Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.dailycaller.com/2018/07/05/maga-hat-stole-drink-kids-face/

It takes a real man to bully and assault kids.

Ah, the tolerant left.

Sounds like Robtard lost his shit finally.

Originally posted by Kurk
Sounds like Robtard lost his shit finally.

No, he's much older than that guy and Robtard would give the boy his own hat if he needed it.

Originally posted by Impediment


Ah, the tolerant left.

the cheapest of bait

This seems like a bigger story then another flippin 20 second gotcha video clip.

Does it excuse the behavior, nope. Are those teens innocent little snowflakes, probably not.

I do believe that qualifies as criminal battery, the guy should be arrested.

Also, it is nice to see who doesn't mind violence being used on kids if they disagree with the kids politics.

Originally posted by snowdragon
This seems like a bigger story then another flippin 20 second gotcha video clip.

Does it excuse the behavior, nope. Are those teens innocent little snowflakes, probably not.

You're putting a lot of trust in an anonymous source that has no proof that the kids said that, or that he actually recieved death threats.

Edit: Even if true, that doesn't excuse what the guy did.

Originally posted by Silent Master
You're putting a lot of trust in an anonymous source that has no proof that the kids said that, or that he actually recieved death threats.

Edit: Even if true, that doesn't excuse what the guy did.

Yeah, that 20-second video clip obviously details the entire situation, totally trustworthy........

I'm not trusting in anything, I'm questioning the validity of the story told by kids but isn't being substantiated by anyone else there.

Originally posted by snowdragon
Yeah, that 20-second video clip obviously details the entire situation, totally .......

I'm not trusting in anything, I'm questioning the validity of the story told by kids but isn't being substantiated by anyone else there.

A 20-second clip is still far more than the anonymous source provided.

I notice that nobody has substantiated the claim made by the anonymous source, so it's still one side that has provide at least some evidence vs an anonymous source that provided zero evidence. yet you're only questioning the kids trustworthiness. I find that interesting.

Originally posted by Silent Master
A 20-second clip is still far more than the anonymous source provided.

I notice that nobody has substantiated the claim made by the anonymous source, so it's still one side that has provide at least some evidence vs an anonymous source that provided zero evidence. yet you're only questioning the kids trustworthiness. I find that interesting.

I question people that make news on controversial behaviors when they justify their position with a gotcha clip.

I don't like it when people do that to the police, I don't like it when people on the left do it, the right etc.

It is just a weapon people use to position themselves.

When I look at that situation and listen to what the anonymous person says, those are tough stories to just lie about on the spot, I didn't interview them I don't know.

It doesn't seem kosher, the guy was wrong grabbing the hat, I sincerely doubt the kids did nothing to antagonize that situation.

By the way it was 2am and the place looked vacant, how many people could possibly verify their story, even being anonymous they got death threats.

What controversial behaviors are the kids trying to justify and how is that a gotcha clip?

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
the cheapest of bait

Take it, you whore.

It is wrong to assault teens with anything but your penis.

Originally posted by BackFire
It is wrong to assault teens with anything but your penis. 110%

You can use your mouth too.

Originally posted by Silent Master
A 20-second clip is still far more than the anonymous source provided.



Right. In a court of law, one is hearsay and one is evidence.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
the cheapest of bait

And you sure did Nom Nom'ed on it!

Originally posted by Impediment
Take it, you whore.

look at me daddy, i can blow cum bubbles.

He has been arrested, BWHAHAHAHA!


#MAGA

What also makes me smile is leftist morons whined when cons called David Hogg a crisis actor. And then I saw leftist morons saying this was fake.

Too funny! Yes, fake. The bar the assailant worked at just decided to go along with the hoax. And so did the cops. Cuz fake!

Originally posted by Surtur
What also makes me smile is leftist morons whined when cons called David Hogg a crisis actor. And then I saw leftist morons saying this was fake.

Too funny! Yes, fake. The bar the assailant worked at just decided to go along with the hoax. And so did the cops. Cuz fake!

another vicarious victory for the non-contributing welfare queen. congratulations *clap*

I would love to see this guy get interviewed. I wanna know if he feels it was worth it to get fired and arrested all over a hat.

The cops should have arrested him wearing MAGA hats. Would have been hilarious.

Originally posted by Surtur
I would love to see this guy get interviewed. I wanna know if he feels it was worth it to get fired and arrested all over a hat.

The cops should have arrested him wearing MAGA hats. Would have been hilarious.


Have you noticed that he still hasn't said that what the guy did was wrong?

The scumbag was arrested. I hope that the parents of that boy press hard charges.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Have you noticed that he still hasn't said that what the guy did was wrong?

Yeah, what he did was wrong, I still want to know his motivation for this assault.

It seems clear to me. These people had not met before this. He went after the hat. The motivation is he hates Trump and seeing this hat triggered his Trump Derangement Syndrome.

People these days do not need a reason beyond "I don't like that hat cuz Trump". It's sad, but true. These people were never tolerant. They just usually could express that intolerance via their SJW bullshit. But these days it's clearly not working as well as they had hoped. So now, like a wounded animal, they are lashing out physically.

We will see this trend of violence against conservatives continue IMO. These people are super upset they might not get to kill as many babies as they once did.

Originally posted by snowdragon
I question people that make news on controversial behaviors when they justify their position with a gotcha clip.

What position are the kids trying to justify with the clip and what makes it a gotcha clip?

Originally posted by snowdragon
Yeah, what he did was wrong, I still want to know his motivation for this assault.

One of them was wearing a MAGA hat.

This kind of Hatered and Intolerance are being Taught in the Schools Now....As Example...have we forgotten about this HalteFilled Little (Big and Fat actually) Kommie Kunt!?

TGxqdhB_raQ

That guy was an idiot, even if the teens were indeed talking shit before the clip started, as the Cult of Trump often does and then plays victim, he's the adult in the situation and he should have acted that way.

I was unaware that splashing something with a cold beverage was "assault" though. Seem like a rather harsh sentence for such a benign crime.

Lol bro...in the age of microaggressions throwing a drink in someones face is akin to nearly beating them to death.

Throwing a beverage on a stranger is still assault, no matter how you look at it.

I will say this: this disturbs me in a different way. The guy who did this deserves to be fired and any other legal ramifications.

However, because of social media...people were not only able to ID him, but tracked down places they thought he lived. There was a place where he used to live that got threats cuz they thought he still lived there. They had to go to the police over it.

The internet is getting more dangerous.

Ah, the tolerant Cult of Trump

More Tolerant then the Left in many ways.

Originally posted by Robtard
Ah, the tolerant Cult of Trump

Irony overload here.

Trumper outright punches (ie physical assault) a peaceful protestor at a Trump rally during the election.

Cult of Trump: "He shouldn't have been there, it's his fault he got punched."

#tolerance

16 yr. old girl sings at Trump inauguration. Gets many death threats

#Tolerance

Look how mad certain people got when the Parkland kids got called names and compare it to how upset they are about a 16 year old who got physically attacked and his property stolen for supporting Trump.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Look how mad certain people got when the Parkland kids got called names and compare it to how upset they are about a 16 year old who got physically attacked and his property stolen for supporting Trump.

No one here is defending this guy and he's been arrested, what else would you like? Should people call for his death?

Originally posted by Surtur
16 yr. old girl sings at Trump inauguration. Gets many death threats

#Tolerance

That's wrong too and no one said it was okay. While you had no problem with the black man protesting Trump being punched at the Trump rally; in fact, you blamed him for being there.

So why is one okay and not the other?

I don't blame anyone protesting peacefully. I do blame people who show up at rallies just to start shit. I fully support people who go there with peaceful intentions. But you see some on the left feel that anything that isn't out right violence is peaceful. That is incorrect.

It's also way different than a 16 yr. old girl getting death threats. She went there to sing, not to start shit with other people.

Originally posted by Robtard
No one here is defending this guy and he's been arrested, what else would you like? Should people call for his death?

It's about the difference in reactions.

Replace this kid with a leftist and the black guy with some white alt right douche. This would be much bigger news.

I want people to hold all sides to the same standards. assault and theft >>>>>>> name calling. yet the name calling got far more reaction out of certain people.

Some people have also implied that the kids are probably racist and that's why the guy did it.

Originally posted by Surtur
I don't blame anyone protesting peacefully. I do blame people who show up at rallies just to start shit. I fully support people who go there with peaceful intentions. But you see some on the left feel that anything that isn't out right violence is peaceful. That is incorrect.

It's also way different than a 16 yr. old girl getting death threats. She went there to sing, not to start shit with other people.

That was not your attitude during the election, you had zero tolerance for anti-Trump protestors, peaceful or otherwise.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I want people to hold all sides to the same standards. assault and theft >>>>>>> name calling. yet the name calling got far more reaction out of certain people.

Some people have also implied that the kids are probably racist and that's why the guy did it.

I didn't see anyone defending this guy. Snow said he was curious why the video only showed this guy's actions and not the whole picture of events. Which is a fair thing to ask.

Originally posted by Surtur
It's about the difference in reactions.

Replace this kid with a leftist and the black guy with some white alt right douche. This would be much bigger news.

So you're using pretend scenarios and trying to race-bait again. Lame. Be less lame.

Originally posted by Robtard
So you're using pretend scenarios and trying to race-bait again. Lame. Be less lame.

I'm pointing out how the other side would react. Are you actually disagreeing with me that they would not make a bigger deal out of the scenario I described?

What if the kid was a member of the Alliance and the guy was a member of the Horde? This would be HUGE news.

Originally posted by Robtard
I didn't see anyone defending this guy. Snow said he was curious why the video only showed this guy's actions and not the whole picture of events. Which is a fair thing to ask.

That isn't an accurate description of snow said, he posted an article where an anonymous source said the kids made racist comments. snow then said that they probably weren't innocent themselves.

He clearly is putting all of his trust in an anonymous source who has provided zero evidence.

So what I said then, no one here is actually defending this guy

As far as your attempt at trying to paint Snow as some "der Leftist!", pretty funny considering he's a Conservative.

Arguing that the guy might have been provoked is a form of defending him. BTW, at no point did I call snow a leftist, that is just you trying to score points in a game where you're the only player.

Snow said that regardless of what happened, this guy's behavior is inexcusable; that hardly sounds like a defense. So maybe you missed that?

Originally posted by Robtard
Snow said that regardless of what happened, this guy's behavior is inexcusable; that hardly sounds like a defense. So maybe you missed that?

snow never said the guy's actions/behavior were inexcusable and BTW, saying there were probably mitigating factors in the attack is a form of defense.

It's basically saying. yeah what he did was wrong, but it probably wouldn't have happened if the kids weren't racist.

Originally posted by Silent Master
snow never said the guy's actions/behavior were inexcusable and BTW, saying there were probably mitigating factors in the attack is a form of defense.

It's basically saying. yeah what he did was wrong, but it probably wouldn't have happened if the kids weren't racist.

HYG:

Originally posted by snowdragon
This seems like a bigger story then another flippin 20 second gotcha video clip.

Does it excuse the behavior, nope. Are those teens innocent little snowflakes, probably not.

As you can see, Snow did in fact say that this man had no excuse for his actions, regardless of what happened prior. I hope that clears up your confusion.

Where did Snow say the kid was a racist?

Saying that something doesn't excuse an action is not the same as saying that the action is inexcusable.

You know this.

Saying someone's behavior is not excusable is saying it though.

Where did Snow say the kid was a racist?

Originally posted by Silent Master
snow never said the guy's actions/behavior were inexcusable and BTW, saying there were probably mitigating factors in the attack is a form of defense.

It's basically saying. yeah what he did was wrong, but it probably wouldn't have happened if the kids weren't racist.

You're assuming I believe that I don't. My issue with this situation was a 20-second video that showed an adult that lost control and went after kids, he was wrong, he's been arrested.

I dislike 20-second clips to paint a picture when most situations aren't composed of 20-second clips but multiple interactions leading up to those clips.


PS I voted for Ralph Nader and Gary Johnson in presidential elections, I would hardly call that a conservative

Originally posted by snowdragon


PS I voted for Ralph Nader and Gary Johnson in presidential elections, I would hardly call that a conservative

Apologies, I thought you had said that you're a Conservative.


Did you call those kids racist? Or is that something SM strawmanned you on to try and gain points?

Originally posted by snowdragon
You're assuming I believe that I don't. My issue with this situation was a 20-second video that showed an adult that lost control and went after kids, he was wrong, he's been arrested.

I dislike 20-second clips to paint a picture when most situations aren't composed of 20-second clips but multiple interactions leading up to those clips.


PS I voted for Ralph Nader and Gary Johnson in presidential elections, I would hardly call that a conservative

No, I assuming that you're giving more trust to an anonymous source than you are to a video that at least shows some of what happened. after all, the anonymous source was enough to convince you that the kids probably weren't "innocent little snowflakes".

Originally posted by Robtard
Saying someone's behavior is not excusable is saying it though.

Where did Snow say the kid was a racist?

snow didn't say the guy's behavior is not excusable, he said a certain action didn't excuse it. one action not excusing something and that something being inexcusable are two different things.

I didn't claim snow said they were racist, that's why I said "It's basically saying" and not "snow said this". the "It's basically saying" is a qualifier, indicating that what comes next is my interpretation of his actions/words.

Originally posted by Silent Master
No, I assuming that you're giving more trust to an anonymous source than you are to a video that at least shows some of what happened. after all, the anonymous source was enough to convince you that the kids probably weren't "innocent little snowflakes".

No one disputes what the guy did, I question the value of said clips when they are used to push an idea/agenda (maga hate time!)

What the guy did was wrong, I wanted to know what motivated the aggressive behavior if you believe the 20-second clip tells the whole story good for you, I know 20-second clips don't tell the whole story.

Someone that came out anonymous that commented about what was said in the diner, they didn't want to go on the record. I don't blame them, who wants your name all over social media and your family being threatened over a soda/hat incident.

Too bad the other person in the video didn't upload his video, you could see him recording behind the situation in jeans.

Originally posted by snowdragon
No one disputes what the guy did, I question the value of said clips when they are used to push an idea/agenda (maga hate time!)

What the guy did was wrong, I wanted to know what motivated the aggressive behavior if you believe the 20-second clip tells the whole story good for you, I know 20-second clips don't tell the whole story.

Someone that came out anonymous that commented about what was said in the diner, they didn't want to go on the record. I don't blame them, who wants your name all over social media and your family being threatened over a soda/hat incident.

Too bad the other person in the video didn't upload his video, you could see him recording behind the situation in jeans.

The clip proves he did it, without proof the guy could just deny it, assuming he was ever found as the clip is the only reason he was able to be ID'd. I'd say that makes the clips value extremely high.

How do you know this specific clip doesn't show the whole story?

The anonymous source provided no evidence to support his claim, so why put so much trust into him and make no mistake, saying that the kids were probably not innocent is putting trust in the anonymous sources claim.

Originally posted by Silent Master
The clip proves he did it, without proof the guy could just deny it, assuming he was ever found as the clip is the only reason he was able to be ID'd. I'd say that makes the clips value extremely high.

How do you know this specific clip doesn't show the whole story?

The anonymous source provided no evidence to support his claim, so why put so much trust into him and make no mistake, saying that the kids were probably not innocent is putting trust in the anonymous sources claim.

You are clearly looking to climb a mountain over this.

Everyone, literally everyone on this forum has said the guy is wrong.

Originally posted by snowdragon
You are clearly looking to climb a mountain over this.

Everyone, literally everyone on this forum has said the guy is wrong.

Not everyone, I can name at least one person in this thread that hasn't.

But that isn't my point, I'm trying to understand why you're putting so much faith in an anonymous source that has provided zero evidence.

Originally posted by snowdragon
You are clearly looking to climb a mountain over this.

Everyone, literally everyone on this forum has said the guy is wrong.

just play their cute little game when one of theirs is beyond repugnant. watch me, now:


awful

an acceptable substitution is apparently "womp womp"

Originally posted by Robtard
I was unaware that splashing something with a cold beverage was "assault" though. Seem like a rather harsh sentence for such a benign crime.


Yeah, physically touching someone's body when they don't want it is battery. I can see how throwing ice water in someone's face could be escalated a bit higher.


It's the place we live in. You can't just throw icewater in people's faces. Use your words. Don't touch unless it's welcomed.

Originally posted by Robtard
What if the kid was a member of the Alliance and the guy was a member of the Horde? This would be HUGE news.

Triggered.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
just play their cute little game when one of theirs is beyond repugnant. watch me, now:


awful

I still love the fact you guys are triggered over this. So much butthurt.

Originally posted by snowdragon
You are clearly looking to climb a mountain over this.

Everyone, literally everyone on this forum has said the guy is wrong.

But you also seemed to question the validity of it because some anonymous person said "they was talking about hanging blacks!".

Is that not what you were implying?

I guess I'm also a bit confused. How is the witness able to remain anonymous when...people already gave his family death threats? Isn't the cat out of the bag...by the time you are getting death threats?

Are they under the impression these people are going "well, we threatened this guy for saying the white kids were racist, but we are PERPLEXED at this now anonymous person claiming the same exact thing" ? You see because people who send others death threats are known for being rational...lol. They'd just assume the anonymous person was the same person they threatened, and then would probably spread his name around.

Help me make sense of what is being claimed. Cuz if you're already getting threatened you aren't anonymous anymore. And it's not like the place this occurred was SWAMPED with people. So to me, what you posted sounds like someone bullshitting. "We don't wanna give out the name cuz we fear threats" makes sense. "We don't wanna name it cuz they've already received threats, which means somewhere they were named" makes no sense here. It would make sense if there were literally hundreds of possible people who could be reporting these things, but it was a friggin what a burger.

My question is more along the lines of how is he already getting death threats when that article appears to be the first time he made the claim.

Originally posted by Surtur
Triggered.



I still love the fact you guys are triggered over this. So much butthurt.

look at all the pretend wins you're racking up. good for you. *clap*

Originally posted by Surtur
People these days do not need a reason beyond "I don't like that hat cuz Trump". It's sad, but true. These people were never tolerant. They just usually could express that intolerance via their SJW bullshit. But these days it's clearly not working as well as they had hoped. So now, like a wounded animal, they are lashing out physically.

Is it really that different in your eyes as opposed to other times throughout history? Did people ever need a reason beyond religion, politics, sports etc... People have been whooping other people's asses in bars and on the streets for these reasons ever since there have been bars asses and streets.

Go to a Boston or new York sports bar a few times wearing a hat from the opposing city's team after that city loses a game or series and see if people are willing to fight u over a hat.

Now everyone has a cell phone and posts a vid so they and their side can have a nice collective cry over it, but it's been happening for ages.

As for the topic, if what the anonymous witness said is true, then 16 is plenty old enough to know that saying those things in public (especially at a bar) around the wrong person can and probably will lead to an ass kicking and deservedly so.

If they aren't true then the guy should definately been fired and technically arrested under the letter of the law.

Though if a spokesman for the police department said they would only charge him if he turned himself in and they weren't going to waste the departments time and resources finding a guy who took a hat off some kids head and splashed some water I wouldn't really care.

Here is the thing: you don't have the right to assault someone just because they say something offensive. 16 or 60. But we've seen no evidence so far those anonymous claims are true.

Originally posted by Surtur
Here is the thing: you don't have the right to assault someone just because they say something offensive. 16 or 60. But we've seen no evidence so far those anonymous claims are true. that's all well and good to say, but what percent of people in your opinion, that are preaching that, would actually refrain from whooping someones ass (if they physically could) in a bar or on the street if someone said the wrong thing to/around them or their wife/kids/mother etc... I personally think that fear of getting their own ass beaten is a bigger deterrent than whether or not it's within their rights.

Also do u really see people "these days" as being much different than the past. Do u think that no one ever got into a scuffle over an I support JFK shirt or a Go Nixon hat in a bar in the sixties? Or do u think the same stuff probably happened, but no one had a way to record and post it?

I mean there are a shit ton of bars around the world that have signs hanging saying things like "no talking politics or religion" for a reason, and they've been hanging there way before Trump or sjw's.

Originally posted by Raptor22
that's all well and good to say, but what percent of people in your opinion, that are preaching that, would actually refrain from whooping someones ass (if they physically could) in a bar or on the street if someone said the wrong thing to/around them or their wife/kids/mother etc... I personally think that fear of getting their own ass beaten is a bigger deterrent than whether or not it's within their rights.

Loads of people would refrain. Not because they agree, but so they don't wanna wind up getting arrested like this guy.

There is also the potential threat to their wife/kid/mother. Everybody has a camera on their phone and people on social media can quickly identify someone. Including finding out their address. This guys brother got death threats cuz they thought they still lived together.



Sure they did before, but it seemed like we'd made some progress when it comes to beating people down for political views. I guess not.

Hilarious. Now you will see copy cats. I bet the guys who got drinks all over their face was stunned!! Lol

Originally posted by Raptor22
that's all well and good to say, but what percent of people in your opinion, that are preaching that, would actually refrain from whooping someones ass (if they physically could) in a bar or on the street if someone said the wrong thing to/around them or their wife/kids/mother etc... I personally think that fear of getting their own ass beaten is a bigger deterrent than whether or not it's within their rights.

Also do u really see people "these days" as being much different than the past. Do u think that no one ever got into a scuffle over an I support JFK shirt or a Go Nixon hat in a bar in the sixties? Or do u think the same stuff probably happened, but no one had a way to record and post it?

I mean there are a shit ton of bars around the world that have signs hanging saying things like "no talking politics or religion" for a reason, and they've been hanging there way before Trump or sjw's.

It doesn't matter how many people you think would do it, a grown man attacking a 16 year old is still wrong.

Originally posted by Silent Master
It doesn't matter how many people you think would do it, a grown man attacking a 16 year old is still wrong. I never said how many people I think would do it, nor did I say or imply that it would matter to it being right or wrong. Nice strawman tho

I did state my belief that alot of people would say that u don't have the right to assault someone for saying something offensive but if placed in a similar situation might act in a manner different from their previous statements. And I was curious to what Surturs opinion was on what percent of people would say that and then actually practice what they preach. That's kind of why I asked him his opinion on the matter.

As to the second part, I disagree. There are plenty of things a 16 year old can say or do that would earn them a deserved ass whooping from an adult.

The law disagrees with you, you are never allowed to use physical force against someone because you don't like what they said.

Originally posted by Raptor22
Is it really that different in your eyes as opposed to other times throughout history? Did people ever need a reason beyond religion, politics, sports etc... People have been whooping other people's asses in bars and on the streets for these reasons ever since there have been bars asses and streets.

Go to a Boston or new York sports bar a few times wearing a hat from the opposing city's team after that city loses a game or series and see if people are willing to fight u over a hat.

Now everyone has a cell phone and posts a vid so they and their side can have a nice collective cry over it, but it's been happening for ages.

As for the topic, if what the anonymous witness said is true, then 16 is plenty old enough to know that saying those things in public (especially at a bar) around the wrong person can and probably will lead to an ass kicking and deservedly so.

If they aren't true then the guy should definately been fired and technically arrested under the letter of the law.

Though if a spokesman for the police department said they would only charge him if he turned himself in and they weren't going to waste the departments time and resources finding a guy who took a hat off some kids head and splashed some water I wouldn't really care. Good Post.

Originally posted by Silent Master
The law disagrees with you, you are never allowed to use physical force against someone because you don't like what they said. if your basing your morality and what's right and wrong in the world based soley on the legality of it then your even more screwed up than I am.

But let's go down that rabbit hole for a bit.

By the logic you're presenting me, if I beat the shit out of someone and the police/courts can't prove it, then in the eyes of the law and your own logic I didn't do anything wrong... Because Law. That would go for any crime that can't be proven in a court of law, even the most horrendous.

Surtur it won't let me quote u'r last post but if that story is true and the stuff about the kid saying that stuff isn't true then that's beyond pathetic. I have no idea what the law says in regards to making stuff like that up, but in my in opinion the person who supposedly made it up should be facing harsher legal penalties than the guy who took his hat and threw a drink in his face.

Originally posted by Silent Master
The law disagrees with you, you are never allowed to use physical force against someone because you don't like what they said.


Oh so, my friend:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaplinsky_v._New_Hampshire



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words



It's pretty narrow, probably only exists because a judge wanted to "protect our own", and it's not likely it'll save someone who attacks another for words, but "Fighting words" is very much still a thing.. A sympathetic judge/jury and a good lawyer is all you need.

Originally posted by Raptor22
if your basing your morality and what's right and wrong in the world based soley on the legality of it then your even more screwed up than I am.

But let's go down that rabbit hole for a bit.

By the logic you're presenting me, if I beat the shit out of someone and the police/courts can't prove it, then in the eyes of the law and your own logic I didn't do anything wrong... Because Law. That would go for any crime that can't be proven in a court of law, even the most horrendous. it's also not morally right to assault someone because you dislike their politics or something they said.

Originally posted by cdtm
Oh so, my friend:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaplinsky_v._New_Hampshire



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words



It's pretty narrow, probably only exists because a judge wanted to "protect our own", and it's not likely it'll save someone who attacks another for words, but "Fighting words" is very much still a thing.. A sympathetic judge/jury and a good lawyer is all you need.

In my opinion "fighting words" goes a bit beyond just not liking what somebody said, though I suppose certain judges may feel differently. So, fair enough

Originally posted by Silent Master
it's also not morally right to assault someone because you dislike their politics or something they said. do u have like a barn or something where u keep all these strawmen u keep building up? Please show me where I said it's moraly right to assault someone due to a dislike of their politics.

Do u ever consider for a minute that if u have to constantly twist things, change them and blatantly make things up just to convince yourself that u have a valid point, that maybe u don't?

Originally posted by Raptor22
do u have like a barn or something where u keep all these strawmen u keep building up? Please show me where I said it's moraly right to assault someone due to a dislike of their politics.

Do u ever consider for a minute that if u have to constantly twist things, change them and blatantly make things up just to convince yourself that u have a valid point, that maybe u don't?

Sure, right after you show me where I said that you claimed it was morally right to physically assault someone due to a dislike of their politics.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Sure, right after you show me where I said that you claimed it was morally right to physically assault someone due to a dislike of their politics.
so then u quoted that post of mine and didn't make that response to imply it's something I said (which would be par for the course with your strawman routine), but just decided to quote my post and instead of addressing anything in it, u decided to drop a nugget of your own personal moral wisdome on us for no reason about a point that was never discussed or contested in any way.

In other words, you can't actually provide the quote so you're just going to claim I implied it. That is seriously pathetic.

You need to learn the difference between someone stating their opinion / stance & them claiming another person said something.

Originally posted by Raptor22
so then u quoted that post of mine and didn't make that response to imply it's something I said (which would be par for the course with your strawman routine), but just decided to quote my post and instead of addressing anything in it, u decided to drop a nugget of your own personal moral wisdome on us for no reason about a point that was never discussed or contested in any way.

Take a look at this post:

Originally posted by Silent Master
In other words, you can't actually provide the quote...



FYI, when Silent Master gets to this point in his posts in an argument, you know you f*cked up. It's easy to shut him up with a quote.

Originally posted by Silent Master
In other words, you can't actually provide the quote so you're just going to claim I implied it. That is seriously pathetic.

You need to learn the difference between someone stating their opinion / stance & them claiming another person said something. Lol it's pretty funny that u think I'm under some obligation to provide u with a quote to satisfy your demands.

Feel free to deny it all u want, but it's either that or u quoted that specific post, didn't respond to anything contained in it, then posted your opinion on a subject that was never disputed or even discussed.

At best it was a strawman at worst u responded to a quote with an off subject opinion that served no purpose than to derail the topic at hand in an attempt to distract from the fact that your arguments on the subject were garbage.

So the guy who just got through demanding I provide a quote now thinks asking for proof is funny.

You're a hypocrite.

Originally posted by Raptor22
Surtur it won't let me quote u'r last post but if that story is true and the stuff about the kid saying that stuff isn't true then that's beyond pathetic. I have no idea what the law says in regards to making stuff like that up, but in my in opinion the person who supposedly made it up should be facing harsher legal penalties than the guy who took his hat and threw a drink in his face.

I can't see how at this point it is "supposedly" made up. This guy spoke to the press. He didn't say "they were saying racist things". He said it was the hat.

They DID make up that these kids were talking about hanging blacks. That is just how pathetic some leftists are. It's why they'll never ever hold any sort of moral high ground again. I can't say I'm shocked, hands up don't shoot was a lie too.

Originally posted by Silent Master
So the guy who just got through demanding I provide a quote now thinks asking for proof is funny.

You're a hypocrite. Ah classic Silent. Can't defend your position on the actual subject being discussed, so u try to derail the conversation into petty bickering and words games. I'll take a page out of your book for this response.

Please provide a quote where I "demanded" u provide a quote.

I remember asking, even saying please.

U need to learn the difference between someone asking for something and someone demanding it.

Originally posted by Raptor22
Please show me where I said it's moraly right to assault someone due to a dislike of their politics.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Sure, right after you show me where I said that you claimed it was morally right to physically assault someone due to a dislike of their politics.

Originally posted by Raptor22
so then u quoted that post of mine and didn't make that response to imply it's something I said (which would be par for the course with your strawman routine), but just decided to quote my post and instead of addressing anything in it, u decided to drop a nugget of your own personal moral wisdome on us for no reason about a point that was never discussed or contested in any way.

Originally posted by Silent Master
In other words, you can't actually provide the quote so you're just going to claim I implied it. That is seriously pathetic.

You need to learn the difference between someone stating their opinion / stance & them claiming another person said something.

Originally posted by Raptor22
Lol it's pretty funny that u think I'm under some obligation to provide u with a quote to satisfy your demands.

Feel free to deny it all u want, but it's either that or u quoted that specific post, didn't respond to anything contained in it, then posted your opinion on a subject that was never disputed or even discussed.

At best it was a strawman at worst u responded to a quote with an off subject opinion that served no purpose than to derail the topic at hand in an attempt to distract from the fact that your arguments on the subject were garbage.

Originally posted by Silent Master
So the guy who just got through demanding I provide a quote now thinks asking for proof is funny.

You're a hypocrite.

Originally posted by Silent Master
On to page 2 of the Silent playbook of avoiding the topic.

In other words, you can't actually provide the quote of me demanding a quote from u, instead u just post a bunch of quotes that don't say what you're accusing me of saying. Pathetic bro

U r a hypocrite.

Originally posted by Surtur
I can't see how at this point it is "supposedly" made up. This guy spoke to the press. He didn't say "they were saying racist things". He said it was the hat.

They DID make up that these kids were talking about hanging blacks. That is just how pathetic some leftists are. It's why they'll never ever hold any sort of moral high ground again. I can't say I'm shocked, hands up don't shoot was a lie too. the supposedly was due to my distrust of the media and people in general. I wasn't there, I'm just hearing a bunch if stuff from people I don't know, talking about things I didn't see myself.

Pathetic is one thing, this stuff is just plain stupid. Getting caught in lies like this does nothing but hurt their cause and give ammo to their opposition. lying about it is bad enough, but dear god, doing it a manner that gets exposed and comes back to bite u in the ass so quick shows a level of stupidity that's almost staggering.

Originally posted by Raptor22
On to page 2 of the Silent playbook of avoiding the topic.

In other words, you can't actually provide the quote of me demanding a quote from u, instead u just post a bunch of quotes that don't say what you're accusing me of saying. Pathetic bro

U r a hypocrite.

Yes, I used the word demand when I should have said request. doesn't change the fact that you made a claim about me and then failed to prove it. let's see if you're mature enough to admit being wrong like I did.

My money is on no, you're not.

Originally posted by Raptor22
the supposedly was due to my distrust of the media and people in general. I wasn't there, I'm just hearing a bunch if stuff from people I don't know, talking about things I didn't see myself.

Pathetic is one thing, this stuff is just plain stupid. Getting caught in lies like this does nothing but hurt their cause and give ammo to their opposition. lying about it is bad enough, but dear god, doing it a manner that gets exposed and comes back to bite u in the ass so quick shows a level of stupidity that's almost staggering.

You make a good point and this stuff always mystifies me. Whenever anything is Trump related I don't see why people lie or mislead. There is plenty of legitimate stuff to criticize. He gives them so much material to work with and they still lie. Sometimes the lies are about him and sometimes they are about his supporters.

I don't think people realize this contributes to Trumps ability to withstand scandals. People weigh their dislike of what Trump is doing with the insanity of the left, and the insanity of the left tends to win out.

I wonder if snow still believes the kids probably aren't "innocent little snowflakes".

Originally posted by Silent Master
Yes, I used the word demand when I should have said request. doesn't change the fact that you made a claim about me and then failed to prove it. let's see if you're mature enough to admit being wrong like I did.

My money is on no, you're not. I could consider doing that and act "mature" in your eyes.

Or I could act like a giant douche because I don't particularly care for the cut of your jib.

I think I'll take option B.

Thank u for admitting you were wrong. Mistakes happen, after all we're only human. We all know to err is human, but to forgive... To forgive is divine.

With that being said and in the spirit of divinity, I forgive u for your mistake Silent.

I'm glad you've learned difference between a demand and a request and I'm happy I was able to help teach u along the way and be a part of your learning process.

Thank u for your humility and your welcome for the guidance.

I just read that, reportedly, the kids were making extremely racist comments about lynching and hanging black people.

This is according to one eye witness who claimed to have overheard the comments and was among brewing situation between the kids and the guy, but promptly left to avoid any involvement.

If those kids were, in fact, making racist comments and discussing despicable violence, then they deserved even more than a soda in he face. I probably would have shit in my hand and threw it at them like a chimpanzee.

There's just no evidence to prove otherwise, sadly.

Originally posted by Impediment
I just read that, reportedly, the kids were making extremely racist comments about lynching and hanging black people.

This is according to one eye witness who claimed to have overheard the comments and was among brewing situation between the kids and the guy, but promptly left to avoid any involvement.

If those kids were, in fact, making racist comments and discussing despicable violence, then they deserved even more than a soda in he face. I probably would have shit in my hand and threw it at them like a chimpanzee.

There's just no evidence to prove otherwise, sadly.

Agreed, it's hearsay.

But TBF, they are Trumpers...

Well those kids would products of the modern educational system, which is run by loony lefty fascists so.... yeah...

Originally posted by Robtard
Agreed, it's hearsay.

But TBF, they are Trumpers...

Originally posted by Impediment
I just read that, reportedly, the kids were making extremely racist comments about lynching and hanging black people.

This is according to one eye witness who claimed to have overheard the comments and was among brewing situation between the kids and the guy, but promptly left to avoid any involvement.

If those kids were, in fact, making racist comments and discussing despicable violence, then they deserved even more than a soda in he face. I probably would have shit in my hand and threw it at them like a chimpanzee.

There's just no evidence to prove otherwise, sadly.

*SMH* this has been covered already. The guy who did it admitted why he did it. It was the hat. It wasn't racist comments. At no time does he mention they were racist.

Some grimey little weasel made up the racism comments. How sad is that? How pathetic?

Originally posted by Surtur
*SMH* this has been covered already. The guy who did it admitted why he did it. It was the hat. It wasn't racist comments. At no time does he mention they were racist.

Some grimey little weasel made up the racism comments. How sad is that? How pathetic?

If that's the case, then he's a douche bag who needs to be charged to the full extent of the law for assault and theft.

It's very sad and pathetic, I agree.

He has been arrested but I doubt he will get more than a slap on the wrist.

Can someone post proof that this guy admitted that he did what he did just because of a maga hat?

I've never met a teenager who didn't deserve a smack in the face and a kick to the balls.

Originally posted by Robtard
Can someone post proof that this guy admitted that he did what he did just because of a maga hat?

It's already been posted. He spoke to a reporter.

But here, I wonder if you'll twist this or say it's not enough, despite the fact this was the perfect opportunity to say "Yeah, they were racist".

https://www.ksat.com/news/sapd-plagued-with-calls-for-tougher-charges-against-suspect-in-whataburger-attack

Come on let's twist again like we did last summer. Yea, let's twist again like we did last year.

Not going to click, I'll take your word for it as I don't really care. As before in my first post, regardless of what the teens said, he's the adult; he should have acted that way.

But good on you, you didn't end up defending racist for once

Originally posted by Robtard
Not going to click, I'll take your word for it as I don't really care. As before in my first post, regardless of what the teens said, he's the adult; he should have acted that way.

But good on you, you didn't end up defending racist for once

Ah yes "you're correct on this, but I'm gonna take a shot at you anyways".

Lol, never change you weasel.

Originally posted by Surtur
Ah yes "you're correct on this, but I'm gonna take a shot at you anyways".

Lol, never change you weasel.

^
https://i.imgur.com/hG3cuWn.jpg

If pointing out SDS is being triggered...okie dokie.

PS: Glad you finally got that pic to work.

Huh?

Anyways, this guy could potentially serve 180 days in jail. I doubt it though.

Okay so apparently the guy was charged with a felony. Interesting.

Originally posted by Surtur
Okay so apparently the guy was charged with a felony. Interesting.

Good. Maybe now people will realize that this kind of activity is extremely counterproductive.