Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Action80

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 40  Next >
1
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated
« on: December 07, 2021, 09:17:52 PM »
People who clamor for "democracy" are clueless, mindless morons.

2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: December 06, 2021, 05:09:24 PM »
A media curfew wouldn't hurt...Masks are about obedience ... not science.

A media curfew is supported by science? Going to a shop is a fundamental right? Here in the States a lot of shops have this posted:



I guess that's taking a fundamental right away? So the goal is "obedience"? The benefit to mandate makers is....? And a media curfew isn't forced "obedience"?
Refuse service to a black man, brown man, or woman. See how legit that sign is then.

3
How many people at the US Capitol were armed?

Answer -0

You're just weak liar.

Fuck that. That piece of human shit, Trump, was going to send federal troops to my town to protect a Target store from protesters marching against a corrupt police force that has brutalized the people of this city for over a half century. They weren't armed either.

Every rioter in that photo is a traitor to this nation. The Republicans supporting Putin's agenda who opened the doors for these traitors are traitors. Fuck each and every one of those 'short bus retards' (their lawyer's words, not mine.)

  Seems like sour grapes.

It's pissed off grapes. I owned guns when I was 17. The idea that my mom and dad would let me take one of my rifles and go into the streets at night is incomprehensible. This little fuck head's parents are the real problem. So fuck them too.
Sour grapes from an ineffectual troll who has no point.

Rittenhouse killed two known shitbags and his trial ended in a just verdict.

His parents are a far sight better than most.

He randomly killed two people not knowing who they were.

What if someone had snatched that rifle away from that stupid Punk and shot him in the face with it. That's my idea of self-defense. That's my idea of someone protecting the community from an armed extremist freak.

Again, his weeping parents would blame someone else for things they could have prevented.
He killed two despicable shitbags who wanted to kill him.

That's a fact of law and too bad for you.

Losers have trouble dealing with facts.

4
So someone possessing a firearm on Capitol Grounds on Jan 6 isn't actually possesing a firearm on Capitol Grounds on Jan 6th, good talk.
Revising definitions after the fact is a favorite pastime of all shitbags and idiots

So literally possessing a firearm isn't possessing a firearm.  Keep going.
If we we were discussing possession you'd have a point. Try capitol grounds. I know you desperately need this, but too bad.

5
There absolutely were people that were armed. Christopher Albert was one such person.
Outcome?

Hey remember when you called Dr VanNostrand a liar and said there were zero people that were armed there? Turns out you were wrong and acted pretty shitty based on a Facebook meme or something. Why don’t you acknowledge that?
Because you offered something that didn't state what you claimed it does. That's why.

Sorry you are having trouble reading. Let me quote the part where they say he was armed, what type of firearm it was, the serial number, the number of rounds he had and that there was one in the chamber:

Quote
At that point, I told two MPD officers next to him that ALBERTS had a firearm on his person. ALBERTS, apparently hearing that, immediately tried to flee, but I was able to detain him with the help of two other officers. A black Taurus G2C 9mm (Serial#AAL085515) was recovered from D-1’s right hip. Additionally, a separate magazine was located on D-1’s left hip. Both the gun and the spare magazine were in held in two separate holsters. The handgun had one round in the chamber with a twelve round capacity magazine filled with twelve rounds; the spare magazine also had a twelve round capacity and was filled with twelve rounds.

Now I eagerly await an admission that:
How many people at the US Capitol were armed?

Answer -0

Was incorrect. Also that:

Quote
You're just weak liar.

Was completely unwarranted since you were attacking him based on your ignorance.

EDIT: At least 4 were charged with firearms violations in connection with the event.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/january-6-capitol-riot-firearm-guy-reffitt
Nothing about anything related to actual possession on grounds on January 6.

Prosecutor overcharge, as usual.

This took place in the US Capitol Visitor Center which is an addition to the Capitol Building and “on Capitol grounds”; indeed it has space and offices used by Congress.

Did you read the document I linked at all?
Of course and like I wrote, it's not what you allege it is or what you want it to be.

6
There absolutely were people that were armed. Christopher Albert was one such person.
Outcome?

Hey remember when you called Dr VanNostrand a liar and said there were zero people that were armed there? Turns out you were wrong and acted pretty shitty based on a Facebook meme or something. Why don’t you acknowledge that?
Because you offered something that didn't state what you claimed it does. That's why.

Sorry you are having trouble reading. Let me quote the part where they say he was armed, what type of firearm it was, the serial number, the number of rounds he had and that there was one in the chamber:

Quote
At that point, I told two MPD officers next to him that ALBERTS had a firearm on his person. ALBERTS, apparently hearing that, immediately tried to flee, but I was able to detain him with the help of two other officers. A black Taurus G2C 9mm (Serial#AAL085515) was recovered from D-1’s right hip. Additionally, a separate magazine was located on D-1’s left hip. Both the gun and the spare magazine were in held in two separate holsters. The handgun had one round in the chamber with a twelve round capacity magazine filled with twelve rounds; the spare magazine also had a twelve round capacity and was filled with twelve rounds.

Now I eagerly await an admission that:
How many people at the US Capitol were armed?

Answer -0

Was incorrect. Also that:

Quote
You're just weak liar.

Was completely unwarranted since you were attacking him based on your ignorance.

EDIT: At least 4 were charged with firearms violations in connection with the event.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/january-6-capitol-riot-firearm-guy-reffitt
Nothing about anything related to actual possession on grounds on January 6.

Prosecutor overcharge, as usual.

7
There absolutely were people that were armed. Christopher Albert was one such person.
Outcome?

Hey remember when you called Dr VanNostrand a liar and said there were zero people that were armed there? Turns out you were wrong and acted pretty shitty based on a Facebook meme or something. Why don’t you acknowledge that?
Because you offered something that didn't state what you claimed it does. That's why.

8
How many people at the US Capitol were armed?

Answer -0

You're just weak liar.

Fuck that. That piece of human shit, Trump, was going to send federal troops to my town to protect a Target store from protesters marching against a corrupt police force that has brutalized the people of this city for over a half century. They weren't armed either.

Every rioter in that photo is a traitor to this nation. The Republicans supporting Putin's agenda who opened the doors for these traitors are traitors. Fuck each and every one of those 'short bus retards' (their lawyer's words, not mine.)

  Seems like sour grapes.

It's pissed off grapes. I owned guns when I was 17. The idea that my mom and dad would let me take one of my rifles and go into the streets at night is incomprehensible. This little fuck head's parents are the real problem. So fuck them too.
Sour grapes from an ineffectual troll who has no point.

Rittenhouse killed two known shitbags and his trial ended in a just verdict.

His parents are a far sight better than most.

9
There absolutely were people that were armed. Christopher Albert was one such person.
Outcome?


10
I've always believed that idea of an armed citizenry defending liberty from our federal government was an absolutely delusional redneck fantasy. I need the federal government to have resources and weaponry to defend us from powerful nation states all over the world. I want a government that can defend us from extremist terror groups with technology and intelligence.

Our government is not going to fall to a bunch of bumpkins with hand guns and hunting rifles!



.... shit
How many people at the US Capitol were armed?

Answer -0

You're just weak liar.

11
 
You have no  evidence he was polishing the rifle in his mom's house.
Just another lie.

So this punk, a product of the mainstream media, sat in his bedroom of his mom's house, studying algebra, doing his chores, watching action movies, dreaming of being a cop, getting hopped up on Fox News.

Right.

I'm entitled to my opinion and if it offends the right wing snowflakes that made this entitled, spoiled piece of shit their hero, I'm glad.

This affluenza ridden brat is the reason liberals don't want us to have guns.
Seems like sour grapes.

12
This punk is a product of the mainstream media. He sat in his bedroom of his mom's house polishing that rifle, watching action movies, dreaming of being a cop, getting hopped up on Fox News. Despite the law, despite self defense, the only reason those people are dead is because he took his weapon and hit the streets. I don't believe he saved any lives or did any good by leaving his house that night. The pictures of him dressed as an action hero that night says it all.

I own guns, I have a conceal carry permit. Everyone in my extended family for three generations owns guns. I am here to tell you that this is a sickness and I've seen it before over and over. These militant freaks, open carry assholes are an embarrassment to what it is to posses a weapon. People who openly carry sidearms while not being an on duty cop or active duty military are offensive.

And before the conservatard snowflakes start whining about the 2nd Amendment, The 2nd Amendment says nothing about individual gun rights. The citizens have a right to bear arms in the form of a well regulated militia as a balance of power against the Feds. It doesn't mean some punk gets to wander the streets at night with a rifle.

And speaking of which, we had a 17 year old kid wandering the streets at night with a rifle in a neighboring municipality. The cops surrounded him, ordered him to drop the weapon and he said, "huh?" He died in a hail of gunfire. Yep, he was black.

It's a good thing we don't have any of those militant freaks around here.
You have no  evidence he was polishing the rifle in his mom's house.

Just another lie.

13
Not guilty on all counts

14
Defense moves for mistrial with prejudice:

15
The interesting thing about that third guy.  Rittenhouse probably has a good self defense argument there.  But suppose the other guy drew quicker.  Then he'd be the one on trial and he also has an equally good claim for self defense.

It just illustrates how insane the whole "good guy with a gun" thing is.  If everyone was armed at this protest then it would have been a bloodbath.
It illustrates the other guy actually did draw quicker as he didn't get shot until he pointed the gun at Rittenhouse.

I think you missed the point. If the 3rd guy had gotten off a shot before rittenhouse and killed him, his defense would be that he was staring down the barrel of an AR-15, felt his life was in danger, and shot in self-defense. That’s what I’m getting at with the good or bad guy with a gun. It’s sometimes hard to tell the difference.

I’m not defending the third guy. He was aiming a gun at the kid. Just curious as to what his motivation was. Did he think he was the good guy?
It is only hard for a known liar to print the truth about this issue.

It is much easier for people who know the truth to be clear thinking and know a shitbag got shot.

16
The interesting thing about that third guy.  Rittenhouse probably has a good self defense argument there.  But suppose the other guy drew quicker.  Then he'd be the one on trial and he also has an equally good claim for self defense.

It just illustrates how insane the whole "good guy with a gun" thing is.  If everyone was armed at this protest then it would have been a bloodbath.
It illustrates the other guy actually did draw quicker as he didn't get shot until he pointed the gun at Rittenhouse.

Just another disgusting example of your lousy, habitual style of revisionist history on the fly.

17

Apparently, the Judge changed his mind about how the law was written. And yeah, I thought it would stick and was wrong. I also said it didn't matter because the charge is a whatever considering the other 5 charges - i.e., it didn't matter.
All charges matter, obviously in a trial, and the prosecutor thought they mattered, and you thought it mattered.

The judge knew it was wrong and threw it out.
Prevaricators typically have difficulty dealing the realities of life, offering bogus philosophical questions like you pose here, thinking they're somehow meaningful and relevant to the case whatsoever. In reality,  the question offered is just another weak attempt to support  a known shitbag who got what was coming to him.

Why so hostile? I already said that I think the guy who pointed a gun at him and got shot in the arm, for Rittenhouse, seems like self-defense. I just wonder if the guy with the gun thought he was going after a bad guy.
Sticking up for a shitbag must be a favorite pastime of yours.
100 percent of the people who didn't attack Rittenhouse that day walked away that day, suffering no harm from Rittenhouse.

I don't know what this is supposed to mean. But it reads like you're offering a bogus philosophical question thinking that it's somehow meaningful and relevant to the case.
I know you don't know what it means. You cannot even tell the difference between an obvious statement of fact (where no question mark is implied or explicitly written,  such as what I wrote) and the utter tripe offered by you in post after post in response to this topic.

18
I have no idea what you mean by this. Underage with rifle = misdemeanor, period.

What’s your problem? If he gets convicted of the count of underage with a rifle, so what? It’s a parking ticket. The judge refuses to throw it out. I’m not sure why you’re hung up on this charge when it means nothing in comparison to his other charges.
Possession charges DISMISSED,  clearly demonstrating your hot takes and pontificating about this issue was from a position of intellectual bankruptcy.



All I said is that the judge didn't initially throw out the charge. Then I went on to say, "I’m not sure why you’re hung up on this charge when it means nothing in comparison to his other charges."

Personally, I think the only questionable is the skateboarder killing. Rosenbaum I could see as self-defense holding. The guy who got shot in the arm had a gun and pointed it at him. So that seems pretty clear cut self-defense. The skateboarder? Don't know. But all told, it looks like it's leaning toward self-defense for all three (or all 5 counts still in play).

I guess the only other question I have is the NRA's whole "The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." thing. Did the guy with the gun who got shot in the arm think he was a good guy with a gun trying to stop an active shooter, a bad guy with a gun? Our gun laws are so screwed up.
No, you pretty much stated it was a given the charge would stick, offering your bogus and faulty interpretation of the law, thinking the judge's failure to not dismiss it earlier would somehow be the case at the end of the day.

I mean, you are quoted right here stating: "underage with a rifle=misdemeanor period." You don't know what the hell you're writing about and have no problem with writing bald faced lies when proven wrong.

Prevaricators typically have difficulty dealing the realities of life, offering bogus philosophical questions like you pose here, thinking they're somehow meaningful and relevant to the case whatsoever. In reality,  the question offered is just another weak attempt to support  a known shitbag who got what was coming to him.

100 percent of the people who didn't attack Rittenhouse that day walked away that day, suffering no harm from Rittenhouse.

19
Guys.
Its a clear cut case of self defense.
The question courts need to answer is if self defense has limits.

Ex: if I goad someome into trying to kill me, do I have a right of self defense?  If no, where is that line? 

Like if I tell someone I'm gonna go pull out my gun and kill everyone in a room and you try to stop me with deadly force, can I legally defend myself and call it self defense?
If I walk into a gang hangout and tell them I'm gonna fuck them up, can I claim self defense if I kill some of them? (Assuming I survive obviously)
If I wave my gun around outside walmart(in an open carry state) can I claim self defense if someone thinks I'm a threat and tries to stop me?
Wtf are you going on about?

You think none of these issues have been codified already?

Just aimless, pointless ramblings, having nothing to do with the current situation.

20
I have no idea what you mean by this. Underage with rifle = misdemeanor, period.

What’s your problem? If he gets convicted of the count of underage with a rifle, so what? It’s a parking ticket. The judge refuses to throw it out. I’m not sure why you’re hung up on this charge when it means nothing in comparison to his other charges.
Possession charges DISMISSED,  clearly demonstrating your hot takes and pontificating about this issue was from a position of intellectual bankruptcy.


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 40  Next >