Originally posted by MythLord
In actual triggering news:
Lesbian couple assaulted in London
There's also been a rise in homophobic hate crimes in the UK... This is just sad.
I noticed that the ONLY Description of the Men was their "ACCENTS".....I WONDER WHY THAT WAS!??/
*cough cough rape gangs tommy was right cough cough*
Originally posted by MythLord
In actual triggering news:
Lesbian couple assaulted in London
There's also been a rise in homophobic hate crimes in the UK... This is just sad.
Saw that earlier, truly shit. Do hope the scumbags are caught.
Originally posted by MythLord
In actual triggering news:
Lesbian couple assaulted in London
There's also been a rise in homophobic hate crimes in the UK... This is just sad.
Awful. They should buy a gun for protection.
Why is Vice actively promoting child abuse?
I'm assuming either we're okay with this or we're bigots.
Originally posted by Surtur
Awful. They should buy a gun for protection.
Disagree.
Pretend you're a thin, attractive, woman. Like these two ladies. But you're also a lesbian. You have no man to protect you from assault from another man. And they are not friendly to LGBT (that's why being a lesbian makes this situation worse, I think: they are a target of bigots).
Now you have a gun. Now you see your female partner, who is thin and a woman, getting the crap beat out of her.
Do you think you will be able to pull out your Glock 19 9mm and accurately shoot just the assailants? That's, of course, taking into consideration that the slugs will have penetration power enough to travel through two bodies or more. In one side and out the other. Do you think you will be able to avoid hitting any bystanders in that scenario? Even with training? Keep in mind, women do not respond as logically and reasoned as men in these scenarios. Women tend to respond emotionally and men take action.
I know some libtards might be offended by this because it hurts your feelings that I dared point out there are differing danger responses between the two sexes. Well, too bad. Be offended. Whine harder. But there are differences and they are not just little differences:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091129125131.htm
I think a gun in this scenario is a bad idea. The area is too enclosed. Taser seems like a better choice.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Disagree.Pretend you're a thin, attractive, woman. Like these two ladies. But you're also a lesbian. You have no man to protect you from assault from another man. And they are not friendly to LGBT (that's why being a lesbian makes this situation worse, I think: they are a target of bigots).
Now you have a gun. Now you see your female partner, who is thin and a woman, getting the crap beat out of her.
Do you think you will be able to pull out your Glock 19 9mm and accurately shoot just the assailants? That's, of course, taking into consideration that the slugs will have penetration power enough to travel through two bodies or more. In one side and out the other. Do you think you will be able to avoid hitting any bystanders in that scenario? Even with training? Keep in mind, women do not respond as logically and reasoned as men in these scenarios. Women tend to respond emotionally and men take action.
I know some libtards might be offended by this because it hurts your feelings that I dared point out there are differing danger responses between the two sexes. Well, too bad. Be offended. Whine harder. But there are differences and they are not just little differences:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091129125131.htm
I think a gun in this scenario is a bad idea. The area is too enclosed. Taser seems like a better choice.
LOL! Ya got me.
They need to hire a man carrying a gun to protect them.
This is absolutely disturbing
https://www.dailywire.com/news/48156/california-democratic-party-first-amendment-josh-hammer
Originally posted by EmperordmbYeah, **** that shit.
This is absolutely disturbinghttps://www.dailywire.com/news/48156/california-democratic-party-first-amendment-josh-hammer
Originally posted by Emperordmb
This is absolutely disturbinghttps://www.dailywire.com/news/48156/california-democratic-party-first-amendment-josh-hammer
This is why the First Amendment is so important: to stop things exactly like this.
When people start defining what hate speech is, they are trying to define how people are allowed to think and feel. That's the worst possible outcome. This is slowly marching us towards the 1984 scenario.
**** they have no limits none. No limiting principles. “HATE SPEECH ISNT FREE SPEECH” “THIRD TERM ABORTION PAID FOR BY THE TAXPAYER” “GREEN NEW DEAL” “SOCIALISM ISNT A DIRTY WORD!” “INTERSECTIONALITY LETS CRAM IT INTO THE EDUCATION SYSTEM!”
And that’s just in policy. Is there any right-wing voice they haven’t tried to destroy? Oh they’ll let the never Trumpers speak, they’ll grant leeway towards right-wingers when they speak their talking points, but every other time it’s “THEY MUST NOT SPEAK ON THIS CAMPUS” “DEMONETIZE THEM!” “BAN THEM!” “ADVERTISER BOYCOTT!” “DEPLATFORM THEM!” “GET PAYMENT PROCESSORS TO UNDERCUT THEIR ABILITY TO DO BUSINESS OR MAKE EXCHANGES WITH THEIR AUDIENCE!”
Too funny:
They're racist for stopping a black shop lifter? Jesus leftists are so deranged lol.
Oh and by the way: if the college has to raise tuition or cut funding to certain areas to pay for this...students who were not involved in this nonsense will now have to endure the burden of this as well. Good job to those who f*cked it up for them by being petty whiny racist brats 👆