Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/24/2010 11:49:18 PM   
EbonyWood


Posts: 2044
Joined: 7/8/2005
Status: offline
 
Must be a bitch posting from the roadblock while stocking up on canned goods and ammo.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 12:21:30 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
Nope, I am going to buy more refigerators and freezers. Canned good have BPA in them, which is poison.

T

< Message edited by Termyn8or -- 1/25/2010 12:22:16 AM >

(in reply to EbonyWood)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 2:48:21 AM   
StrangerThan


Posts: 1515
Joined: 4/25/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

The idea behind the photo is to commit an of delation against one's neighbours by advertising that they're more vulnerable to an armed burglar than you are, to save your own skin, and to fuck them up at the same time. It's cowardly and criminal.

If you don't see how or why that's a revolting idea, there's nothing else to discuss, really.

Thankfully, the picture belongs to the realm of fantasy (I'm hoping).


If I had a neighbor who wanted to ban firearms, I'd make the picture in the realm of reality just for you kittin. It has nothing to do with fucking them up nor with saving your own skin. It has everything to do with pointing out the fact that their desire is to make everyone in the neighborhood as defenseless as they are for some stupid reason.

I don't find it revolting at all. I find it more revolting that said neighbors won't simply mind their own fucking business and stay out of everyone else's.

_____________________________


--'Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform' - Mark Twain

(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 4:33:37 AM   
EbonyWood


Posts: 2044
Joined: 7/8/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

The idea behind the photo is to commit an of delation against one's neighbours by advertising that they're more vulnerable to an armed burglar than you are, to save your own skin, and to fuck them up at the same time. It's cowardly and criminal.

If you don't see how or why that's a revolting idea, there's nothing else to discuss, really.

Thankfully, the picture belongs to the realm of fantasy (I'm hoping).


If I had a neighbor who wanted to ban firearms, I'd make the picture in the realm of reality just for you kittin. It has nothing to do with fucking them up nor with saving your own skin. It has everything to do with pointing out the fact that their desire is to make everyone in the neighborhood as defenseless as they are for some stupid reason.

I don't find it revolting at all. I find it more revolting that said neighbors won't simply mind their own fucking business and stay out of everyone else's.


I think such a sign is the exact opposite of 'minding your own fucking business', isn't it?
 
The sign is photoshopped, propagandistic and would be illegal if real.

(in reply to StrangerThan)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 5:24:19 AM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: EbonyWood

I think such a sign is the exact opposite of 'minding your own fucking business', isn't it?
 
The sign is photoshopped, propagandistic and would be illegal if real.


On what basis - and, more specifically, what statute - would such a sign be illegal?

Just curious.

Firm


_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to EbonyWood)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 5:55:56 AM   
EbonyWood


Posts: 2044
Joined: 7/8/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: EbonyWood

I think such a sign is the exact opposite of 'minding your own fucking business', isn't it?
 
The sign is photoshopped, propagandistic and would be illegal if real.


On what basis - and, more specifically, what statute - would such a sign be illegal?

Just curious.

Firm



Aiding commission of a crime for one.
 
Imagine someone caught burglarising the house.  In court - "Well, I saw this sign pointing the way, your Honor" Do you think the sign would stay up?
 
But even before that probably something about publishing private assets. The owner could also just buy a gun and then it becomes libellous for publishing an untruth.
 
I'm hypothesising because the sign is hypothetical. It's morally wrong first, right?.  Can't swing a cat in this country without hitting a lawyer. Let's knock a few issues off before calling them.

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 6:39:38 AM   
Marc2b


Posts: 6660
Joined: 8/7/2006
Status: offline
Some more SIGN ideas:

"They're on vacation this week."

"They're committed pacifists - they won't fight back."

"They just bought a new wide screen TV."

"They think this is a nice neighborhood and don't lock their doors."

"He's a defense lawyer, so you probably already know each other."

"Happy 95th birthday Emma."

_____________________________

Do you know what the most awesome thing about being an Atheist is? You're not required to hate anybody!

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 6:45:02 AM   
servantforuse


Posts: 6363
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline
He should have spent more time at the firing range.Now we have to pay for a trial and time in jail. 2 funerals would have been cheaper.

(in reply to Marc2b)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 7:00:51 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
A man recently accused Soles of attempting to molest him, leading authorities to ask the SBI to investigate. The man later said his allegation was false.

I love looking up the reports in the local papers. you get a much clearer picture of the incident.

Columbus County Sheriff Chris Batten said Kyle Blackburn was taken to Loris Community Hospital in South Carolina. Late Sunday night, a spokeswoman at the hospital said that Blackburn was in good condition.

The shooting occurred on Soles’ property when two men went to the senator’s house and tried to kick in his front door, Batten said. The incident happened about a quarter mile from Canal Street and Stake Road.

The other man involved in the incident is B.J. Wright, Batten said. Multiple media outlets have reported that Wright was a legal client of Soles – an attorney – and that Soles gave him money while Wright was in prison.

The State Bureau of Investigation is probing the shooting, Batten said, because the agency is already looking into accusations against the senator.


http://www.starnewsonline.com/article/20090823/ARTICLES/908239980/-1/stormpost02&tc=email_newsletter?p=1&tc=pg



_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to cuckoldmepls)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 7:04:56 AM   
servantforuse


Posts: 6363
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline
What is the SBI ??

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 7:05:58 AM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline
The State Bureau of Investigation.
 
Honestly... it's right above your head.

_____________________________



(in reply to servantforuse)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 12:56:21 PM   
StrangerThan


Posts: 1515
Joined: 4/25/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: EbonyWood

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: EbonyWood

I think such a sign is the exact opposite of 'minding your own fucking business', isn't it?
 
The sign is photoshopped, propagandistic and would be illegal if real.


On what basis - and, more specifically, what statute - would such a sign be illegal?

Just curious.

Firm



Aiding commission of a crime for one.
 
Imagine someone caught burglarising the house.  In court - "Well, I saw this sign pointing the way, your Honor" Do you think the sign would stay up?
 
But even before that probably something about publishing private assets. The owner could also just buy a gun and then it becomes libellous for publishing an untruth.
 
I'm hypothesising because the sign is hypothetical. It's morally wrong first, right?.  Can't swing a cat in this country without hitting a lawyer. Let's knock a few issues off before calling them.


And let's totally ignore the implicit recognition of the deterent in favor of the explicit denunciation of the right to deter.
 
That's the revolting thing in this debate.







_____________________________


--'Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform' - Mark Twain

(in reply to EbonyWood)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 1:31:43 PM   
domiguy


Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline
Nice story....Why would anyone want to know what was the end result  of the shooting?

http://www.newsobserver.com/home/story/273014.html

"State Sen. R.C. Soles Jr. has been indicted in connection with an August shooting at Soles' Tabor City home."

The op is a douche who has no regard for the truth.

Why does this shit happen all of the time?

< Message edited by domiguy -- 1/25/2010 1:38:15 PM >


_____________________________



(in reply to StrangerThan)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 1:37:32 PM   
Jeffff


Posts: 12600
Joined: 7/7/2007
Status: offline
You can't let the truth stand in the way of strong personal beliefs!

GlenBeckDom

_____________________________

"If you don't live it, it won't come out your horn." Charlie Parker

(in reply to domiguy)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 1:40:14 PM   
domiguy


Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline
Douchebags.  have no problem stretching the truth as far as it takes to support their tiny little notions of how the world should operate.

Why does this stuff continually happen?  Shouldn't the op be incredibly embarrased?

_____________________________



(in reply to Jeffff)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 1:43:18 PM   
Jeffff


Posts: 12600
Joined: 7/7/2007
Status: offline
Have you read the OP? Everything he posts is just stupid. He is beyond embarrassment.

He is a zelot. He has a mission. Nothing else matters.

One day he will be gone, we will toast that day!


Jeff

_____________________________

"If you don't live it, it won't come out your horn." Charlie Parker

(in reply to domiguy)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 2:09:03 PM   
rulemylife


Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomImus

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol
The idea behind the photo is to commit an of delation against one's neighbours by advertising that they're more vulnerable to an armed burglar than you are, to save your own skin, and to fuck them up at the same time. It's cowardly and criminal.


Show me how it's criminal. I'll wait.

If the sign were real and factual i.e the unarmed neighbor actually did want to ban all guns and remove the armed naighbor's right to defend his home then I see nothing wrong with the sign. If the unarmed neighbor merely chose to not own firearms and didn't advocate taking away everyone else's right to own fireams then the sign likely would not exist.

The whole 'If you can't see it my way then there's nothing to discuss' logic is juvenile at best and the mark of a skilled debater.



I find this attitude interesting.

When Ohio passed its law allowing concealed carry in 2004 the Cleveland Plain Dealer and a number of other newspapers around the state published the names of those who obtained permits.

There was a howl of outrage because apparently those having concealed carry permits felt they would be targeted by criminals, which was the exact opposite of the arguments made for passing the law in the first place.

Here an example some of the comments:

A fight over confidentiality of concealed-handgun permits


"The press wants to put a scarlet letter on these people," said Chris W. Cox, chief lobbyist for the National Rifle Association. "This serves no public good. It's potentially dangerous to post these lists." 
 
 
Now based on this sign, you would think that those who want to carry would feel safer with everyone knowing they were, so I never quite understood the outrage over the media publishing their names.

(in reply to DomImus)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 2:14:19 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

The State Bureau of Investigation.
 
Honestly... it's right above your head.


thanks kittin. honestly, i truly wonder about some people!

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 2:18:52 PM   
Jeffff


Posts: 12600
Joined: 7/7/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomImus

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol
The idea behind the photo is to commit an of delation against one's neighbours by advertising that they're more vulnerable to an armed burglar than you are, to save your own skin, and to fuck them up at the same time. It's cowardly and criminal.


Show me how it's criminal. I'll wait.

If the sign were real and factual i.e the unarmed neighbor actually did want to ban all guns and remove the armed naighbor's right to defend his home then I see nothing wrong with the sign. If the unarmed neighbor merely chose to not own firearms and didn't advocate taking away everyone else's right to own fireams then the sign likely would not exist.

The whole 'If you can't see it my way then there's nothing to discuss' logic is juvenile at best and the mark of a skilled debater.



I find this attitude interesting.

When Ohio passed its law allowing concealed carry in 2004 the Cleveland Plain Dealer and a number of other newspapers around the state published the names of those who obtained permits.

There was a howl of outrage because apparently those having concealed carry permits felt they would be targeted by criminals, which was the exact opposite of the arguments made for passing the law in the first place.

Here an example some of the comments:

A fight over confidentiality of concealed-handgun permits


"The press wants to put a scarlet letter on these people," said Chris W. Cox, chief lobbyist for the National Rifle Association. "This serves no public good. It's potentially dangerous to post these lists." 
 
 
Now based on this sign, you would think that those who want to carry would feel safer with everyone knowing they were, so I never quite understood the outrage over the media publishing their names.



There is a valid argument for not wanting your name published.  One of the few things that a criminal can sell for more than it's face value are stolen guns. If your name is published everyone knows you own at least one gun. It could increase the chance of you being a victim of a burglary.
Which then put the gun in the hands of criminals.

The same goes for "NRA" bumper stickers. You are inviting people to follow you home and see where you live.

Jeff

_____________________________

"If you don't live it, it won't come out your horn." Charlie Parker

(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder - 1/25/2010 2:36:43 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

When Ohio passed its law allowing concealed carry in 2004 the Cleveland Plain Dealer and a number of other newspapers around the state published the names of those who obtained permits.

There was a howl of outrage because apparently those having concealed carry permits felt they would be targeted by criminals, which was the exact opposite of the arguments made for passing the law in the first place.

I think their concern is not only for themselves. As a general rule, you don't want to make it any easier than it already is for people in certain careers to obtain guns. The whole purpose of concealed carry is so that criminals do not know who is armed and who is not. You are at a considerable disadvantage if the party of the second part knows in advance that you are armed. And, too, since many merchants do not allow weapons on their premises, even carried legally, publishing the names of carry permit holders has the potential to turn any shopping center parking lot into an open-air gun mart for an enterprising and observant fellow.

K.

(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094