How to handle confrontational liberals.

[Gotcha68]

Try disturbing the peace. But it doesn't matter as the owner had every right to ask her to leave when she caused a scene. Get it?

I'm almost positive nobody has said otherwise.

[Legion]

lol Can't find someone to read to you lying little stalker?

LINK, DEMOCRAT.

Loser.



I have little to no patience with liars or the willfully ignorant. Both are choices that cretinous and foolish people make. We are all ignorant of certain things, but to remain willfully so is inexcusable. - I have little to no patience with liars or the willfully ignorant. Both are choices that cretinous and foolish people make. We are all ignorant of certain things, but to remain willfully so is inexcusable. - I have little to no patience with liars or the willfully ignorant. Both are choices that cretinous and foolish people make. We are all ignorant of certain things, but to remain willfully so is inexcusable. - I have little to no patience with liars or the willfully ignorant. Both are choices that cretinous and foolish people make. We are all ignorant of certain things, but to remain willfully so is inexcusable. - I have little to no patience with liars or the willfully ignorant. Both are choices that cretinous and foolish people make. We are all ignorant of certain things, but to remain willfully so is inexcusable. - I have little to no patience with liars or the willfully ignorant. Both are choices that cretinous and foolish people make. We are all ignorant of certain things, but to remain willfully so is inexcusable. - I have little to no patience with liars or the willfully ignorant. Both are choices that cretinous and foolish people make. We are all ignorant of certain things, but to remain willfully so is inexcusable. - I have little to no patience with liars or the willfully ignorant. Both are choices that cretinous and foolish people make. We are all ignorant of certain things, but to remain willfully so is inexcusable. - I have little to no patience with liars or the willfully ignorant. Both are choices that cretinous and foolish people make. We are all ignorant of certain things, but to remain willfully so is inexcusable. - I have little to no patience with liars or the willfully ignorant. Both are choices that cretinous and foolish people make. We are all ignorant of certain things, but to remain willfully so is inexcusable. -

[Legion]

Earth, in the age of Trump, Grampy.

It's glorious fun, dear Brother.

[Legion]

I'm almost positive nobody has said otherwise.

Is that so?

It is a business open to the public. Try again.

[Bigdog]

lol

It sure doesn't, illiterate dumbfuck.

Your post # 27 that we've been referring to:

"Disorderly Conduct under Virginia law is an act that 1) takes place in a public place, 2) has direct tendency to cause violence at the person at whom such conduct is directed, and 3) the accused intended to cause a public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly created a risk for one of those."

Sad little illiterate can't even remember his own posts.

"Page 315 U. S. 573

On the authority of its earlier decisions, the state court declared that the statute's purpose was to preserve the public peace, no words being "forbidden except such as have a direct tendency to cause acts of violence by the persons to whom, individually, the remark is addressed." [Footnote 7] It was further said:

"The word 'offensive' is not to be defined in terms of what a particular addressee thinks. . . . The test is what men of common intelligence would understand would be words likely to cause an average addressee to fight. . . . The English language has a number of words and expressions which, by general consent, are 'fighting words' when said without a disarming smile. . . . [S]uch words, as ordinary men know, are likely to cause a fight. So are threatening, profane or obscene revilings. Derisive and annoying words can be taken as coming within the purview of the statute as heretofore interpreted only when they have this characteristic of plainly tending to excite the addressee to a breach of the peace. . . . The statute, as construed, does no more than prohibit the face-to-face words plainly likely to cause a breach of the peace by the addressee, words whose speaking constitutes a breach of the peace by the speaker -- including 'classical fighting words,' words in current use less 'classical' but equally likely to cause violence, and other disorderly words, including profanity, obscenity and threats."

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/fed.../568/case.html

[USFREEDOM911]

It is a business open to the public. Try again.

And when the owner asks you to leave and you don't, you are now trespassing.

[USFREEDOM911]

Nonsense. You right wing snowflakes are so easily offended. She called Bannon a "piece of trash" (which he is), and the store owner is going to call the cops? Give it a break. If it had not been Bannon the guy would never have noticed. However, we have to protect the sniveling right wing snowflakes.

Or maybe the store owner doesn't like having to mop up after a liberal snowflake meltdown.

[USFREEDOM911]

Hey childlike dog dick, you have to have a legitimate complaint. Calling one a "piece of trash" is not "disorderly conduct", and she would never have been arrested.

You keep overlooking that trespassing thingy.

Why is that?

[USFREEDOM911]

Hey childlike dog dick, you have to have a legitimate complaint. Calling one a "piece of trash" is not "disorderly conduct", and she would never have been arrested.

Just curious; but what did you mean by "childlike dog dick"??

Is it a child that likes dog dick?
or
A child with a dog like dick?
or
?????

[domer76]

"Page 315 U. S. 573

On the authority of its earlier decisions, the state court declared that the statute's purpose was to preserve the public peace, no words being "forbidden except such as have a direct tendency to cause acts of violence by the persons to whom, individually, the remark is addressed." [Footnote 7] It was further said:

"The word 'offensive' is not to be defined in terms of what a particular addressee thinks. . . . The test is what men of common intelligence would understand would be words likely to cause an average addressee to fight. . . . The English language has a number of words and expressions which, by general consent, are 'fighting words' when said without a disarming smile. . . . [S]uch words, as ordinary men know, are likely to cause a fight. So are threatening, profane or obscene revilings. Derisive and annoying words can be taken as coming within the purview of the statute as heretofore interpreted only when they have this characteristic of plainly tending to excite the addressee to a breach of the peace. . . . The statute, as construed, does no more than prohibit the face-to-face words plainly likely to cause a breach of the peace by the addressee, words whose speaking constitutes a breach of the peace by the speaker -- including 'classical fighting words,' words in current use less 'classical' but equally likely to cause violence, and other disorderly words, including profanity, obscenity and threats."

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/fed.../568/case.html

You gonna be caused to fight when called a "piece of trash"?

Pussy.

[bhaktajan]

How to handle confrontational liberals:

The cosmopolitan continental discreetly [covertly] employs this:



Remember that this is an ancient tactic.

It's a kind of reverse psychology

[Bigdog]

You gonna be caused to fight when called a "piece of trash"?

Pussy.

It's a racist slur frequently used by racist liberals.

[NiftyNiblick]

If Steve Bannon was in a bookstore, he was plotting to burn books.

[domer76]

It's a racist slur frequently used by racist liberals.

Really? Which race uses it and which race is it aimed at?

Pussy

[Bigdog]

Really? Which race uses it and which race is it aimed at?

Pussy

It's a racist slur. Why don't you just say white n****r, ... cause that's what you're thinking.