Tucker's wife/kids targeted

Started by dadudemon22 pages
dadudemon Senior Member
Originally posted by Putinbot1
Even JP says it's O.K. to smack someone if they are lippy - paraphrased. I don't disagree.

Damn right. 👆

Robtard Senor Member
Originally posted by Surtur
Oh Rob I can see you're kinda slow today, here is what just happened: you attempted a "gotcha". It failed.

As long as you extend that same standard to the next person you label as an 'Antifa!" or "Leftist!" that does something because of "mean words" 👆

BackFire Blood. It's nature's lube

Originally posted by dadudemon
Yes, I wish we could bring duels back into vogue. So many frail egos would be a lot less frail if they could be challenged to a duel where the might die. Perhaps their ego isn't worth the posturing?

Yes, I am aware Backfire was joking.

As long as the challenge has to include slapping the person with a rubber club and calling him Reginald, I'm all for it.

Surtur Restricted
Originally posted by Robtard
As long as you extend that same standard to the next person you label as an 'Antifa!" or "Leftist!" that does something because of "mean words" 👆

What standard? Are you going to pretend because I pointed out the difference in the situations it means I think it's okay to assault someone over words? Pretty please say you're dumb enough to be doing that...

Robtard Senor Member
Originally posted by Putinbot1
Even JP says it's O.K. to smack someone if they are lippy - paraphrased. I don't disagree.

For sure, someone calls my daughter a whore and that's a call to arms. Happily spend a night in county for that.

Just want the Cult of Trump to use the same standards across the board when "mean words" are had and a "Leftist!" reacts.

Silent Master Senior Member

If the guy wants to press charges over the wine throwing, go for it.

BTW, What happened to. I don't condone what they did, but actions have consequences? or does that only apply to things that happen to people you disagree with.

BackFire Blood. It's nature's lube

Originally posted by Robtard
Happily spend a night in county for that.

Cut the bullshit, you like to spend the night in county just for the lovin'.

darthgoober Senior Member

Originally posted by Robtard
So now it's okay to attack someone over mean words? You people really need to make up your minds.

But just remember this standard (cos I will) the next time anyone you label as "Antifa!" or "Leftist!" attacks someone over mean words. Cool.


My mind is made up, but it all depends on the circumstances. There does in fact exist such a thing as "fighting words" legally. But the Supreme Court has already ruled that typical Nazi rhetoric doesn't apply as such. Now in the event of personal insults against specific people, I'm not sure what the typical guidelines are. I do know this though, if when my sister was still alive someone had called her whore to her face right in front of me, I'd hit the guy. But if it was determined that such didn't qualify as "fighting words" by the legal standard, I wouldn't ***** about being charged with battery nor would I campaign to try to get that standard changed because rules like that are important. And if it happened again, I'd hit him again and take another battery charge with a smile on my face because that's what good brothers do.

Robtard Senor Member

Originally posted by Silent Master

BTW, What happened to. I don't condone what they did, but actions have consequences? or does that only apply to things that happen to people you disagree with.

Who is this question targeted to, my time-waster-troll friend?

Robtard Senor Member
Originally posted by BackFire
Cut the bullshit, you like to spend the night in county just for the lovin'.

Meh, aside from some spooning, county isn't where you get the loving.

BackFire Blood. It's nature's lube
Originally posted by Robtard
Meh, aside from some spooning, county isn't where you get the loving.

Can't compare to the truck stops, huh?

Robtard Senor Member
Originally posted by BackFire
Can't compare to the truck stops, huh?

If you're into being blown by a White Male Christian Conservative and likely Trump supporter, truck stop bathrooms is where it's definitely at. Why do you think there's so many in Red states.

Putinbot1 Restricted

Originally posted by Silent Master
If the guy wants to press charges over the wine throwing, go for it.

BTW, What happened to. I don't condone what they did, but actions have consequences? or does that only apply to things that happen to people you disagree with.

Not at all and it's another thing JP is right on, most men in social situations know where the line is and agree to disagree and even actively avoid politics, religion etc on a night out. One of my best friends has political views I find disgusting, he never talks politics with me and I never talk politics with him, and as long as we do that we stay friends and have managed to for 40 odd years.

The internet is NOT real life

darthgoober Senior Member

Looked up the Supreme Court's stance on personal insults...

In Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), the Supreme Court redefined the scope of the fighting words doctrine to mean words that are "a direct personal insult or an invitation to exchange fisticuffs." In the case, the Court held that the burning of a United States flag, which was considered symbolic speech, did not constitute fighting words.`"

Now looking at that in a relative sense to their ruling on Nazi marches, I think the standard is basically that saying "N*ggers are stupid and dirty" isn't legal justification for someone to hit them, but telling a black person "You're just a stupid, dirty, n*gger" IS justification to hit him

Silent Master Senior Member
Originally posted by Robtard
Who is this question targeted to, my time-waster-troll friend?

As obvious by the wording of the question. it's aimed at the people that have used the argument "I don't condone what they did, but actions have consequences".

Robtard Senor Member
Originally posted by Silent Master
As obvious by the wording of the question. it's aimed at the people that have used the argument "I don't condone what they did, but actions have consequences".

Who is the person(s) who said that and then defended the wine attack victim?

Putinbot1 Restricted

Originally posted by darthgoober
Looked up the Supreme Court's stance on personal insults...

In Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), the Supreme Court redefined the scope of the fighting words doctrine to mean words that are "a direct personal insult or an invitation to exchange fisticuffs." In the case, the Court held that the burning of a United States flag, which was considered symbolic speech, did not constitute fighting words.`"

In the UK we have a little more freedom as to what constitutes incitement to breach the peace.

Surtur Restricted

Originally posted by Robtard
For sure, someone calls my daughter a whore and that's a call to arms. Happily spend a night in county for that.

Just want the Cult of Trump to use the same standards across the board when "mean words" are had and a "Leftist!" reacts.

The same standards are being used. I don't think anybody said if the kid gets in legal trouble it's wrong lol. You attempted a "gotcha" by bringing up the milk incident, acting as if I demanded the person involved be arrested when I merely laughed at the situation.

Once again you mislead people...cuz you're a little weasel lol. And now you'll act oblivious to this...like a puppy who just took a dump on the rug and then looks at you as if to say "....what?"

SquallX Senior Member
Originally posted by Putinbot1
In the UK we have a little more freedom as to what constitutes incitement to breach the peace.

I call bullshit on that one.

Putinbot1 Restricted

Originally posted by SquallX
I call bullshit on that one.
oh trust me if you said stupid things to me and I warned you I found them offensive but you continued and I beat you up, as long as I didn't use a weapon or go over the top I would not get anything more than a fine or a non custodial sentence at the most.