:
There is no version of this where the lady is right and the guy is wrong.

Sure there is. He threatened her. She has the right to protect herself.


Baldimo wrote:
I don't blame him for his threat,

I won't blame anyone who shoots perceived threats instead of calling the police.

It is reasonable for people to not want to lose their job.


Baldimo wrote:
people like her won't do as asked, they will make it about them and attempt to get others in trouble.

If people don't want to get into trouble, they shouldn't threaten women in secluded areas.


Baldimo wrote:
It's people like her that are ruining the world and making it more difficult to live in tightly confined cities.

You've done more harm to the world than she has.

Misperceived threats are likely to be killed now because you've made people afraid to call the police when they feel threatened.
0 Replies
 
justaguy2
 
  2  
Reply Sat 6 Jun, 2020 05:54 am
Here's one for our resident racist oralloy/yellow cake...

https://image.shutterstock.com/image-vector/no-racism-hand-cartoon-style-600w-1749642338.jpg

Enjoy!
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Sat 6 Jun, 2020 06:24 am
@oralloy,
Not the self defense. your posts,
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 6 Jun, 2020 06:25 am
@MontereyJack,
All my posts do is point out that people have the right to defend themselves.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 6 Jun, 2020 06:26 am
@justaguy2,
@justaguy2,
You engage in childish name-calling because you aren't capable of saying anything intelligent.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/26/2021 at 02:05:35