Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,291,000 Posts!
Poker ForumFTR Community

*** Official Politics Shitposting Thread ***

Page 23 of 39 FirstFirst ... 13212223242533 ... LastLast
Results 1,651 to 1,725 of 2871
  1. #1651
    You're claiming that everyone whom practices Islam is batshit.
    Same with Scientology and Satanism. What's the difference? A few billion people?

    Who cares? The content of your bigotry is indistinguishable, was my point.
    Well, I don't see why I should be ashamed of being intolerant of peoples' choices.

    Your baseless categorizing of someone based on characteristics you do not know they have, as individuals,
    is a total jerk move.
    Good job I'm not doing that then. I'm judging them based on characteristics I know they have... they practise a batshit religion.

    Don't be a jerk.
    We're all jerks.

    How the fuck does one person's bigotry excuse anyone else's bigotry?
    There you go again, throwing the word "bigorty" around like it's dirty. I don't have to tolerate batshit religion, any more than I have to tolerate a screaming child.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  2. #1652
    mojo, do you agree that Satanists are batshit? All of them? How about Scientologists? How about cultists who mass suicide onto comets?

    I have every right to think a religion is batshit.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  3. #1653
    It's actually quite amusing.

    I'm hostile to a religion that treats women as inferior to men, and I'm the oppressor.

    This is the world we live in.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  4. #1654
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    The Satanists I've met have all been remarkably fluent in the English language. They were polite and even pretty cool. You should probably look into it, it might suit you. It's not about worshiping Satan at all, as I understand it. It's about rejecting any god-head based mode of thinking which subjugates your own personal thoughts and desires as inferior. I mean, they're people, so some of them are probably batshit.

    I hear there are plenty of Scientologists living right here in the USA. I hear Tom Cruise is even one of them. He's no icon of sanity, but he's at least able to be not batshit often enough and long enough to have established a nice Hollywood career. That L. Ron guy wrote some really good sci-fi.

    I don't really have any thoughts or concerns about people I've never met committing suicide. I was probably closer to suicide than I'd care to discuss at multiple times in my life over less than a comet.

    All religion is bullshit, IMO. No argument there.

    Where it becomes bigotry is where you use your disfavor for a religion to justify your arguments that categorically label all Muslims as supporters of Sharia, or the oppression of women, or baby raping, or whatever fear you latch onto at the moment. Not all Muslims believe the same things just like not all Christians believe the same things.

    It's not your hostility toward religion that is bigotry. It's your lazy hating on people you haven't met. Not all Muslims want to oppress women. Not all Muslims want to impose Sharia on non-Muslims whom are not themselves choosing to follow those laws.

    Look, you could meet 50 Muslims and hate all 50 of them. You can tell me you hate them all day and I'll never accuse you of being prejudiced. But the moment the 51st Muslim walks in and you treat them like you already know them, that's where I draw the line.

    Have you even met 50 Muslims? Spoken to them and gotten to know them? Treated them with respect and seen how they treated you in return?
    Maybe try that.
    Last edited by MadMojoMonkey; 08-14-2018 at 11:21 PM.
  5. #1655
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    We're all jerks.
    Being a jerk on accident while trying to figure life out is one thing.
    Being a jerk on purpose is another.
  6. #1656
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Hating on Sharia is great. Hating on someone whom wants to impose Sharia on anyone whom doesn't want it for themselves is great.
    Hating on the oppression of women is great. Hating on someone who oppresses women is great.
    Hating baby rapers is great.

    That's all great. Saying some bullshit like, "Those people whom want to impose Sharia on other people are Muslims, so Muslims are all bad 'cause Sharia. Never mind that the people having Sharia imposed on them against their wishes were also Muslims."
  7. #1657
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    No. I'm just not deranged.


    Clearly??? Where are you getting this? Why do you get to just make up your own facts. I watched the video a dozen times. I saw the guy take one step backwards after the guy was already in the process of pulling out his gun to fire. The whole thing took a split second.

    You're out of your gourd if you expect a guy who was just beaten to the ground, to have the presence of mind to be able to tell if his assailant is sufficiently deterred merely by the sight of a gun...within a split second. You seem to have this retarded racist idea that gun-toting white people are all reckless hillbillies that like to indiscriminately flap a trigger finger while yelling yeeeeehaaaw.

    In reality, the overwhelming massive majority of gun owners are responsible people that have been trained in gun safety protocols and understand them. If you were one of those people, you would know that a gun is not for intimidation. It's not to brandished. If you pull it out, it's because you are going to shoot somebody. If you pull the gun out, it's because you've already decided that your life is being threatened and you need to respond with force.

    That all happened before the black guy ever thought about taking a step backwards. If you expect a guy who was just hit by someone twice his size, and is on the ground, and is in panicked fear for his life, to then make a hair-splitting nuanced interpretation of a single step, then you're an ignorant douchebag.

    And even if he was backing away. How do we know he wasn't moving toward his car to get his own gun? If you're the one on the ground after being attacked...are you really gonna take that chance? He's attacked you...you've threatened him with a gun....now you're gonna just wait for his next move? That would be stupid. Bigtime stupid.

    I'll lay 50 to 1 right now, on any wager you wanna make that this guy gets off.



    Are you alright? Because you seem to be conflating me with the alt-right hate machine that likes to scream about oppression against whites.

    I've never claimed that white people were a victim of anything here. Not a single word of that. Did you have a stroke? If not, then why do you think I'm making claims of anti-white racism?

    My claim is that any feeling of victimization by black people is completely erroneous and that it was artificially manufactured by opportunistic activists with a profit motive. I object to that as a person of intelligence and respect for the law. My whiteness is not offended in any way.
    In there, you say something about once you pull your gun out, you have already decided your life is in danger and you are going to shoot somebody.

    There is the meat of the problem. Just because you "decided" your life is in danger doesn't mean it actually, factually and incontrovertibly is. You then proceeding to end that other person's life is not a thought not an opinion anymore, that one is the epitome of life in danger. So in danger, it does not exist anymore literally.

    The other problem is that most of these gun toting bad boys are actually feeble assholes, who if you just breathe too hard in their direction might believe that their life is in danger and "pull out their weapon to shoot somebody"

    I've noticed most gun nuts are, for lack of a better word, cowards. If he hits you, you are on the ground cowering in fear, can you not collect yourself for a second and call for help or call the police? So he God-forbid hits you, and that gives you the magic pass to be judge dredd?

    I also like the twice the size argument. IIRC Trayvon Martín was also twice the size of George Zimmerman. Or so did many idiots claimed. Zimmerman's only recorded was to judge him for his actions and execute him on the spot. Because people fighting you for your own arguments (Zimmerman followed Martin, did he not?) deserves the death penalty nowadays.

    PS: quoting on mobile FTR sucks balls
  8. #1658
    Never mind that the people having Sharia imposed on them against their wishes were also Muslims."
    Yeah, I mean it's great how when someone draws a cartoon of Allah, there will be riots across the world. But, you know, if some government imposes a religious code on the masses, well that's ok, even though it's an "imposition" that no one wants. They just can't be bothered to riot about it, oppression is not as bad as disresepct.

    What is being "imposed" is religious tolerance. I WILL tolerate Islam, because if not I will be called a racist. Even though religion isn't a race. Or maybe I don't get called racist, maybe people just shift the goalposts so hating on a religion is now as bad as normal racism (but not as bad as anti-Semitism, which is obviously the worst kind of intolerance). And while we're on that subject, I do absolutely love how we have to tolerate Muslims and Jews, but Jews don't have to tolerate Muslims, and if we demand they do, we're the fucking racists.

    This is the world we live in.

    It's not your hostility toward religion that is bigotry. It's your lazy hating on people you haven't met
    I haven't met? Jesus, so anyone who is hostile towards Islam needs to get out there and meet 4 billion people? You assume flat earthers are stupid, right? I do. Well, by your argument, you're being a jerk by calling them stupid before meeting them to discuss their views in detail. Don't be a jerk. Assume all flat earthers are highly intelligent until proven otherwise.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  9. #1659
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    There is the meat of the problem. Just because you "decided" your life is in danger doesn't mean it actually, factually and incontrovertibly is.
    Doesn't matter. Why is this a concern for you? Just saying "my life was in danger" is not a free pass. They still investigate. The cops still have the power to decide you're an idiot and arrest you anyway. You make it sound like it's the wild fucking west and no one has any responsibility at all. Be smarter.

    The other problem is that most of these gun toting bad boys are actually feeble assholes, who if you just breathe too hard in their direction might believe that their life is in danger and "pull out their weapon to shoot somebody"
    Exactly who are you talking about? There are something like 400 milliion guns in America. We only have like 8000 murders a year.

    I've noticed most gun nuts are, for lack of a better word, cowards. If he hits you, you are on the ground cowering in fear, can you not collect yourself for a second and call for help or call the police? So he God-forbid hits you, and that gives you the magic pass to be judge dredd?
    Demogoguery. Exactly what law are you citing here as the "magic pass". Can you cite what specific language in the statute that offends you?

    I also like the twice the size argument. IIRC Trayvon Martín was also twice the size of George Zimmerman. Or so did many idiots claimed
    Why are they idiots?

    Zimmerman's only recorded was to judge him for his actions and execute him on the spot
    Seriously bro.....go get the facts of the case, and then we can talk about this.

    (Zimmerman followed Martin, did he not?)
    Not a crime.

    deserves the death penalty nowadays.
    Trayvon was beating him, and the 911 call clearly shows Zimmerman screaming hysterically for "help". You make it sound like Zimmerman was supposed to take a few minutes to have a careful introspective thought process about how to handle the situation.

    Testimony from the case says that Trayvon's hand touched the gun and said the words "you are going to die tonight" to zimmerman.

    What exactly is your standard for a person to be in "legitimate" fear of their life?
  10. #1660
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Hating on people whom riot over nonsense is great, whether or not they're Muslims.
    Asserting that every Muslim will riot over nonsense is silly.

    IDK what you're on about bringing Jews into the discussion.
    I assure you my personal criteria for what is prejudice do not take one's background into account, only one's actions.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    because if not I will be called [...]
    Not sure if that's just a life hack or if you're being childish.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    You assume flat earthers are stupid, right?
    No. I assume they're trolls, but none of that is relevant.

    You could believe that Muslims are inferior to non-Muslims in every way. That wouldn't make you a bigot. What would make you a bigot is if you categorically treated Muslims with disrespect and/or were arguing that Muslims deserve fewer rights under the law.

    Your beliefs are not what make you a jerk. It's your actions.
  11. #1661
    Asserting that every Muslim will riot over nonsense is silly.
    I didn't say that. But, based on observation, they are more likely to riot as a result of disrespecting Allah than they are to free themselves from Sharia.

    IDK what you're on about bringing Jews into the discussion.
    I was drifting from the point. But, anti-Semitism is considered to be a worse kind of racism than others. Even though Judaism isn't a race either. Further, any anti-Israeli sentiment is classed as anti-Semitism, so saying they're cunts for their relentless land grabs is racist.

    Of course, saying that doesn't mean I hate all Jews. But Judaism can go fuck the same ass that Islam can go fuck, as far as I'm concerned.

    What would make you a bigot is if you categorically treated Muslims with disrespect and/or were arguing that Muslims deserve fewer rights under the law.
    Well it's a good job I don't. I wouldn't insult a Muslim either to his face, or knowingly online. Not for the sake of insulting him, anyway. I don't spend my time on Twitter telling Muslims to go fuck themselves.

    And no, I don't feel they deserve to be treated differently under law. I believe the law should treat all incoming immigrants equally... ie, all of them have to learn English (or Welsh), have only limited access to benefits, and must have a provable clean criminal record. All of them, without prejudice, should meet this criteria, whether Muslim or Christian, male or female.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  12. #1662
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    But, you know, if some government imposes a religious code on the masses, well that's ok, even though it's an "imposition" that no one wants. They just can't be bothered to riot about it, oppression is not as bad as disresepct.
    Really? What are these people doing then, having a picnic?



    Also, you know what happens when people protest in Iran? Some of them get shot or thrown in jail without a trial. It's not like they can just fly a baby Ayatollah balloon and not suffer any consequences.

    So, calling them all hypocrites for not overthrowing their oppressive gov't is just lame. There's plenty of historical examples of a populace cowered into submission, it doesn't just happen in Muslim countries.
  13. #1663
    Good for Iran. I hope they succeed in toppling their cunts. They have more determination to free themselves from oppression than many other people around the world. They're not fleeing their country en masse. I respect the Iranian people, they want to stay and make Iran better.

    Now let's talk about Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Somalia, Syria, Nigeria, Indonesia and most of North Africa.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  14. #1664
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post

    Now let's talk about Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Somalia, Syria, Nigeria, Indonesia and most of North Africa.
    Sure, then we can talk about China, N Korea, most of Africa, etc. Why aren't those people revolting?
  15. #1665
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Sure, then we can talk about China, N Korea, most of Africa, etc. Why aren't those people revolting?
    What's your point here? That it's not just Muslims who tolerate oppression? That it's not just Islamic nations that are oppressive? Good job there, you're right. I have contempt for most of those, too.

    We have a lot of Chinese immigrants here in the UK. I have no problem whatsoever with these guys.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  16. #1666
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    What's your point here? That it's not just Muslims who tolerate oppression? That it's not just Islamic nations that are oppressive? Good job there, you're right. I have contempt for most of those, too.
    You seem to think it's easy to overthrow a gov't, and ergo any group of people who don't are just wimps. It's not and they're not.
  17. #1667
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Doesn't matter. Why is this a concern for you? Just saying "my life was in danger" is not a free pass. They still investigate. The cops still have the power to decide you're an idiot and arrest you anyway.
    And yet the victim is still shot dead. No investigation will resurrect this person
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  18. #1668
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Trayvon was beating him, and the 911 call clearly shows Zimmerman screaming hysterically for "help". You make it sound like Zimmerman was supposed to take a few minutes to have a careful introspective thought process about how to handle the situation.

    Testimony from the case says that Trayvon's hand touched the gun and said the words "you are going to die tonight" to zimmerman.

    What exactly is your standard for a person to be in "legitimate" fear of their life?
    He touched whose/which gun? How did the gun get in play?

    Ah, right.
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  19. #1669
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Demogoguery. Exactly what law are you citing here as the "magic pass". Can you cite what specific language in the statute that offends you?

    Not citing a law, just citing the overarching thought in these situations. OMG I FEAR FOR MY LIFEZ I HAD TO KILL HIM, HE SOOO BIG

    Related but unrelated anecdote: This one is a cop. "Trained' in handling of weapons and situations as his job. The vic is white. Imagine some random shmuck wanting to be an avenger or some shit getting a gun.

    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  20. #1670
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Not a crime.
    You are looking for trouble if you randomly follow a person around, don't you?

    Now, it is my argument that Zimmerman specifically followed Trayvon around BECAUSE he (Z) was carrying a gun. Without gun he wouldn't have done so.

    Guns (in hands of bad actors) escalate situations immediately. I do not have to cite yet another US study on guns to demonstrate why the proliferation of guns is such a bad idea.
    Last edited by Jack Sawyer; 08-15-2018 at 11:49 AM.
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  21. #1671
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    Related but unrelated anecdote: This one is a cop. "Trained' in handling of weapons and situations as his job. The vic is white. Imagine some random shmuck wanting to be an avenger or some shit getting a gun.
    Harrowing, but I take the cop's side in that. He was perfectly clear in his instructions and the consequences of not following them.
    He did not shoot on the first couple of times the guy did not follow instructions.
    At the end, it's hard to see what happened in the last second or two, but when we see the guy again, he's reaching behind himself, has crawled without his hands in the air and angled his body such that he's reaching behind himself.

    If he was otherwise innocent, he totally fucked up. Either way, good shooting, cop.
  22. #1672
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,914
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    That was a while back. The only thing I remember is that they got the wrong guy. He wasn't reaching behind him, he was just crawling awkwardly. What the cop is doing cannot be protocol: "Don't lower your arms for any reason! ... now crawl towards me!" what?
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  23. #1673
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    The woman figured it out.

    The cop literally said, if you start to fall, you better fall on your face.
  24. #1674
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,914
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    There are so many examples of cops clearly misjudging situations - on video. And I think those are perfectly reasonable examples why citizens should not be running around armed unless they can state a very clear reason and are properly trained.

    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  25. #1675
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    My adrenaline is still pumping from the first video.
    I can't watch another. Not right now.
    That's some traumatizing stuff.
  26. #1676
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,914
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    There's no doubt the guy made some horrendous life decisions - making sudden movements, crying "don't shoot me" - like that's going to do anything. But it should also be obvious that he's not in the right state of mind to follow the commands the moment he drops his hand quickly while having a cop point a rifle at him. I think this is handled poorly by the cop, but I don't see how you can blame him either. If he followed protocol correctly, I do think the protocol is flawed. That's a hell of a lot to keep track of in a high stress situation: keep legs crossed, keep arms in the air. Crawl, but don't move your hands past your waist line. If you lose balance... try to manage all that after a bottle of Smirnoff.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  27. #1677
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    You seem to think it's easy to overthrow a gov't, and ergo any group of people who don't are just wimps. It's not and they're not.
    Of course it isn't easy. When did I say it was? But, best I can tell, there's a great many Muslim people who are happy to live under Sharia. That's what this was about, not the overthrow of governments. You simply showed me what can happen if they do stand up to their government, you simply point out that it's possible.

    We've seen global riots because of cartoons. There was rioting in practically every Islamic nation. A lot of people died. Because some Danish people offended Allah. All those people, expressing their outrage. But they don't stand up to their government who oppress them with Sharia law? Why? Because they don't want to. That's what makes Iran different. Their people want change, their people want to be moderate, and engage positively with the rest of the world. And that's one reason why other Islamic nations hate them so much.

    Back in the 80s, Islam was a fantasy, it was magic carpets and genies in bottles. I wish I was still a naive little kid.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  28. #1678
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    And yet the victim is still shot dead. No investigation will resurrect this person
    I guess we shouldn't bother investigating any murders then. Not one single murder conviction has ever resulted in the resurrection of the victim. Should we stop now?
  29. #1679
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    Not citing a law, just citing the overarching thought in these situations. OMG I FEAR FOR MY LIFEZ I HAD TO KILL HIM, HE SOOO BIG
    lol, "these situations"

    If I challenged you to name five of "these situations", I doubt very much you could do so without using AltaVista or Webcrawler or whatever you kids use these days. And however few you could name off the top of your head are only possible because of exactly TWO public individuals making a living though racially charged pot-stirring.
  30. #1680
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    How did the gun get in play?
    Freedom. That's how.
  31. #1681
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    You are looking for trouble if you randomly follow a person around, don't you?
    Maybe. That's not what Zimmerman was doing. He was in the neighborhood watch. And he was watching the neighborhood. Nothing random about it.

    Now, it is my argument that Zimmerman specifically followed Trayvon around BECAUSE he (Z) was carrying a gun. Without gun he wouldn't have done so.
    Crazy. But even so. Assume this is true....what's your point? Guns shouldn't be allowed?

    Guns (in hands of bad actors) escalate situations immediately. I do not have to cite yet another US study on guns to demonstrate why the proliferation of guns is such a bad idea.
    Stop with that. Shove all your studies up your corn hole. There's really only one study that counts. Google "CDC lives saved by guns".

    the lives saved by responsible gun owners out numbers the lives taken by irresponsible gun owners by 100 to 1.

    100 to 1 Jack.

    ONE HUNDRED TO ONE

    30,000 gun deaths per year in America (including 20,000 suicides). The CDC estimates that defensive firearm use saves upwards of THREE MILLION lives per year.

    Ok....now.....what study would you like to talk about?
  32. #1682
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Maybe. That's not what Zimmerman was doing. He was in the neighborhood watch. And he was watching the neighborhood. Nothing random about it.
    Neighbourhood watch

    Not neighbourhood follow

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Crazy. But even so. Assume this is true....what's your point? Guns shouldn't be allowed?
    Would have saved quite a few more lives than your BS study that comes up in a bit, wouldn't it?

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Stop with that.

    I'll stop when the senseless killings stop.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Shove all your studies up your corn hole.
    Quite classy on your part.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    There's really only one study that counts.
    Sadly not how science works.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Google "CDC lives saved by guns".
    Google number of gun murders in Japan per year. Then do the same, but add per capita.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    the lives saved by responsible gun owners out numbers the lives taken by irresponsible gun owners by 100 to 1.
    Wow. I'm so impressed.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    100 to 1 Jack.
    I already told you I was impressed.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    ONE HUNDRED TO ONE
    God damn it.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    30,000 gun deaths per year in America (including 20,000 suicides).
    NUMBER OONNNNEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!111!!!111!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    The CDC estimates that defensive firearm use saves upwards of THREE MILLION lives per year.
    Damn, by that logic, adding weapons to Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Poland, Romania, The fucking UK, Germany, Belarus, Estonia, Czech Rep, Spain, motherfucking Qatar, Latvia, and more, would probably make them immortal. Do you want highlanders around?

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Ok....now.....what study would you like to talk about?
    Sigh
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  33. #1683
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    Do you want highlanders around?
    I'm not worried....there can be only one
  34. #1684
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    lol, "these situations"

    If I challenged you to name five of "these situations", I doubt very much you could do so without using AltaVista or Webcrawler or whatever you kids use these days. And however few you could name off the top of your head are only possible because of exactly TWO public individuals making a living though racially charged pot-stirring.
    Pistorious comes to mind


    Oh, and this asshole. Note how he was in mortal fear for his life because SOMEONE SHOVED HIM TO THE GROUND (BECAUSE HE WAS ARGUING WITH SOME WOMAND) AND THEN BACKED AWAY.

    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  35. #1685
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    Pistorious comes to mind
    I don't recall Pistorious ever claiming that he was being assailed by someone larger than he is. Side note though, I think you get a little more latitude when reacting to a size disadvantage if you happen to not have legs.

    Wasn't that just straight up murder anyway? Just because one time someone desperately and erroneously invoked a self-defense claim....does that mean it's no longer a legitimate claim, ever? What exactly is your point?

    Also, I thought your problem was with American gun policy? Didn't this happen in some shithole African country?

    What exactly are you describing when you say "these situations"
  36. #1686
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    Oh, and this asshole. Note how he was in mortal fear for his life because SOMEONE SHOVED HIM TO THE GROUND (BECAUSE HE WAS ARGUING WITH SOME WOMAND) AND THEN BACKED AWAY.
    Your timeline is missing a few key events.
  37. #1687
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    Neighbourhood watch

    Not neighbourhood follow
    Ridiculousness. Fuck off with this trolling. Let me know when you want to have a serious talk.
  38. #1688
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Your timeline is missing a few key events.
    My timeline?

    Does the video skip?
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  39. #1689
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    I don't recall Pistorious ever claiming that he was being assailed by someone larger than he is. Side note though, I think you get a little more latitude when reacting to a size disadvantage if you happen to not have legs.

    Wasn't that just straight up murder anyway? Just because one time someone desperately and erroneously invoked a self-defense claim....does that mean it's no longer a legitimate claim, ever? What exactly is your point?

    Also, I thought your problem was with American gun policy?

    My problem is with gun policy in general.

    Spoiler alert: I'm not American. You guys can kill each other all you want.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Didn't this happen in some shithole African country?
    Yeaqh, from the "here be dragons" part of the map


    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    What exactly are you describing when you say "these situations"
    People who feel "unsafe", constantly "in mortal danger", making them absolutely NEED to have a gun.

    The kind who feel "naked" without a gun.

    The kind who would shoot someone dead if said someone shoved him to the floor. One shove means the man's life is to be taken.

    The kind who didn't get the memo that the Wild Wild West is over.

    These situations.
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  40. #1690
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Ridiculousness. Fuck off with this trolling. Let me know when you want to have a serious talk.
    So being in the neighbourhood watch gives you a license to stalk.

    Ok, got ya.
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  41. #1691
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    So being in the neighbourhood watch gives you a license to stalk.

    Ok, got ya.
    So, following this logic, if someone is following you and "you feel unsafe" and "he's so big", and you carry a gun, take it out and shoot the man and then claim self defense because it was a stranger and you felt he was following you, that's ok.

    The other is ok as well. The follower follows you, sees you draw a weapon to shoot him, draws his own and shoots you too. You both shoot each other. That's ok as well.

    LOL. I never knew GTA was that real
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  42. #1692
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    IDK the specifics, but there has to be an open grey area between due diligence of keeping an eye on someone who seems like they're up to no good and "stalking."
  43. #1693
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    So being in the neighbourhood watch gives you a license to stalk.
    Stalking involves repeated actions, active harassment, a threat of some kind. Following someone once does not equate to stalking.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  44. #1694
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Stalking involves repeated actions, active harassment, a threat of some kind. Following someone once does not equate to stalking.
    You know what, I already know the word stalking is open to interpretation based on different cultures and different laws. Forget I mentioned it.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  45. #1695
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    IDK the specifics, but there has to be an open grey area between due diligence of keeping an eye on someone who seems like they're up to no good and "stalking."
    Dude is a neighbourhood watch, not a cop.

    You see shit you don't like, lay off the pipe and call the pro's. You don't go all Magnum PI up in that motherfucker later, for obvious reasons.

    But on the other hand, maybe he had so many false alarms already they would not send him any more forces or he was warned or whatever, and he had no other recourse but to take the law in his literal hands. Emboldened by the fact he was carrying, of course.

    If he had no gun at the time, he'd probably be watching Dexter on Netflix at home instead and Martin would still be alive today.
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  46. #1696
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,914
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    If he had no gun at the time, he'd probably be watching Dexter on Netflix at home instead and Martin would still be alive today.
    Exactly.
    I think what drives most people to own and carry a firearm is the crippling fear that nothing worth telling will ever happen to them. "heroism is first and foremost a reflex of the terror of death" - Earnest Brecker. He's fun.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  47. #1697
    I don't think there's anything wrong with simply following someone, if the sole intention is to ensure that person is not breaking any laws. Just keep your distance and don't do anything that can be considered threatening. If someone feels threatened because they share a footpath with someone, perhaps they should not be out alone. You can't say that someone doesn't have the right to walk the same public route you're walking.

    I dunno the deatils, if there was any harassment of any kind, but simply following someone with no illegitimate motive is not stalking, not close.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  48. #1698
    Stalking is a crime. Zimmerman was charged with many things. Stalking was not one of them. So let us know when you want to have a discussion about this based on actual facts, and actual laws.

    If you want to say that Zimmerman was an emboldened cowboy who had hero fantasies that manifested in tragic circumstances. Fine. I probably agree with you. And the truth is, prosecutors could have successfully prosecuted him and debunked his self defense claim. They could have said exactly what you and I both seem to agree on....Zimmerman had a vigilante hard-on, and that made his trigger finger too sensitive.

    Instead......here's what happened: The alt-left got a hold of this story and turned into a post-modern narrative of racism and implicit bias. Are you aware of how much misinformation there was in the media? Google "NBC Zimmerman 911 tape". Then tell me how you can watch NBC ever again? Radical leftists like Ben Crump, and Al Sharpton stirred up enough of a shitstorm to get Zimmerman charged with murder.

    So instead of debunking the self-defense claim and convicting Zimmerman for being over-zealous vigilante dick-hole, they decided to try and convict him for being a racist hate monger who shot a sweet little boy simply for the color of his skin.

    There is a compelling case for 'Criminally Negligent Homicide'. Instead the prosecution became possessed by ideological pathology and charged Zimmerman with murder. Zimmerman was acquitted because there was never enough evidence, (or any evidence), to support such a charge.

    It amazes me that you can take all of that into account, and then decide that the answer to "these situations" is more oppressive gun regulations. Why not admit that identity-politics tactics failed, and had the results were the opposite of what was intended? All they had to do was look at the situation objectively, and apply existing laws objectively. Instead, they went right to race and tried to convict Zimmerman as a dangerous white supremacist (even though he's not white)

    And you think the problem here is gun laws........?????!!!!!!!

    You really need to learn to sort out what news you hear is news, and what's demagoguery. Because I find it hard to believe that you would hold half the opinions that you do if you had all the facts.

    Go ask Oskar if you can borrow some of his IQ's

    Side Note: I think this more recent shooter will be convicted. See post #1577. There seems to be plenty of evidence to prove "malice aforethought". You guys should have taken that 50-1 wager that I was offering before I saw that story.
    Last edited by BananaStand; 08-16-2018 at 07:25 PM.
  49. #1699
    "The [Zimmerman] jury made the right call according to the law. But Zimmerman probably isn't getting into heaven"

    -Trump (paraphrased)
  50. #1700
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    The kind who didn't get the memo that the Wild Wild West is over.
    Yesterday I was walking into a Subway when I saw a guy with a pistol strapped to his hip and a T-shirt depicting an AK-47 with the caption "Come and Take It"

    No one died.
  51. #1701
    Is the world to forever be divided between the people who think they know what is better for everybody else, and the people who don't think that?
  52. #1702
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I don't think there's anything wrong with simply following someone, if the sole intention is to ensure that person is not breaking any laws.
    Why is this your business?

    Are you a PI? A cop? A fucking security guard? Batman? Paul Blart? Do you have a uniform on, or a god damn t-shirt, or any other indicator for whatever bullshit reason you might possibly have had for being behind me (costume shops do exist, though)?

    The only reason you follow a person is to pickpocket said person. Or to stalk said person, aka you are a pantyshot guy. Or you are law enforcement, and you are doing your fucking job. Said person becomes your target.

    BTW, NW is not law enforcement. Just making sure we are on the same page.

    There is no reason in the world why you would just follow a random person who you have no idea who the fuck he or she is around which is for any kind of good. Why the fuck would you just randomly follow anyone, particularly a random person?

    A neigbourhood watch is just communication. You see someone you don't know in your neigbourhood, you are supposed to communicate with the others who live there indicating you saw someone who is not supposed to be where you think they were supposed to be as you have no idea what they are up to or who they are. If it escalates, you call in security, or cops. That, and look for missing cats during the day.

    That's all. No playing lone ranger.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Just keep your distance and don't do anything that can be considered threatening. If someone feels threatened because they share a footpath with someone, perhaps they should not be out alone. You can't say that someone doesn't have the right to walk the same public route you're walking.
    Would you not feel threatened if someone is intently and purposefully following you around, late at night, and you are the only two people on the street? What about during the plain of day? With so many other paths to take, he takes the exact one you take, speeding up and slowing down, and even stopping exactly when you do. AND YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHO THE FUCK THIS PERSON IS.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I dunno the deatils, if there was any harassment of any kind, but simply following someone with no illegitimate motive is not stalking, not close.

    If I'm walking around some neighbourhood, and then a random person starts following me intently for like 2 blocks and I notice it, I will stop and see if you walk by. If I stop and you stop, then I go and you go, we WILL undoubtedly have a confrontation because why the fuck are you following me?

    I'd probably say something along the lines of "why the fuck are you following me for"?

    What follows, ong?

    Now, keeping in mind that I'm actually big and black, unlike Martin here who was actually just a black kid, there is a non-zero chance the fucking coward following me for no reason would most likely fear for his life because I asked him a question and kill me.

    Because THAT'S WHAT HE WAS LOOKING FOR. A CONFRONTATION. ME ASKING HIM WHY HE IS FOLLOWING ME IS A CONFRONTATION TO HIM. A REASON TO USE THE FUCKING PIECE HE WAS CARRYING AS HE FEELS MORTALLY THREATENED BY MY LANGUAGE. AND ME BEING ME. Like what happened with the guy taking another guys life for an argument over a handicap space. And a shove. And mind you, post-shove, the shover stepped back. He could go in on the ground and clock the other guy MMA style, but he didn't. He stepped back from the confrontation.

    That was enough to take his life, though.

    Judge, jury, executioner all in one. Judge fucking Dredd.
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  53. #1703
    There is no reason in the world why you would just follow a random person who you have no idea who the fuck he or she is around which is for any kind of good. Why the fuck would you just randomly follow anyone, particularly a random person?
    If you're charged with watching the neighborhood, then randos are exactly what you're looking for. Trayvon didn't live there.

    A neigbourhood watch is just communication. ....you call in security, or cops.
    That's exactly what he did

    That's all. No playing lone ranger.
    ^language of a demagogue. Sad really. All Zimmerman did was watch where Trayvon was going, and relaying that information to police dispatchers.

    If I stop and you stop, then I go and you go, we WILL undoubtedly have a confrontation because why the fuck are you following me?
    Wait a minute...this presumes that you know that if you take a step back, he will take a step back. And when a person takes a step back that automatically makes them harmless and innocent. Isn't that how it works?

    Now, keeping in mind that I'm actually big and black, unlike Martin here who was actually just a black kid,
    WRONG! All the pictures in the media were like four years old at the time. They all showed Trayvon when he was like 14, because that's what demagogues do. He was actually a full grown man.

    Again, PLEASE go get the actual facts of this case if you really want to discuss it.

    Here's some hints to get you started.

    1) Trayvon was cutting through private property in order to take a shortcut to a parallel street where his father lived. That's why Zimmerman thought he looked suspicious. Not because he was black. Not because he was wearing a hoodie. It's because he was somewhere he wasn't supposed to be. And it was Zimmerman's responsibility as a member of the NW to watch for exactly that kind of thing.

    2) While you can say it was over-zealous for Zimmerman to follow him after making the initial report, what you can't say is that it was unlawful. He was on the phone with police dispatch the entire time. It's not like Zimmerman was going looking for a fight. Usually if a person is trying to commit a crime, they don't live-stream it to the cops

    3) All Trayvon had to do was walk to his house, and open the door. Instead, he evaded Zimmerman. From Zimmerman's point of view, doesn't this validate his suspicion? Even if you don't agree, that doesn't change the fact that all Zimmerman was trying to do was locate a suspicious person doing suspicious things and relay that information to law enforcement. He wasn't looking for a fight.

    4) He only got in a fight because instead of just going home and being a reasonable person, Trayvon decided to make a violent confrontation with Zimmerman. you get that? Trayvon initiated the fight. All he had to do was go home. All he had to do was call the cops himself and say "help me I'm being followed by a fat mexican" Instead he stayed on the phone with his girlfriend boasting about his upcoming fight.

    All Zimmerman did was follow a guy. Trayvon threw fists. Zimmerman screamed for help. Trayvon said "your'e gonna die tonight"
    Last edited by BananaStand; 08-16-2018 at 10:51 PM.
  54. #1704
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker


    An FBI agent. As responsible a gun owner as they come.
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  55. #1705
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    If you're charged with watching the neighborhood, then randos are exactly what you're looking for. Trayvon didn't live there.
    Then call the cops and go home

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    That's exactly what he did
    Did he do the "go home" part??


    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    ^language of a demagogue.
    How is the "following" of a person to you, you high-IQ non-demagogue?

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Sad really. All Zimmerman did was watch where Trayvon was going, and relaying that information to police dispatchers.
    I hoped that that was actually all he did.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Wait a minute...this presumes that you know that if you take a step back, he will take a step back. And when a person takes a step back that automatically makes them harmless and innocent. Isn't that how it works?
    LOL, logic


    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    WRONG! All the pictures in the media were like four years old at the time. They all showed Trayvon when he was like 14, because that's what demagogues do. He was actually a full grown man.
    Dude, 18 year olds are kids. It's not like magically they leap to adulthood once they leave 17 years and 355 days of age.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Again, PLEASE go get the actual facts of this case if you really want to discuss it.
    No I don't. All I know is DO NOT FOLLOW ME AT RANDOM. If you saw me jumping some fence, then call the cops and go home. It is not your job to take the law into your own hands.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Here's some hints to get you started.

    1) Trayvon was cutting through private property in order to take a shortcut to a parallel street where his father lived. That's why Zimmerman thought he looked suspicious. Not because he was black. Not because he was wearing a hoodie. It's because he was somewhere he wasn't supposed to be. And it was Zimmerman's responsibility as a member of the NW to watch for exactly that kind of thing.
    Bingo. Call the cops and go home. He did not really master the go home part.

    You can also do a flashlight on the dude or something and shout loudly so that more people hear the commotion, from afar, "I saw you jumping a fence, you are not from around here, I have the cops on the phone right here". Do not be Batman, do not go into the confrontation.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    2) While you can say it was over-zealous for Zimmerman to follow him after making the initial report,
    Employee of the month right there

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    what you can't say is that it was unlawful. He was on the phone with police dispatch the entire time.
    Then his job was done. He followed him, he said he commited a crime, he said he saw him commit a crime (the felony of jumping a fence of course), now let the cops do their job. It's over, go home.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    It's not like Zimmerman was going looking for a fight.
    I wonder if he would have followed him without having a gun on him.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Usually if a person is trying to commit a crime, they don't live-stream it to the cops
    Unless you actually believe you are Batman or some shit. You gotta text commisioner Gordon while you are at it.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    3) All Trayvon had to do was walk to his house, and open the door. Instead, he evaded Zimmerman. From Zimmerman's point of view, doesn't this validate his suspicion?
    Anything he would do would validate his suspicion. Like the dude from the parking lot shooting. That is why he should just leave the amateur CBing and go home. He already reported. Sit chill and wait for the cops to arrive and do their shit.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Even if you don't agree, that doesn't change the fact that all Zimmerman was trying to do was locate a suspicious person doing suspicious things and relay that information to law enforcement. He wasn't looking for a fight.
    Once he sat on his tail, he was looking for a confrontation. He could finally start jerking off to the moment he stopped a criminal mastermind who jumped a fence.

    If you follow somebody there are two results. If you stop following that person, then you are not looking for one of those results, as it cannot possibly happen.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    4) He only got in a fight because instead of just going home and being a reasonable person,
    The situation was ripe for all kinds of shit, obviously.

    See that? "Situation"

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Trayvon decided to make a violent confrontation with Zimmerman.
    I probably would as well, some random unidentified dude follows you at night with no clear indication who he is or what he wants?

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    you get that?
    No.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Trayvon initiated the fight. All he had to do was go home.
    Ironically that was all Zimmerman had to do as well. Shit, I just mentioned that one thing like 20 times in this response.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    All he had to do was call the cops himself and say "help me I'm being followed by a fat mexican" Instead he stayed on the phone with his girlfriend boasting about his upcoming fight.
    Kids. See above.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    All Zimmerman did was follow a guy.
    Do not follow random people. Also, you are not Batman. Spoiler alert: Batman does not exist!

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Trayvon threw fists. Zimmerman screamed for help.
    Such a bitch.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Trayvon said "your'e gonna die tonight"
    Trayvon's last words, according to Zimmerman. Is there an actual, verified recording of this?
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  56. #1706
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    That's twice now you've accused this guy of "picking a fight" with the woman.

    There's a world of difference between "having an argument" and "picking a fight". I see absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this guy was "picking a fight" with a woman... rather, he was "having an argument". If we're simply discussing the subject matter in hand (in this case parking in retard spaces), and assuming there is no intimdation or threatening behaviour, then it makes absolutely no difference whether it's a man or woman. None.

    What's it got to do with equality? You're using the fact she's a woman as ammo against him. Forgive me, I assumed you were in favour of gender equality. Correct me if I'm wrong.



    I'm torn on the matter, to be honest. On the one hand, I do think that in an armed country, people should have the right to defend themselves against threats to life. And banana is right that this guy has a split second to determine if his life is at risk. That said, this dude does appear to take it a little too far, like why doesn't he shout "get the fuck down, on the floor", some shit like that? It's a reckless reaction, probably influenced by anger rather than fear for life. But I have absolutely no idea what goes on in peoples' heads in that split second they have to make a judgement, so other than to say he's a piece of shit, I can't really say if I think he should be jailed for this. He was pushed over forcefully, fear is a natural emotion to feel in the seconds that follow. How would I react? Fuck knows.



    Keep in mind, this dude is basically a gun nut. This is an as biased an account of things as you could get.

    And yet the first thing he says is to NOT GET INTO FIGHTS.

    JUST CARRYING A FIREARM DOES NOT GIVE YOU A RIGHT TO BE THE JERK.

    JUST CARRYING A FIREARM DOES NOT MAKE YOU THE ENFORCER OF ANY MORAL CODE.

    I like this guy.
    Last edited by Jack Sawyer; 08-16-2018 at 11:36 PM.
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  57. #1707
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    And this is a few cops perspective of the situation.

    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  58. #1708
    Quote Originally Posted by jack
    Why is this your business?
    Why is it not? I'm not breaking a law following someone.

    Are you a PI? A cop? A fucking security guard? Batman? Paul Blart? Do you have a uniform on, or a god damn t-shirt, or any other indicator for whatever bullshit reason you might possibly have had for being behind me (costume shops do exist, though)?
    Do I need a uniform on to go for a walk?

    The only reason you follow a person is to pickpocket said person. Or to stalk said person, aka you are a pantyshot guy. Or you are law enforcement, and you are doing your fucking job. Said person becomes your target.
    Or you are a concerned resident who decides to go for a walk to make sure that guy isn't doing anything he shouldn't be doing. This is not illegal.

    BTW, NW is not law enforcement. Just making sure we are on the same page.
    I'm not arguin it is. I'm arguing that there's nothing wrong with going for a walk, and that I am perfectly entitled to go that way, in the same direction as that dodgy looking guy.

    A neigbourhood watch is just communication.
    Right. So you're being very specific with the definition of "neighbourhood watch" while being very loose with the word "stalking".

    Going for a walk is not illegal. Walking the same route as someone else is not illegal. Thinking you can differentiate between "following someone" and "walking in the same direction as someone" is nonsense.

    Would you not feel threatened if someone is intently and purposefully following you around, late at night, and you are the only two people on the street?
    I'm glad you're finally getting yo an important question.

    Would I feel threatened? It depends.
    How closely am I being followed? Are they maintaining distance or getting closer? What if I walk faster? And one more very, very important question... do I have anything to hide? I mean, is calling the police an option if I am truly afriad of this person's intentions?

    I have walked late at night in town centre many, many times. I have lost count of the times I have kept an eye on someone walking the same route as me to ensure they're not gaining on me. Is that fear? I call it caution. If you're out and about alone, late at night, you have a responsibility to protect yourself. Keep an eye on who's around, make sure you know where you are and where you're going. If you feel threatened, fucking run, or call the police.

    I mean sure you can easily argue a man should have the right to walk around any time without fear. Sure. A man also has a right to take a walk without fear of being accused of stalking What's the difference between going for a walk and folloing someone? You need to be very clear, legal clarity is needed to further this debate.

    With so many other paths to take, he takes the exact one you take, speeding up and slowing down, and even stopping exactly when you do.
    Wait, you think you're being followed, are in fear, and you stop? Then you're an idiot.

    If I'm walking around some neighbourhood, and then a random person starts following me intently for like 2 blocks and I notice it, I will stop and see if you walk by. If I stop and you stop, then I go and you go, we WILL undoubtedly have a confrontation because why the fuck are you following me?
    Right, well if you're going to stop and have a confrontation, I don't think you can use the word "fear" to describe your emotions at this moment in time. Furthermore, you're doing someone wrong now. You're turning a walk into a conversation. You might be harassing him now, I mean he was doing nothing illegal, and now your are confronting him, demanding an explanation. You're infinging on his right to go for a walk, while he was no infringing any of your right, unless you're going to argue you have the right to not be "followed", in which case you're going to need to clarify legally what that means.

    I'd probably say something along the lines of "why the fuck are you following me for"?
    So you're escalating this situation. This is highly irresponsible.

    Now, keeping in mind that I'm actually big and black, unlike Martin here who was actually just a black kid, there is a non-zero chance the fucking coward following me for no reason would most likely fear for his life because I asked him a question and kill me.
    "coward"
    "no reason"

    This is just rhetoric, but you know nothing about this stranger. How do you know he's not simply going for a walk? How do you know he's not some kind neighbourhood watch type keeping an eye on the streets? Why is that a problem for you? What gives you the right to interrupt his walk with confrontation, while he doesn't have the right to walk the same way you're going? How do you think you're in the right when you stop someone you don't know and challenge them?

    Because THAT'S WHAT HE WAS LOOKING FOR. A CONFRONTATION.
    So are you. You stopped.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  59. #1709
    Jack - your opinion of the Zimmerman case is colored by words that YOU inserted into the narrative. You're not perceiving facts. you're letting your own brain confirmation-bias you into believing that Zimmerman was a thug and Trayvon sweet and harmless.

    It was so clearly the other way around, I can't possibly understand why you insist on being in such denial. Please ask Oskar to borrow some IQ's before posting on this again.

    Why do you say "randomly" so much? Trayvon was in a place he wasn't supposed to be. That's what alerted Zimmerman. That's why he called the cops. You say he should go home. Maybe. But just because he doesn't go home, doesn't make him a criminal. Surveillance is not illegal. It's not even unreasonable if you're a member of group charged with the function of neighborhood surveillance. You can call it stalking, following, harassing, or whatever pejorative verb your demagogue imagination chooses. But you're only deluding yourself by using these loaded terms to describe perfectly reasonable actions.

    You can also do a flashlight on the dude or something and shout loudly so that more people hear the commotion, from afar, "I saw you jumping a fence, you are not from around here, I have the cops on the phone right here".
    That is just about exactly what happened. You must have forgot that part because it doesn't fit your racist-thug narrative. Zimmerman did exactly what you're calling for here, and Trayvon clocked him in the head. PLEASE GET THE FUCKING FACTS

    I wonder if he would have followed him without having a gun on him.
    This is a question of fact for a jury. A jury was convened. The question was asked. The jury gave its answer. Why are you still asking the question?
  60. #1710
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Why is it not? I'm not breaking a law following someone.

    Following someone is generally a bad idea unless you're a licensed private investigator, but it doesn't hurt to be aware of how it's done so you can protect yourself where possible.

    It's worth pointing out that, while laws vary from state to state, following someone is not only a gross invasion of privacy, but can also be illegal if it can be interpreted either as stalking or harassment in your area. You can read more about the legality of stalking in each state here, however, in general, it is a very bad idea to follow someone without their permission.
    https://lifehacker.com/how-to-follow...ght-1454091062


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Do I need a uniform on to go for a walk?
    Are you going for a walk or are you following someone?

    In the former, no. In the latter, goddamn yes.

    These are attorneys answering this very question:

    When you observed potentially illegal conduct simply stop, telephone 911 and report the actions you observe as suspicious. Leave the "following" or investigation to the police.
    The criminal law underwent a metamorphosis twent years ago with domestic violence legislation. Merely following someone is now the crime of "stalking". The perpetrator can be arrested and order of protection issued for the complainant.

    This scheme can be abused by the complainant to mask her own criminal misconduct because of the emphasis to make examples of violent individuals. These days, any interpersonal violence is criminally sanctionable. You'll need an attorney every time you make friends.

    I did not write the law.
    Depending on the particulars of the situation, it might constitute a crime or a violation or nothing. A physical "attack" however, is usually criminal in nature.
    https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/i...o-1337955.html




    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Or you are a concerned resident who decides to go for a walk to make sure that guy isn't doing anything he shouldn't be doing. This is not illegal.
    You are actively looking for a confrontation. That's why. Particularly if you do not know the person you decided to play Magnum PI on. What exactly do you think will result from this action?



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I'm not arguin it is. I'm arguing that there's nothing wrong with going for a walk, and that I am perfectly entitled to go that way, in the same direction as that dodgy looking guy.
    See what lawyers above think about you going for a walk and just "happen" to follow a person around.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Right. So you're being very specific with the definition of "neighbourhood watch" while being very loose with the word "stalking".
    Yes. Do you like being followed around by some random person for no reason you can think of?

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Going for a walk is not illegal. Walking the same route as someone else is not illegal. Thinking you can differentiate between "following someone" and "walking in the same direction as someone" is nonsense.
    US Lawyers disagree. Probably most other countries as well. There is a reason why cop cars in britain have such brash coloring.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I'm glad you're finally getting yo an important question.

    Would I feel threatened? It depends.
    How closely am I being followed? Are they maintaining distance or getting closer? What if I walk faster? And one more very, very important question... do I have anything to hide? I mean, is calling the police an option if I am truly afriad of this person's intentions?
    So you are just about your business, and you notice someone is following you. Quite intently. I assume of course you have not done anything wrong, it's not like you just robbed another person at gunpoint or something. I cannot see how the question in that moment is anything but: why the fuck are you following me?

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I have walked late at night in town centre many, many times. I have lost count of the times I have kept an eye on someone walking the same route as me to ensure they're not gaining on me.

    Mmmmm. So you think following a person is not a bad thing to do, yet you too keep an eye out for this exact thing. So, if you do not think it is a wrong thing to do, why do you care?

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Is that fear? I call it caution. If you're out and about alone, late at night, you have a responsibility to protect yourself.
    Which is my point to begin with. The only reason you'd be following me is to do me harm. There is no other proper reason for you to do so. Why are you arguing with me?

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    eep an eye on who's around, make sure you know where you are and where you're going. If you feel threatened, fucking run, or call the police.
    In such situations, you do not know how you will react. Not everyone remains cool as a cucumber here.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I mean sure you can easily argue a man should have the right to walk around any time without fear. Sure. A man also has a right to take a walk without fear of being accused of stalking What's the difference between going for a walk and folloing someone?
    You just said it above.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    You need to be very clear, legal clarity is needed to further this debate.
    I have been quite clear on my stance on this IMO.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Wait, you think you're being followed, are in fear, and you stop? Then you're an idiot.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Is that fear? I call it caution. If you're out and about alone, late at night, you have a responsibility to protect yourself.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    In such situations, you do not know how you will react. Not everyone remains cool as a cucumber here.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Right, well if you're going to stop and have a confrontation, I don't think you can use the word "fear" to describe your emotions at this moment in time. Furthermore, you're doing someone wrong now.
    And that is my point about the situation and the escalation of said situations. He did me wrong by following me. Now I do him wrong by confronting him. How can this end well?

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    You're turning a walk into a conversation.
    Me? Who turned my walk into a stalkfest?

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    You might be harassing him now, I mean he was doing nothing illegal,
    And yet you feel the need to protect yourself in that situation, right? But it's not a wrong thing for him to do, right? It's not illegal either?

    Then why do you feel the need to protect yourself from that situation?

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    and now your are confronting him, demanding an explanation.
    Would be my way of protecting myself from that situation. Remember, people are different


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    aYou're infinging on his right to go for a walk,
    And he infringed on my right for privacy

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    while he was no infringing any of your right,
    He infringed on my right for privacy


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    unless you're going to argue you have the right to not be "followed", in which case you're going to need to clarify legally what that means.
    Do not follow me around. Do I have to clarify what I mean by that? Isn't the "Don't follow me around" part clear?


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    So you're escalating this situation. This is highly irresponsible.
    Again, not everyone is the same. People react differently in different situations. I'm sure a few of the carry guys would be salivating at the chance of the follower saying anything to them and then they would shoot said person in a millisecond because "they felt threatened".

    Now I would also feel threatened by someone following me, and my response would probably be as I described above. And this situation could have been perfectly avoided by simply respecting each other's privacy.

    See something suspicious? Call it in. That's all you have to do.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    "coward"
    Would he not have gone after him had he not had the warm feels provided by the piece he was carrying?



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    "no reason"
    Again. See something suspicious? Call it in. That's all you have to do. This is what a lawyer says:

    When you observed potentially illegal conduct simply stop, telephone 911 and report the actions you observe as suspicious. Leave the "following" or investigation to the police.
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    This is just rhetoric, but you know nothing about this stranger. How do you know he's not simply going for a walk?
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    How do you know he's not some kind neighbourhood watch type keeping an eye on the streets?
    My point about the uniforms/indication as to who you are. Identify yourself, and your intentions. That is why cop cars in the UK have battenburg markings.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Why is that a problem for you?
    See my whole response above.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    What gives you the right to interrupt his walk with confrontation,
    What gives him the right to invade my privacy in minding my business and follow me?

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    while he doesn't have the right to walk the same way you're going?
    He ABSOLUTELY CAN go where I'm going. That's the reason for the movement stops. If he is actually going where I'm going, he would continue moving, no problems with that, right?


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    How do you think you're in the right when you stop someone you don't know and challenge them?
    Only if they are following me.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    So are you. You stopped.
    And that's the thing. What was he expecting by following me?

    All of this hypothetical could have been avoided had he just NOT FOLLOWED me.
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  61. #1711
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,667
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Jack - your opinion of the Zimmerman case is colored by words that YOU inserted into the narrative. You're not perceiving facts. you're letting your own brain confirmation-bias you into believing that Zimmerman was a thug and Trayvon sweet and harmless.
    Thugs generally shoot people.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    It was so clearly the other way around, I can't possibly understand why you insist on being in such denial. Please ask Oskar to borrow some IQ's before posting on this again.
    Your lack of empathy is baffling.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Why do you say "randomly" so much? Trayvon was in a place he wasn't supposed to be.
    Enough for a death penalty apparently.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    That's what alerted Zimmerman. That's why he called the cops.
    Good for him.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    You say he should go home. Maybe.
    End of argument

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    But just because he doesn't go home, doesn't make him a criminal.
    Nah, he wanted more. He got more. The other guy too.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Surveillance is not illegal.
    Yeah, there is a nice invention called a camera just for that.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    It's not even unreasonable if you're a member of group charged with the function of neighborhood surveillance.
    If you wanted to follow people around in the name of neighbourhood watch, please identify yourself as being so.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    You can call it stalking, following, harassing, or whatever pejorative verb your demagogue imagination chooses. But you're only deluding yourself by using these loaded terms to describe perfectly reasonable actions.
    Only perfectly reasonable if you are actively looking for action.


    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    That is just about exactly what happened.
    How do you know this? After the fact a keyring flashlight was found? LOL

    You must not have seen the video of cops planting evidence just so then turning on their bodycams.

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    You must have forgot that part because it doesn't fit your racist-thug narrative.
    It fits Zimmerman's Batman narrative perfectly

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Zimmerman did exactly what you're calling for here, and Trayvon clocked him in the head.
    This is the problem. I probably would too.

    What was he expecting once he decided to follow the guy?

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    PLEASE GET THE FUCKING FACTS

    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    This is a question of fact for a jury. A jury was convened. The question was asked. The jury gave its answer. Why are you still asking the question?
    OJ's jury aquitted him as well. Spoiler alert; he did it
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  62. #1712
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    OJ's jury aquitted him as well. Spoiler alert; he did it
    Ok, did Zimmerman's jury come out afterwards and say "we know he did it but we let him off anyway as revenge for Rodney King" ?
  63. #1713
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    It fits Zimmerman's Batman narrative perfectly
    ^Total demagoguery

    What 'Batman' narrative?

    When have you ever heard Batman say "I was walking back to my truck and this dude jumped me and broke my nose. I was screaming for help like a pussy bitch. He reached for the gun. He was going to kill me, so I shot him."
  64. #1714
    I really don't even see why we're having such a nit-picky debate about the details of the confrontation. Both men had the opportunity to walk away from the incident before it began. Both men contributed to the escalation. One more than the other obviously, but let's not get into who's who. I doubt very much that Zimmerman initiated a physical confrontation with fists, while he was armed, right after he called the cops. That makes zero sense. Trayvon threw the first punch. Maybe you think he was justified in doing so. You're wrong, but I don't care. After that point, what do you expect Zimmerman to think? His nose is broken, his head has been slammed into concrete, his assailant knows a gun is in play, he's screamed for help, he's tried to get away....are you really saying he shouldn't shoot?? You're nuts!

    But nevermind all that. Your issues with this case are summed up in two questions....

    A) Was Zimmerman criminally negligent when he continued to follow Trayvon against the advice of the dispatcher? Did he do anything that could reasonably lead to a violent confrontation (mere surveillance doesn't count!)? Was he criminally responsible in the escalation by being negligent?

    B) Was Zimmerman's entire purpose for reporting Trayvon's presence and subsequently following him, racially motivated? Was Trayvon profiled and surveilled merely because of ethnic animus?

    If you answer yes to A, but not B. Then charge Zimmerman with Criminally Negligent Homicide and let the the jury sort out what actions are reasonable, and which are negligent. But if you answered yes to B, or A and B, then you charge him with murder, and throw the fucking book at him. However, it should be noted that in light of all available evidence, you would have to be a hopeless moron possessed by identity politics ideology to answer 'yes' to question B.

    Enter Al Sharpton

    Jack, if you think justice was perverted here, I challenge you to identify exactly how. The prosecution was tainted with politics because of people like you demanding justice for a perfectly lawful shooting because you're so blinded by post-modern indoctrination that YOU LITERALLY CAN'T SEE ANYTHING OTHER THAN A WHITE OPPRESSOR SUBOORDINATING A BLACK VICTIM.

    It was demanded that Zimmerman be charged with a crime and a motive that was never supported by a shred of evidence. And the results were what you'd expect.
    Last edited by BananaStand; 08-17-2018 at 01:36 PM.
  65. #1715
    Wow that's a biggie, I read as I reply...

    Quote Originally Posted by jack
    Are you going for a walk or are you following someone?
    I'll assume you get to the legal difference between the two later in your post.

    These are attorneys answering this very question:
    Nope, doesn't answer my question.

    Quote Originally Posted by random attourney
    Merely following someone is now the crime of "stalking".
    Jeez, so if I'm walking through town and someone is behind me going in the same direction, I should call the police? I mean, I'm being followed. Maybe I need to turn right or left and see the other person make the same change before we are legally classed as "being followed". Still, maybe they were going that way anyway. Where's the line?

    You are actively looking for a confrontation. That's why. Particularly if you do not know the person you decided to play Magnum PI on. What exactly do you think will result from this action?
    You're assuming this is "actively seeking confrontation". If the follower keeps some kind of reasonable distance, then it's perfectly reasonable to assume the follower only intends to call the police if he is witness to a crime. That isn't confrontation.

    See what lawyers above think about you going for a walk and just "happen" to follow a person around.
    Yeah those lawyers were really clear about that. I'm still unaware who makes the determination that a person is following someone, as opposed walking in the same direction as someone.

    Yes. Do you like being followed around by some random person for no reason you can think of?
    I don't believe I have the right to stop someone taking a walk in public. I will walk at a good pace to ensure reasonable distance, and if he still gains on me, and I'm convinced he's a threat, well I probably just run. If he starts running too, well now it's more than "merely following", there is no question he is in pursuit of me, and it's a different ball game.

    The idea it's illegal to "merely follow" someone is ludicrous. That's certainly not the case here in the UK. There would need to be aggravating circumastances for it to become criminal.

    So you are just about your business, and you notice someone is following you. Quite intently. I assume of course you have not done anything wrong, it's not like you just robbed another person at gunpoint or something. I cannot see how the question in that moment is anything but: why the fuck are you following me?
    Yep, "why the fuck are you following me" is definitely something I would think. So I walk faster, try to remove myself from this potentially dangerous situation. At no point do I think "this guy has no right to walk the same direction as I am walking", because that would be insane. I am out in public.

    Mmmmm. So you think following a person is not a bad thing to do, yet you too keep an eye out for this exact thing. So, if you do not think it is a wrong thing to do, why do you care?
    I am pretty sure that every time I thought I was being followed, I wasn't, I was just being paranoid. And herein lies the problem. Who determines if my paranoia is justified?

    "Merely following someone" is not a bad thing to do. Following someone to rob them, confront them, or otherwise aggravate the situation, that's not ok.

    I care who's following me because I am aware there are bad people in the world. But I don't think someone patrolling the streets as some kinf of crime prevention initiative is a bad person. How can I tell the difference? How do I know if I'm just being paranoid or not? Do I err on the side of caution and have everyone within five meters of me arrested?

    How do you not see the problems here?

    Which is my point to begin with. The only reason you'd be following me is to do me harm. There is no other proper reason for you to do so. Why are you arguing with me?
    I'm giving you a legitimate reason to "follow" someone. Patrolling the streets. That isn't with intent to do harm, is it? We can argue about whether it's necessary, or perhaps even legal, but it's not intended to do harm, so why are you immmediately assuming anyone who follows you intends to do you harm? And again, we come back to, how do you know you are being followed?

    In such situations, you do not know how you will react. Not everyone remains cool as a cucumber here.
    I know if I feel threatened by someone who might be follwoing me late at night, I run.

    I have been quite clear on my stance on this IMO.
    I'm not asking for your stance, I'm asking for legal clarification on the difference between following someone and walking in the same direction as someone. You haven't answered that, you've deflected because it's a very hard question to answer.

    And that is my point about the situation and the escalation of said situations. He did me wrong by following me. Now I do him wrong by confronting him. How can this end well?
    Well, no. The problem is that you think he's doing wrong. First of all, you might just be being paranoid. But let's assume you are convinced you are not being paranoid. Well, I think you'll find the phrase "two wrongs don't make a right" applies here. If you're going to confront people who have the balls to blatantly follow you, no I don't think it ends well. Hence, your actions are irresponsible. You're either confronting someone who gives no fucks, or you're being paranoid and starting on some guy walking home. This is better than running?

    Then why do you feel the need to protect yourself from that situation?
    Because I take responsibility for my own safety, instead of demanding people have less rights to make me safer. I understand that some people are bad, while also understanding that people have a right to be out in public. I understand that I can't really tell the difference between "being followed" and "walking in the same direction as", so I err on the side of caution late at night and maintain reasonable distance. I also understand that maybe there are locals who like to keep an eye on the streets because of concerns about crime, and I don't personally have a problem with that, in fact I applaud it.

    Would be my way of protecting myself from that situation. Remember, people are different
    You're not protecting yourself. You're doing the exact opposite.

    And he infringed on my right for privacy
    There is no such right in public.

    Do not follow me around. Do I have to clarify what I mean by that? Isn't the "Don't follow me around" part clear?
    No. Can I walk in the same direction as you?

    And this situation could have been perfectly avoided by simply respecting each other's privacy.
    Privacy is a really poor choice of words when referring to a public place.

    Would he not have gone after him had he not had the warm feels provided by the piece he was carrying?
    I dunno. You think everyone who follows someone else has a gun?

    Again. See something suspicious? Call it in. That's all you have to do. This is what a lawyer says:
    So here we come back to one reason why you might follow someone... maybe, just maybe that person looks a bit shady, but nothing more... you're gonna call the cops and say "shady mofo on the streets"? Nope, you might decide to take the dog for a walk and see if he's up to no good, and call the cops if you witness something criminal.

    My point about the uniforms/indication as to who you are. Identify yourself, and your intentions. That is why cop cars in the UK have battenburg markings.
    Don't all countries have LOOK AT ME cop cars? I also assume all countries have unmarked cop cars.

    Where's my "taking the dog for a walk" uniform?

    He ABSOLUTELY CAN go where I'm going. That's the reason for the movement stops. If he is actually going where I'm going, he would continue moving, no problems with that, right?
    No. Maybe your sudden stopping has him paranoid, and he doesn't want to gain on you. Maybe he's trying to keep reasonable distance, and you're not letting him. How is he intimidating you and not the other way around?

    All of this hypothetical could have been avoided had he just NOT FOLLOWED me.
    Officer, I was walking the dog.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  66. #1716
    Oh and why was there such a massive public outcry condemning this a racially motivated hate crime?? Well, I think that was pretty obvious when we all heard NBC release the audio of Zimmerman's 911 call...

    This guy looks like he's up to no good. He looks black
    I mean, right there, the guy is obviously a hate-monger right? Clearly this was a racially motivated hate crime, and he should be charged with murder, right? "he looks black". He might as well have said "he looks like a filthy big-lipped thief"

    Everyone heard this tape. It was headlines for days.

    except no one ever hears the correction or follow up weeks later. You see, it turns out that our friends at the "real news" decided to edit the recording. Here's the full transcript:

    Z: This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about
    Dispatcher: OK and this guy is he white, black, or hispanic?
    Z: He looks black
    Huh....I wonder why the "racist ass hole" argument failed in court.
  67. #1717
    Quote Originally Posted by jack
    Your lack of empathy is baffling.
    Baffling? Empathy is not something we're all blessed with. Some people are sociopathic. It's a trait. Traits baffle you?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  68. #1718
    What am I supposed to have empathy for?

    Zimmerman may have had bad reasons for following trayvon. And you can judge him morally however you like. I might even agree with you. But at no time were his actions unlawful. And the distinction matters. Just because the outcome was unusually catastrophic, doesn't mean that you can retroactively go back and de-legalize Zimmerman's actions to that point.

    Conducting surveillance is NOT a crime. Trayvon ambushed Zimmerman. He didn't have to do that. And if you're going to judge Zimmerman's motivations, then you have to judge Trayvon's too. Why would he choose to start a fight rather than simply walk inside his house, or at least call for help?

    What happened was an unfortunate coincidental calamity of tragedies. Nothing more. Any attempt to interpret further is merely an instinctive reaction borne out of frustration and low emotional intelligence. A man is dead, and he shouldn't be. Emotional instincts cry out for justice. They seek to blame. Scapegoats are offered. Peer pressure and mob mentality takes over.

    Now people have to decide. They can be cold, objective, and by-the-book legal. Or they can be empathetic, and compassionate by taking a stand for the racially oppressed. The former requires you to be unpopular and value the rule of law over the suffering and pain of the victims. The latter comes with the opportunity for virtue-signaling and moral posturing. All things considered, that's a pretty fucking good deal. Facts be damned.

    But please do understand the pathetically low levels of intelligence you're displaying when you make that choice.
    Last edited by BananaStand; 08-17-2018 at 02:01 PM.
  69. #1719
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    As someone who's called the police because I was being followed, and one the followers (2) threw something at me*, which I dodged.
    On the police call, despite the fact that it was night time, the followers were wearing hoodies so I couldn't see their faces at all, the dispatcher kept asking me if they were white or black. I had to tell her like 5 times that I couldn't tell, given the lighting and their clothing.

    Skin color is a quick way to rule out suspects to the police. If they know they're looking for 2 white guys in hoodies, then they can rule out every non-white, non-hoodie wearing person they see. It's stupid to turn that information into a race issue. It's literally, "What did they look like?" Skin color is an obvious character trait.


    *Turns out it was a half-eaten Rice Crispie Treat, and they were probably just punk kids being stupid.
    Good story, huh.
  70. #1720
    Does anyone remember when "punk" meant an awesome genre of music, rather than a generic word for a little twat?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  71. #1721
    To be fair, I do like the way Americans say "punk" when used in the same context as "cunt". It goes well with the accent, like "bloody" in England.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  72. #1722
    Once, in college, I spent the afternoon with a friend smoking weed and watching Simpsons reruns. Then I ordered Chinese take out from the Cheung-Kee, which was on my way home. I entered the highway at exit 10 (where my friend lived) heading south. As I was merging, I was cutoff by an idiot who doesn't know how to drive. I honked, and then he slowed down.

    It was a car full of teenagers and they were having an awfully good time making faces at me and flipping me the middle finger and what not.

    I stayed behind them rather than pass, because I intended to get off at the next exit in a quarter mile.

    Coincidentally, they got off at the same exit. Their faces turned from mischievous to anxious, but still laughing. But the brazen hand gestures stopped, and their behavior became less provoking, and more nervously watchful.

    The took a right off the exit. I was going the same way.

    The took a left at the next light. So did I.

    They turned into a strip mall. I followed.

    They parked right in front of the Cheung Kee. The restaurant only had two parking spots, so I parked right next to them.

    As I parked, they were already out of the car. As I got out of the car, I walked by them.

    I've never seen real fear like that in my life. These kids thought that every horror story their parents ever told them about strangers was about to come true. Not one of them said a word. They all stood frozen, but watching me very very closely.

    I went inside, paid for my food, and left.

    I'll bet those kids are all great drivers now.

    Just me affecting positive change in the world man.
  73. #1723
    I bet they all carry guns now, you mean.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  74. #1724
    By Jack's logic, the four of them would be totally justified in beating the crap out of me, and if I dared to defend myself, I should go to jail.

    'cuz...who follows someone???
  75. #1725
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I bet they all carry guns now, you mean.
    Positive change

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •