Gun nuts intimidate mothers in parking lot

[Pogo]

Marty and Pothead -- it just now occurred to me why y'all are babbling on about making this into "civil rights" ....

You think you can equate yourselves with oppressed minorities

No, seriously, is that it? You think you're honorary Negroes now?

It made no sense yesterday, it just dawned on me now. Tell me if I'm on target here. Because that would be some hilarious shit.

Nah, but i equate those who seek to strip the rights of others with the KKK...

Know anyone like that, sporky?

a violation of rights is a violation of rights. whether those rights are civil or constitutional.

Technically. I just find it interesting from a psychological angle that Pothead wants to dress up as a poor oppressed minority.

But that's his kind of spin. I think he was born under the sign of Vertigo.

 

[Spoonman]

did these armed protestors break the law?

did they shoot anyone?

did they actually threaten to shoot anyone?

did they demonstrate that someone can be heavily armed in public and no one dies?

Can someone explain what they did that was wrong?

 

[Vandalshandle]

Did I read that right? Is someone now bragging about carrying a switchblad knife?

I find that amusing as hell! I was given a summons to court when I was 16 for haveing an illlegal concealed weapon in my glove box. It was a fish scaling knife with a blade that was over 2 inches long, and it wasn't even a switchblade!

Anyway, not to be outdone, I carry a blackjack and martial arts throwing star every time I leave the house. I won't even go to the 7/11 without them. I will admit that the star has ruined a whole lot of pockets of my jeans, though....

 

[koshergrl]

Good grief, just stop.

 

[Uncensored2008]

a violation of rights is a violation of rights. whether those rights are civil or constitutional.

All Constitutional rights are civil rights.

Not all civil rights are Constitutional rights, though.

In this case, they are attacking a Constitutionally protected civil right.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Did I read that right? Is someone now bragging about carrying a switchblad knife?

I find that amusing as hell! I was given a summons to court when I was 16 for haveing an illlegal concealed weapon in my glove box. It was a fish scaling knife with a blade that was over 2 inches long, and it wasn't even a switchblade!

Anyway, not to be outdone, I carry a blackjack and martial arts throwing star every time I leave the house. I won't even go to the 7/11 without them. I will admit that the star has ruined a whole lot of pockets of my jeans, though....

Yer not the sharpest marshmallow in the bag, are you?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What is [sic] any of the above got to do with photography?
Seriously, do you write these posts with your screen turned off?

Did you suddenly forget that this thread is all about a photograph?

This thread has never been about "a photograph".

If we didn't have a photograph you would have been screaming about the mothers being outnumbered 10
to 1 by gun toting thugs.

The photograph proved that was a lie, didn't it.

You might not like it, but this thread has always been about that photograph because it proved the OP was a lie from the beginning. That left you scrambling to find a way to defend the lie that the men intended to scare the mothers, and they used kids to accomplish that purpose.

Did I ever ask you why mothers are afraid of other people's children?

 

[Pogo]

a violation of rights is a violation of rights. whether those rights are civil or constitutional.

All Constitutional rights are civil rights.

Not all civil rights are Constitutional rights, though.

In this case, they are attacking a Constitutionally protected civil right.

And contrary to appearances, you're actually smart enough to know the nuances of common vernacular.

As I said, an interesting psychological study introducing this idea. In a hilarious way.

 

[Pogo]

Did you suddenly forget that this thread is all about a photograph?

This thread has never been about "a photograph".

If we didn't have a photograph you would have been screaming about the mothers being outnumbered 10
to 1 by gun toting thugs.

The photograph proved that was a lie, didn't it.

You might not like it, but this thread has always been about that photograph because it proved the OP was a lie from the beginning. That left you scrambling to find a way to defend the lie that the men intended to scare the mothers, and they used kids to accomplish that purpose.

Did I ever ask you why mothers are afraid of other people's children?

Actually five to one for those of us familiar with how numbers work, but unimportant.

Pictures don't tell a story. Stories tell a story. That's what the thread's about, like it or lump it.
I understand the dimmer set like to look at the pictures on the Peter Principle. Me, I read the actual story. Different strokes.

By the way, an opinion can't be a "lie", Einstein.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Did I read that right? Is someone now bragging about carrying a switchblad knife?

I find that amusing as hell! I was given a summons to court when I was 16 for haveing an illlegal concealed weapon in my glove box. It was a fish scaling knife with a blade that was over 2 inches long, and it wasn't even a switchblade!

Anyway, not to be outdone, I carry a blackjack and martial arts throwing star every time I leave the house. I won't even go to the 7/11 without them. I will admit that the star has ruined a whole lot of pockets of my jeans, though....

I hate to disappoint you, but "switchblade" knives are perfectly legal.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This thread has never been about "a photograph".

If we didn't have a photograph you would have been screaming about the mothers being outnumbered 10
to 1 by gun toting thugs.

The photograph proved that was a lie, didn't it.

You might not like it, but this thread has always been about that photograph because it proved the OP was a lie from the beginning. That left you scrambling to find a way to defend the lie that the men intended to scare the mothers, and they used kids to accomplish that purpose.

Did I ever ask you why mothers are afraid of other people's children?

Actually five to one for those of us familiar with how numbers work, but unimportant.

Pictures don't tell a story. Stories tell a story. That's what the thread's about, like it or lump it.
I understand the dimmer set like to look at the pictures on the Peter Principle. Me, I read the actual story. Different strokes.

The OP claimed that there were 40 armed men outside the restaurant, which of us has a problem with numbers again?

My story is that the OP is a lie. It still is, and the picture agrees with me. There is no story you can get from that picture that makes the OP not a lie.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I hate to disappoint you, but "switchblade" knives are perfectly legal.

I bought this one at Big 5.

A switchblade is useful because I often have my hand occupied and need to cut a tape seal, zip tie, or something of the sort, and want a knife that I can open with one hand.

 

[koshergrl]

Nah, but i equate those who seek to strip the rights of others with the KKK...

Know anyone like that, sporky?

a violation of rights is a violation of rights. whether those rights are civil or constitutional.

Technically. I just find it interesting from a psychological angle that Pothead wants to dress up as a poor oppressed minority.

But that's his kind of spin. I think he was born under the sign of Vertigo.

I find that Poto's posts seem to address some other topic other than the one that is being discussed in the here and now. He hovers around the outer edges of the conversation in any thread he participates in, jumping on minutiae, posting distracting commentary about things that have no relevance, and attributing false stances to posters, then carrying on a conversation as if those false stances exist anywhere outside his own mind.

I'm thinking about putting him on ignore, because I have yet to find any post of his, anywhere, that actually contributes anything to the discussion. When he is asked questions, he quips "Wrong poster" or "That is not the precise color of tea in the Hebrides" as if those comments actually mean something, or make a point..any point...about the topic that is being discussed. He claimed to not attach false stances to posters...then made a comment about my "theory" and when asked to identify what my theory was, skipped off to some new inanity..and this is what he does in every thread.

He's impossible to engage...and his commentary has no value except to drag the conversation down into the mire. His statements are dishonest and vague, yet he postures as someone who is fully engaged and in control of the conversation, and the victor of the debate. His style hovers somewhere between bad faith, and Parkinson's law of triviality...except he doesn't provide enough substance even to be certainly identified.

In all, highly annoying, pretty distracting, completely without any substance or value as a poster. Verrry reminiscent of fake...think I'm going to pop him onto ignore. If he can get my attention after that, I'll just take to negging him every time I have break through...

 

[koshergrl]

This thread has never been about "a photograph".

If we didn't have a photograph you would have been screaming about the mothers being outnumbered 10
to 1 by gun toting thugs.

The photograph proved that was a lie, didn't it.

You might not like it, but this thread has always been about that photograph because it proved the OP was a lie from the beginning. That left you scrambling to find a way to defend the lie that the men intended to scare the mothers, and they used kids to accomplish that purpose.

Did I ever ask you why mothers are afraid of other people's children?

Actually five to one for those of us familiar with how numbers work, but unimportant.

Pictures don't tell a story. Stories tell a story. That's what the thread's about, like it or lump it.
I understand the dimmer set like to look at the pictures on the Peter Principle. Me, I read the actual story. Different strokes.

By the way, an opinion can't be a "lie", Einstein.

Actually, an opinion can be a lie, if it's just a lie posed as an "opinion". It happens all the time, pedanto.

"
ped·ant·ry


noun, plural ped·ant·ries. 1. the character, qualities, practices, etc., of a pedant, especially undue display of learning.

2. slavish attention to rules, details, etc.

3. an instance of being pedantic: the pedantries of modern criticism. "

Pedantry | Define Pedantry at Dictionary.com

 

[koshergrl]

"the habit or an instance of being a pedant, esp in the display of useless knowledge or minute observance of petty rules or details "

Pedantry | Define Pedantry at Dictionary.com

 

[koshergrl]

pedant

› a person who is too interested in formal rules and small details that are not important

pedant noun - definition in the British English Dictionary & Thesaurus - Cambridge Dictionaries Online (US)

 

[koshergrl]

"I was often, when a boy, wonderfully concerned to see, in the Italian farces, a pedant always brought in for the fool of the play.."

"But whence it should come to pass, that a mind enriched with the knowledge of so many things should not become more quick and sprightly, and that a gross and vulgar understanding should lodge within it, without correcting and improving itself, all the discourses and judgments of the greatest minds the world ever had, I am yet to seek."

"Of pedantry" by Michel de Montaigne

So popo.

 

[skookerasbil]

Want a real good laugh........check out this vid.........you cant make it up!! These gun grabbers are beyond fucked.........

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNb34vPqrN0#at=257]Debating A Gun Control Fanatic - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Pogo]

a violation of rights is a violation of rights. whether those rights are civil or constitutional.

Technically. I just find it interesting from a psychological angle that Pothead wants to dress up as a poor oppressed minority.

But that's his kind of spin. I think he was born under the sign of Vertigo.

I find that Poto's posts seem to address some other topic other than the one that is being discussed in the here and now. He hovers around the outer edges of the conversation in any thread he participates in, jumping on minutiae, posting distracting commentary about things that have no relevance, and attributing false stances to posters, then carrying on a conversation as if those false stances exist anywhere outside his own mind.

I'm thinking about putting him on ignore, because I have yet to find any post of his, anywhere, that actually contributes anything to the discussion. When he is asked questions, he quips "Wrong poster" or "That is not the precise color of tea in the Hebrides" as if those comments actually mean something, or make a point..any point...about the topic that is being discussed. He claimed to not attach false stances to posters...then made a comment about my "theory" and when asked to identify what my theory was, skipped off to some new inanity..and this is what he does in every thread.

He's impossible to engage...and his commentary has no value except to drag the conversation down into the mire. His statements are dishonest and vague, yet he postures as someone who is fully engaged and in control of the conversation, and the victor of the debate. His style hovers somewhere between bad faith, and Parkinson's law of triviality...except he doesn't provide enough substance even to be certainly identified.

In all, highly annoying, pretty distracting, completely without any substance or value as a poster. Verrry reminiscent of fake...think I'm going to pop him onto ignore. If he can get my attention after that, I'll just take to negging him every time I have break through...

^^ entire post that contributes nothing to the topic. Irony alert.

Do you need help finding the Ignore feature?

 

[Pogo]

If we didn't have a photograph you would have been screaming about the mothers being outnumbered 10
to 1 by gun toting thugs.

The photograph proved that was a lie, didn't it.

You might not like it, but this thread has always been about that photograph because it proved the OP was a lie from the beginning. That left you scrambling to find a way to defend the lie that the men intended to scare the mothers, and they used kids to accomplish that purpose.

Did I ever ask you why mothers are afraid of other people's children?

Actually five to one for those of us familiar with how numbers work, but unimportant.

Pictures don't tell a story. Stories tell a story. That's what the thread's about, like it or lump it.
I understand the dimmer set like to look at the pictures on the Peter Principle. Me, I read the actual story. Different strokes.

The OP claimed that there were 40 armed men outside the restaurant, which of us has a problem with numbers again?

My story is that the OP is a lie. It still is, and the picture agrees with me. There is no story you can get from that picture that makes the OP not a lie.

I think we all counted 20 in the picture, but if you want 40 then there are 20 more people whose actions we can't see, so have it your way...

The actual point is that the OP declares "intimidation". That's an opinion about their motivations. Can't be proven to be accurate or not. Therefore neither can it be a "lie".

Yours,
Captain Obvious