Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Jun 29, 2020 20:26:37 GMT -8
Honestly Credo you post the most ridiculous shit from Twitter. Do you notice a pattern here (Michael Flynn, Bubba Wallace, the current thread)? 1. I make a commentary on a news story, from a perspective that runs contrary to the MSM narrative. 2. You take the bait, automatically assuming that I don't know what I'm talking about and so my views must necessarily be wrong. 3. When the actual facts of the case are further revealed, what I have asserted is essentially proven correct. 4. You look ridiculous. But keep playing, because at least it's entertaining. Now you're back to HIDDEN POST status. |
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorFate on Jun 29, 2020 21:38:49 GMT -8
Is that couple Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip, because that looks like freakin' Buckingham Palace behind them. Furthermore, it appears the idiots they are threatening with their firearms are on a public sidewalk. If that's the case, then the couple should be arrested. It's a private street, not open to the public. The "protesters" were the ones posing the threat and were clearly trespassing. After a few weeks of scenes of looting, violence, and wanton destruction property--all without authorities seemingly willing to enforce the law--citizens can only count on themselves at this point. And that particular house is a mansion in a historical neighborhood. There's a photo below of the entrance to the neighborhood; the private entrance is similar to the entrance to many gated communities across the nation.  They came in through this gate:: They left through this gate: |
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorFate on Jun 29, 2020 21:57:32 GMT -8
The video this poster mentions was the best one to show just how crude and threatening the BLM crowd was. Unfortunately, that video is unavailable now. Either the person who tweeted it has taken it down, or Twitter has censored it. We can't have anything that shows the BLM in an unfavorable light, now can we? They called the wife every name in the book, chanted that they were gonna come for her, and threatened to take her gun away from her and use it on her. At least one of those so called "peaceful protesters, was seen armed with a long gun of his own.
|
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Jun 30, 2020 3:58:43 GMT -8
Yeah, we need to have the second amendment so those people can protect their mansion. You've convinced me. If that guy didn't have an AR he'd be dead right now...those protesters were out for blood. Honestly Credo you post the most ridiculous shit from Twitter. I don’t understand your attitude. Don’t you believe people have a right to protect their property? What would you do if a mob threatened to loot, vandalize or set fire to your home? Would you gladly turn it over to them? These people have shown over and over that they are not reasonable. They take great pleasure in destroying property! So what would you do? I get that you don't understand my attitude. Of course people have a right to protect their property. Is standing on the street brandishing an assault rifle the best way to do that? No. The people claim that they were threatened and that they feared they would be killed, their house would be burned down, and their pets would be killed. My attitude comes mostly from the fact that I don't believe a word they say. If they were truly afraid they wouldn't have ventured out of their house. Do I think these idiots should be punished?....No, I think they will be punished enough for their idiocy by the denizens of the Twittersphere. |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Jun 30, 2020 4:00:04 GMT -8
You see, the standard is to wait until AFTER you're vandalized to defend your property...just like the cops are supposed to wait until AFTER they see the weapon or are shot at to open fire. That is correct. I assume you think this is wrong for some reason? |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Jun 30, 2020 4:06:07 GMT -8
The video this poster mentions was the best one to show just how crude and threatening the BLM crowd was. Unfortunately, that video is unavailable now. Either the person who tweeted it has taken it down, or Twitter has censored it. We can't have anything that shows the BLM in an unfavorable light, now can we? They called the wife every name in the book, chanted that they were gonna come for her, and threatened to take her gun away from her and use it on her. At least one of those so called "peaceful protesters, was seen armed with a long gun of his own. So not only does your missing video prove what you claim it proves, but it also proves how dishonest Twitter is doesn't it? You do realize how absurd your argument is don't you? Why not just wait for some reliable evidence from a reliable source? |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Jun 30, 2020 4:07:06 GMT -8
Honestly Credo you post the most ridiculous shit from Twitter. Do you notice a pattern here (Michael Flynn, Bubba Wallace, the current thread)? I do...that's why I wrote that you post the most ridiculous shit. Carry on. |
|
thefrog
Eminence Grise
Posts: 1,819
|
Post by thefrog on Jun 30, 2020 5:17:47 GMT -8
The video this poster mentions was the best one to show just how crude and threatening the BLM crowd was. Unfortunately, that video is unavailable now. Either the person who tweeted it has taken it down, or Twitter has censored it. We can't have anything that shows the BLM in an unfavorable light, now can we? They called the wife every name in the book, chanted that they were gonna come for her, and threatened to take her gun away from her and use it on her. At least one of those so called "peaceful protesters, was seen armed with a long gun of his own. So not only does your missing video prove what you claim it proves, but it also proves how dishonest Twitter is doesn't it? You do realize how absurd your argument is don't you? Why not just wait for some reliable evidence from a reliable source? Linked photo was too big. |
|
Bick
Administrator 
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on Jun 30, 2020 6:56:03 GMT -8
You see, the standard is to wait until AFTER you're vandalized to defend your property...just like the cops are supposed to wait until AFTER they see the weapon or are shot at to open fire. That is correct. I assume you think this is wrong for some reason? The point of defending your property is to prevent it from being destroyed,or your family from being hurt. In the 2nd example, by the time you see the weapon or are shot at, you might be too late, and you end up shot and / or dead. Put in today's mob context, the threat of both are elevated significantly more than usual. In both examples, at which point do you use your weapon? |
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,286
|
Post by RSM789 on Jun 30, 2020 7:53:32 GMT -8
.... Is standing on the street brandishing an assault rifle the best way to do that? No. That is a complete misrepresentation of the facts. The couple was not "standing on the street", they were on their front porch. They were on their property. Further, the "protesters" were not protesters, they were trespassers who forced their way through a locked gate onto these peoples property. That is a criminal act and throws the narrative of them being "peaceful protesters" out the window. The property was large, so there is space between them, but it is no different than a mob of anti-gay folks coming inside the foyer of your apartment building and chanting that we need to rid the world of gay people. In that scenario, you coming out with a long gun would be the best way to disperse such a mob, although it would be more effective if you didn't wear your ass less chaps. This couple had every legal right to fear for their safety based upon the mobs actions & could have legally opened fire upon the mob had they not dispersed. Those in the mob are fortunate the couple kept their cool and didn't do what they had the legal right to do. You ask if the couples actions are "the best way to do that", i.e., make the mob leave? Considering that this mob did leave, but when the police or other authorities stand down, the mobs loot and destroy, it appears the answer is yes, brandishing a weapon is indeed the best way to disperse the mob. Shooting a few also tends to make those criminals make a hasty exit. As an aside, you discredit your claim to be a gun owner when you use the term "assault rifle". That term is a favorite upon neophytes who are extremely ignorant when it comes to firearms. |
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Jun 30, 2020 9:35:38 GMT -8
As if to prove my point ("But keep playing, because at least it's entertaining."), I see multiple HIDDEN POSTS that are doubling (tripling?) down on the harebrained idea that it's wrong to defend your property against a violent mob.  /photo/1 |
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on Jun 30, 2020 10:10:58 GMT -8
Claiming that a member of a mob is not a vandal until after he vandalizes your home is technically correct, but waiting until he earns the title before preventing him from doing so seems like a dubious decision. A person is not a murderer until he shoots you in the head, but it seems overly virtuous to delay defending yourself until after you're dead.
|
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Jun 30, 2020 11:06:36 GMT -8
.... Is standing on the street brandishing an assault rifle the best way to do that? No. That is a complete misrepresentation of the facts. It's a figure of speech you nitpicking idiot.This couple had every legal right to fear for their safety based upon the mobs actions & could have legally opened fire upon the mob had they not dispersed. Those in the mob are fortunate the couple kept their cool and didn't do what they had the legal right to do. utter nonsense. If they had fired on the crowd you can bet they'd be arrested by now. You know nothing about the law,As an aside, you discredit your claim to be a gun owner when you use the term "assault rifle". That term is a favorite upon neophytes who are extremely ignorant when it comes to firearms. I know what an assault rifle is...considering your terrible grammar your ignorance doesn't surprise me. |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Jun 30, 2020 11:08:42 GMT -8
That is correct. I assume you think this is wrong for some reason? The point of defending your property is to prevent it from being destroyed,or your family from being hurt. In the 2nd example, by the time you see the weapon or are shot at, you might be too late, and you end up shot and / or dead. Put in today's mob context, the threat of both are elevated significantly more than usual. In both examples, at which point do you use your weapon? At the point where you reasonably think your life is in danger. |
|
thefrog
Eminence Grise
Posts: 1,819
|
Post by thefrog on Jun 30, 2020 11:20:29 GMT -8
The point of defending your property is to prevent it from being destroyed,or your family from being hurt. In the 2nd example, by the time you see the weapon or are shot at, you might be too late, and you end up shot and / or dead. Put in today's mob context, the threat of both are elevated significantly more than usual. In both examples, at which point do you use your weapon? At the point where you reasonably think your life is in danger. The analysis isn’t that difficult. Broken gate, entering private property, mob, shouting threats... A reasonable person given those circumstances (also watching the news cycle) would feel fear of bodily injury... |
|
