peacefuljeffrey

Quote

Quote

To kill a simple street gangsta by shooting in his head after he stole an old ladies' wallet is a little harsh, or not? See, JR, this is called the difference. Our police staff is trained to quickly decide on more than ONE solution of a difficult situation. But that's just our forces. We do not train killers.

So you think that American police shoot suspects for minor crimes, use their guns are cure-all's for every situation, and are trained executioners. Okaaaay...

It's always fun to watch you destroy your own credibility. Thank you for the entertainment.

If any post in this thread deserved to be re-quoted, this one was it.
That was the exact implication I took from cristelsabine's post. Ugh, I've just stopped responding to her stuff. I can't. It's madness, and responding to it would be almost certain to get me banned.

-

Quote

Quote

Quote

..some abstract faceless hypothetical cop that only lives in the imagination of a splintered left wing group.

You mean like the Michigan Militia?
Oh, wait; that's a splintered RIGHT wing group. Completely different. Lawlessness only comes from the left.
Never mind.

Of what "lawlessness" has the Michigan Militia been tried and convicted, as a group?

And exactly where did "LAWLESSNESS" come up? YOU were the first to inject that term in here. Whyzzat?

I mean, this post was really "out there"...

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Quote

Cool, just like in the movies. Just shoot the gun out of his hands from 50 feet away, shooting from the hip, while riding a motorcyle, over cobblestones, at night, while eating sammich.

the asswipe has likely never even seen a gun of any type, let alone shot a handgun

Thanks, rehmwa!


I would add that Paterson should be the guy who is being threatened by a violent criminal when a cop, afraid that he may end up using "too much force," fails to act adequately to save his pathetic ass.


-

Quote

Paterson (D-Harlem) wrote that a police officer, under his legislation, "would have to try to shoot a suspect in the arm or the leg."

Why wouldn't Mr. Paterson want to sponsor this legislation? Every time a cop shoots to wound a criminal scumbag rather than shooting to end the threat (which may well kill the suspect) that's another one of Mr. Paterson's constituents who will be around to vote for his re-election.

Not much needs to be said about this: it is stupid on its face. I have not delved into the other replies yet, but I noticed right off the bat that Lawrocket started saying something about "once deadly force is justified, you don't hold someone to the 'only as much as necessary to get the job done' standard."

I hope that IF this law passes (it probably has no chance, or so I would hope), Mr. Paterson finds that innocent blood is spilled on his behalf by cops aiming for extremities rather than center-of-mass. Let the death of innocents (bystanders, cops who under stress miss the extremities and then get killed by their targets) be on his head. Fucking shitwipe moron.

-

Quote

Is this where we all get together and hate rich people? Getting paid millions is a sign someone is SMART - that's why they get paid millions.

I want you to please print that out, tape it to your television, and then watch any movie that stars Freddie Prinz Jr.

Or watch Latrell Sprewell play basketball for millions of dollars. Yeah, real intelligent, real good guy.


-

Quote

I will never understand why people get so bent out of shape about celebs with a political message.

It's simply because many celebs are known to be fuckin' whack-jobs with nutty ideas, but because they are famous, and because a bunch of morons in the audience have the right to vote (some quite lamentably), they are capable of having an undue influence on how society governs itself.

One man, one vote is fine. But we are talking about people who attract other people like iron filings to a magnet just by virtue of their celebrity and when they express who they want to win public office, many people will blindly vote that way just because it was their favorite celebrity who said they should.

I just don't feel that this is the way the political system should be working.

-

Quote

Plenty of words exhibit a similar shift in pronunciation with the addition of new syllables.

Take the word photo, photograph, photography, photographic. Notice the change in the vowels? especially the a and the second o.

Did you get that from Marilyn Vos Savant in the Para\de magazine that comes with your Sunday newspaper?

-

Quote

COME ON!........... Not one of you people had a damn.
Big Wheel ??
or am i that f***ing old?

Well, the thread's supposed to be about what toy you loved then that you now think was stupid. Big Wheels will never be stupid!
...but not as much as The GREEN MACHINE!!

-

Quote

Oh the irony. I do believe it would be what would finally put Ted Kennedy in the grave.

Funny, I thought that was likely to be a front-end loader.

-

Quote

Let me see if I got this right. You are ranting about what these people had to say and ranting about people who pay attention to what they say???

Don't mistake "being aware that they've voiced opinions publicly with help from the media to get them heard," with "I hung on their every word and will do as they command." That's what I don't like, and as someone said about how if Oprah eschewed toilet paper we should refrain from shaking hands from now on, I get the feeling that plenty of people (ignoramuses, mostly) actually use what they've heard these celebriots say to form their political views.

Trying to catch me in a childish game of, "Oh, so you were 'listening' to them, Jeff?" is pretty silly. You and I both know I don't mean "hearing their voices" the same as "mimicking their ideas."

-

Quote

I think Johnny Depp made the same claim.

He moved.

So, I actually respect him for that.
I do not agree with his reason, but applaud his conviction.

His conviction on that is questionably respectable.

I see it as being a whiny, petulant baby who storms off in a tantrum when things don't go his way. A real man would stay in a great country even if it is having troubles and try to better it. The pansies run off to other countries that they pretend are more free, etc.

Funny, Depp didn't make his million$ in France, he made them right fuckin' here in this awful, leaving-worthy country.

-

Quote

Dude, we (citizens) are living our Top Nightmare Shrub and the Puppet Masters.

Clarification, please:

Are you saying that anyone who is a citizen dislikes having Bush as president?

-

Quote

I'm a liberal. Why would I throw a fit? She'd surely be better than GWB.

Maybe the predicted "fit" would be thrown over the fact that a conservative, not a liberal black woman had not been elected; not that it was "anyone but Bush."

I'm sure that most liberals would not simply be happy with another conservative as long as it's "anyone but Bush"; they're gonna want a liberal in office. (Which ain't too likely, I'm happy to say.)

-

Quote

Did you ever really believe any of these statements from celebs when they made them?

These people live in a fantasy world. No reason to believe them on anything.

And yet, they are constantly consulted on what they think on political and social issues.

Angelina Jolie.
Sean Penn.
Alec Baldwin.
Susan Sarandon.
Cher.
Michael Stipe.
who knows how many others.


Why do we know what they think? Because the media have brought news of it to us. So somebody thinks that we're supposed to let these people's views and opinions guide us in shaping our own.

-

Quote

Quote

Switch that to Catholic and Protestant, add in a few kneecappings and you've got Northern Ireland's history in a nutshell.

I'm glad this got said as early as Post #3. If this turns into yet another "let's bash Muslims" thread, I'm going to vomit.

Did I ever excuse the religious groups in Ireland for doing it?

-

Quote

GTA, PJ, cut it out. PJ, this is about your fourth warning. There will not be another.

Fine, bill, I'm out of this one. No more from me. If people want to do as they did with the "vibes" thread and continue on after I agree to cease and desist, that's their choice. (In that other case, I thought it was very disrespectful to you-know-who to persist, even descending into a conservative bash-fest as I was told it had done. I admitted my mistake in starting it and asked that it end, and then I held up my part and stopped posting.)

So if nothing else, maybe I'll get a reputation for meaning what I say when I say I am through posting to a certain thread. No amount of bait will bring me back here, but it sure will be fun watching to see how long everyone carries on in my absence, pathologically unable to stop.

-

Quote

>I WANT TO BE IN A WORLD WHERE PEOPLE DON'T CREATE
> ARTIFICIAL DIVISIONS BETWEEN GROUPS FOR ONE REASON OR
> ANOTHER . . . OTHER THAN THE DIVISIONS I LIKE

Fixed that for you. Gay boogie - bad thing that causes divisions between skydivers. Chute and shoot - fun thing that makes everyone happy.

I did not make a call for a Chute n Shoot. Someone else asked me on the spur of the moment if I would accept that.

It is NOT an event that would be based on people's personal divisions and/or sexual orientation, or skin color, or anything else they cannot change. Anyone (who is not a felon) is free to pick up a gun and have some shooting fun, and unless you are truly an anti-gun bigot, you are not going to ridicule a person who opts to own guns the same way some ridicule gay people or blacks or immigrants, etc.

Bill, once again you are not granting that you see a difference where there definitely is a difference. For the reason you claim applies that I should be just as against Chute n Shoot, I should be against any plain old "let's get together to skydive" day, because we'd be doing something that others don't do. Hell, I should be against going to see a waterskiing demonstration for that reason, too. And against going to an antiques show, because not everyone is doing that, either.

Chute n Shoot would not discriminate between people of different characteristic makeups. Oh, guns owners and non-gun-owners, maybe? Well, anyone can decide to be a gun owner (if the law allows, so that leaves out minors, drug addicts, felons, and the insane. Sorry). It's not exclusionary.

-

Quote

Did you hear that? It's little butterflies weeping.

You give as you as you get, PJ. You are no martyr.

Your malicious sarcasm taints every single post you make to me. I may be no martyr, but I find I cannot respect a person who acts as you do, in alleged self-righteousness, no less.

-

Quote

Actually, "Thinly Veiled Personal Attacks" (TM), and cleverly crafted putdowns, if fairly well-done, are a bit of an art form, to be appreciated as such.

I knew someone was likely gonna say something like that.

How? Because it has become abundantly clear, based on some people's actions, that it is exactly how they feel. It's juvenile, but it's true.

"Let's see how far I can push the rules that the mods enforce so I can publicly humiliate this guy and make him know I think he's an asshole."

Great way to be. At least my posts simply tell you what I think about the issue we're discussing. And if I make what you claim is a TVPA, it's simply out of exasperation that after the 17th time explaining my view, a person is still pretending he can't get it.
That's way different from just going off on someone 'cause you don't like him.


-

I think I like you, too. It's because you simply say what you mean, openly and sincerely, and without attack. There are a lot of people here who are not mature enough to reply to a thread they don't like, or a post they don't like, by simply stating what they disagree with and moving on. They go for the personal attack or the TVPA as the case may be. Some seem to think it makes them cool, even.

Perhaps you ought to be less judgmental of me than I suspect you are being. I WANT TO BE IN A WORLD WHERE PEOPLE DON'T CREATE ARTIFICIAL DIVISIONS BETWEEN GROUPS FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER BUT THEN BITCH ABOUT BEING TREATED DIFFERENTLY. It may well be a chicken-or-the-egg question, but SOMEONE is gonna have to break the damned chain.

I am utterly tolerant of gay people, black people, whatever people, despite having been accused of bigotry over and over here. I have gay friends, black friends, hispanic friends, handicapped friends, male friends, female friends, non-American-citizen friends... None of your complaints point to me; I have never "tsked" when I've seen gay people holding hands, kissing, etc. Never chased someone down an alley; never threatened a gay couple. My attitude is, "That's what they should be free to do!" when I see gay people just being people like anyone else.

So it's about time people got off my back and stopped pretending they don't understand why I started the poll. I think it's a mistake to perpetuate feelings of division by constantly naming our divisions and paying attention and focus to them. And for expressing that, I got scorned and attacked.

So much for the supposed fuckin' tolerance we owe each other. (I don't mean you, Xena, I mean the others who at this point wouldn't piss in my mouth if my teeth were on fire.)

-

Quote

Now, I know several gay skydivers. I also know that the gay games will be taking place. Why not take this knowledge, much like the gun knowledge, and apply it to an event. How about a gay boogie?

The "gay games"?

All I'm saying is that anyone who willfully separates him or herself along lines like sexual orientation loses their justification for being upset when others draw lines like that, and possibly exclude them from things, or even simply opt to dislike them.

Let me ask you about these "gay games." If it's like an Olympics specifically for gay people or something, will they allow NON-avowed gay people to compete?

And if so, what exactly makes it stay the "gay games"; and if not, how can you possibly defend this as not being discriminatory?

-

Quote

Quote

Quote

Isn't this the second time someone raised the idea of the Pink Pistols as a specious and cynical attempt to confuse the issue between an advocacy group and a "gay gun show"? Can you not mentally separate the two?

Try knowledge instead of ignorance sometime.

Pink Pistols is gay people who go shooting together.
Gay boogie is gay people who go chuting together.

Looks like we have a match!

That was a very nice way of bringing down to a level that all could easily understand. Well done.

So, make that two who cannot mentally separate the two.

-

Quote

Quote

Isn't this the second time someone raised the idea of the Pink Pistols as a specious and cynical attempt to confuse the issue between an advocacy group and a "gay gun show"? Can you not mentally separate the two?

Try knowledge instead of ignorance sometime.

Pink Pistols is gay people who go shooting together.
Gay boogie is gay people who go chuting together.

Looks like we have a match!

Pink Pistols is gay people who advocate for gay people to protect their right to keep and bear arms.
Has nothing to do with "going shooting together."

And the claim, which you distorted into unrecognizability, was GAY GUN SHOWS were commensurate with gay boogies. Do try to not be disingenuous. Oh, what's that -- you were trying to be disingenuous, because that's the only way to support your point. Oh, okay. Carry on, I guess.

-

Quote

Quote

Quote

Oh wait. I'm wasting my time here. I forgot you ALWAYS ignore posts that actually ANSWER your questions. Silly me.

"You... you... you... always... always... always..."

And yet -- by ignoring all the answers to your original question AGAIN -- you prove me right.

How about, I don't respect questions that come from you because you are only about trying to put me down, not discuss or debate issues with me, so please, by all means, hold your fucking breath waiting for my response. I should put as my #1 priority, "Reply to the question posed in contempt by some guy who has never met me but who clearly detests me and skirts the forum rules with a by to post personal attacks"?

Yeah, right.

-

Quote

How about you stick to the topic of a given post dork?

Why, that wouldn't be nearly as much self-righteous fun as picking a guy to dislike and then ripping on him every chance you get.


-