RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles"

RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

cjan -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 6:55:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote: ORIGINAL: cjan quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado You've altered the relevant 'reasonably feels that their life is in imminent danger', to an overly simplistic, and therefor incorrect, 'when one feels threatened'. One may be part of the other, but they aren't interchangeable in the context of what the law says or means. quote: Reading this would be a good start. ~stef That's very funny. Try defending your positions in a Florida court. "Feeling threatened" is a subjective state, isn't it ? Ok, we can split hairs on whether someone who has pulled the trigger had a reasonable "cause" to feel threatened. I'd still like to have a front row seat in a Florida court to hear y'all argue that , based on the current law. Don't suppose for a second that Florida judges (or the USSC) interpret things the way you have. Nobody is allowed to pull the trigger merely because they 'feel threatened'...your assertion is bogus.. the standard for deadly force is quite clear. Okie doke, let's come down from our ivory, ideological , theoretical towers and consider reality. K? http://www.alternet.org/stories/59584/ http://writ.news.findlaw.com/sebok/20050502.html

Alumbrado -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 7:07:32 PM)
Sorry I'm to busy doing this for a living to let some internet keyboard commando spin what I already know with debate tricks. In every state in the US, you cannot legally blow someone away, just because you 'feel threatened'... your assertion is pure BS. The standard is a reasonable fear of imminent death or severe bodily harm, and no amount of juvenile sophistry on your part, or linking to sites you cannot correctly interpret, will change that

cjan -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 7:17:05 PM)
Dayum. " I've never been called an "internet commando" or been deemed guilty of "juvenile sophistry "before. But, thanks for your input, oh Bodisatva. I wouldn't want to interfere with your "making a living", sir.

Alumbrado -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 7:21:39 PM)
With your misunderstanding of simple legal priciples, and refusal to learn anything, or even admit that you might need to learn anything, you wouldn't stand a chance of interfering with it. Your kind of pure BS can't be turned into pancakes by pouring maple syrup over it.

thornhappy -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 7:32:37 PM)
Fer crying out loud guys, this was a talk about tasteful simulated bull testicles, not another gun discussion! I betcha this guy wanted them banned because his ums go "Daddy? What's that thing hanging from the trailer hitch?" thornhappy

Leatherist -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 7:34:36 PM)
So we have to enact laws to keep guys from acting like morons. Wonderful.

Alumbrado -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 7:38:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thornhappy Fer crying out loud guys, this was a talk about tasteful simulated bull testicles, not another gun discussion! I betcha this guy wanted them banned because his ums go "Daddy? What's that thing hanging from the trailer hitch?" thornhappy Yeah, you would think that after all this time, I would just give up on trying to stick my finger in the dike to stem the tide of mis-infomation flooding CM...

stef -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 7:40:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cjan That's very funny. Clearly we have different opinions on what constitutes humor. quote: Try defending your positions in a Florida court. "Feeling threatened". or, if you prefer,'reasonably feels that their life is in imminent danger', is a subjective state, isn't it? Most application of law is subjective on one level or another. The statute regarding the justified use of deadly force, however, is quite clear. For the record, it's not whether you feel you are in imminent danger, it's whether a *reasonable person* in your position would feel that they, or another person, was in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. quote: Ok, we can split hairs on whether someone who has pulled the trigger had a reasonable "cause" to feel threatened. I'd still like to have a front row seat in a Florida court to hear y'all argue that, based on the current law. I wish you had a front row seat for such a trial as well, it would be a good learning experience. The recent change in the law doesn't make it any easier for a person to use deadly force. The only thing this law has changed is that no longer are you required to attempt to flee before defending yourself. What constitues the justified use of deadly force is the same as it has always been, at least it's the same as it was when I obtained my Florida CCW permit in 2001. ~stef

cjan -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 7:40:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado With your misunderstanding of simple legal priciples, and refusal to learn anything, or even admit that you might need to learn anything, you wouldn't stand a chance of interfering with it. Your kind of pure BS can't be turned into pancakes by pouring maple syrup over it. quote: Fer crying out loud guys, this was a talk about tasteful simulated bull testicles, not another gun discussion! (...) thornhappy But, but...he's being MEAN to me, thorn... sobs

Alumbrado -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 7:43:18 PM)
That's fantastic.

dcnovice -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 7:54:21 PM)
<fast reply> Motion to adjourn.

thornhappy -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 8:20:03 PM)
< slams the gavel > Motion seconded, the motion carries thornhappy

cjan -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 8:26:55 PM)
Thank you. May I , please,have my peanut butter and jelly sammie in the privacy of my cell now ?

batshalom -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 8:33:20 PM)
~fast reply~ If the world were populated by only adults, I'd think car balls were in relative poor taste but of not particular consequence. My problem with them, as a mother of two young ones, is that someone's big "freedom of expression" danglers are going to wind up in my kids' line of vision sooner or later.

DesFIP -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 8:34:35 PM)
So it's legal to have them on a restaurant menu but not to have fake ones on a car. Sure I can see the logic of that. Not.

Termyn8or -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 9:01:40 PM)
First of all I saw some of those fake balls and I thought they were pretty col, even though most likely the artistic statement of a box of rocks. They were still cool. Now on blowing somebody away in FL or anywhere else, this society has gotten to the point that a single, or even two gunshots in rapid succession will not yield a visit by the cops. If someone breaks into my house they will be dead. And then I will sit there in silence. If the cops come fine, if not tomorrow I have things to do, like buy new carpet. I am not wasting the family fortune defending myself against some thug who does not have the decency to not break into a Man's house. I will literally roll up the carpet and throw it over the hill. That is the ultimate, if someone has the balls to break in when you are home you can only assume that they brought the proper tools for the job, and that swift action is needed. If I "feel threatened" out in public, I can always come back with my own tools. Then it will be they who "feel threatened" but not for long. Not long at all. If you don't agree with me fine, but before you condemn me, come live down here in the city. I can get you a house rent free, it even has a driveway. I am not kidding. You would be a squatter, but the owner is several states away and is not coming back. In fact there are two of those here. Anybody losing their lease soon ? The fact of the matter is that those who legislate are not connected to reality. These fake balls seem to be a big problem, and FL is full of religious people. And it comes down to this, they might shout "Think of the children", but did you ever buy your children a dog ? A male dog ? All of the hubub about these fake balls comes from puritanical roots. If it is to be so that the little kiddies are never to see genitalia, our male doge will have to start wearing pants I guess. Not so sure about cats, but I have seen dogs walk around with some pretty big erections. Actually I don't care. But what gets my attention is all the attention others are paying to it. I mean who cares ? What now, an enhanced leash law for male dogs, which includes a chastity belt to protect the children ? From what, knowing something about anatomy before society decides it is time ? I say hang those fake balls from every bumper, but with one restriction, the vehicle must have a V8 engine. If not it had better have one seriously powerful engine of some type. There is alot more, but I think it wise to stop now. Those hanging balls are close to porn, and I have two opinions on the subject which do not belong here. But suffice it to say that I have had access all my life, from the time I even began to want to look at anything of the sort, and I have not become a womanizer, a user or anything like that. But to go further into that would be a hijack, so if I feel froggy sometimes I might post it, but not right now. T

Vendaval -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 9:22:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or First of all I saw some of those fake balls and I thought they were pretty cool, even though most likely the artistic statement of a box of rocks. They were still cool. I think they would make great gag gifts for bachelorette parties! [sm=pillowfight.gif] The fact of the matter is that those who legislate are not connected to reality. These fake balls seem to be a big problem, and FL is full of religious people. And it comes down to this, they might shout "Think of the children", but did you ever buy your children a dog ? A male dog ? Yeah, the situation gets even harder to explain away when an unaltered male dog starts humping the knees of unsuspecting guests! [sm=couch.gif] All of the hubub about these fake balls comes from puritanical roots. If it is to be so that the little kiddies are never to see genitalia, our male doge will have to start wearing pants I guess. Not so sure about cats, but I have seen dogs walk around with some pretty big erections. Ever see a ram up close and personal? How about a bull? [sm=hewah.gif] I say hang those fake balls from every bumper, but with one restriction, the vehicle must have a V8 engine. If not it had better have one seriously powerful engine of some type. Yeah, I have to agree with the V8 engine idea. [sm=car.gif] T

Vendaval -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 9:27:04 PM)
http://www.truck-nuts.com/index.html quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 I want some! Where do I get 'em?

angelicbitch -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 9:29:37 PM)
okay just a personal observation ... how much do you want to bet that if it were a pair of titties or a casting of a vagina that no one would be up in arms... they are fake BALLS..... good grief remove the stick from up your butt and get over it !!!

Vendaval -> RE: "State moves to ban fake testicles on vehicles" (4/28/2008 9:31:47 PM)
So I have to ask, what kind of scrotums (as in species) ? And where do you get something like that? quote: ORIGINAL: thornhappy And what about the companies that make candy holders out of scrotums? I'm serious, they got these! thornhappy

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875