more ignorance of the law as an excuse

[SmarterthanYou]

I'm making shit up? Really?

Those are your words...you used the word "protest" TWICE...seems pretty clear you think this guy was protesting...

analogy [uh-nal-uh-jee]

1) a similarity between like features of two things, on which a comparison may be based: the analogy between the heart and a pump. as in carrying a gun is a RIGHT and protesting is a RIGHT
2) Logic . a form of reasoning in which one thing is inferred to be similar to another thing in a certain respect, on the basis of the known similarity between the things in other respects.

It depends on what cause the "riot".

so what would a good statist, like yourself, suggest? should we create another federal bureaucracy with a color coded system that can guide us on when we should exercise certain rights and when we shouldn't?

Bullshit...Houston is the 4th LARGEST MARKET in the USA...Denver isn't even in the top 20 markets...driving from Aurora to Thornton covers a distance of 18 miles...it's close to 75 all the way across Houston.

while YOU might consider driving 18 miles to go see a movie as a mere inconvenience, many others probably don't share your viewpoint on it. But all in all, it's a pretty stupid statement from you, asking why this guy wasn't at the aurora shooting simply because he also carries a gun.

So you agree I've got a right to claim self defense when I see someone with a gun strapped to his hip...

it is my most fervent hope that when you see the next person wearing a gun, that you assault and try to kill them, then claim self defense.....if you are still alive, when the police show up.

Cops are PAID to protect me and mine...I'm pretty sure the guy in the theater last weekend wasn't.

cops are paid to enforce the law, keep the peace, and maintain order. NOT PROTECT YOU. If you need any court precedents to confirm that, let me know.

Right...me expressing my opinion that this guy is just some Wyatt Earp wannabe is "persecuting" him...oh how thin skinned you gun nuts truly are underneath all that tough talk.

Persecuting him...ROTFLMAO!!

I can see right through the thin veneer of sarcastic ridicule you're trying to wear in order to mask your fear and cowardice. Do I need to look up some therapists for you?

 

[zappasguitar]

analogy [uh-nal-uh-jee]

1) a similarity between like features of two things, on which a comparison may be based: the analogy between the heart and a pump. as in carrying a gun is a RIGHT and protesting is a RIGHT
2) Logic . a form of reasoning in which one thing is inferred to be similar to another thing in a certain respect, on the basis of the known similarity between the things in other respects.

The only similarity between the theater shootings and this guy is the movie theater and a gun...

You want an analogy?

Praying is a right too...but most normal people understand that when radicals start whining about PUBLIC prayer, they are more concerned with making sure others get to watch them pray...not that their rights are infringed. If this guy REALLY cared, he could have worn a shoulder holster and kept it out of sight...but NOOOOOOOOOOOO...he's gotta go in with his "dick" swinging from his hip where everyone can see it and fear him.

so what would a good statist, like yourself, suggest? should we create another federal bureaucracy with a color coded system that can guide us on when we should exercise certain rights and when we shouldn't?

Well since we're talking about a gun nut who obviously doesn't have the common sense to understand what others might think when they see a gun at a movie so soon after the shootings, so maybe we do need some sort of system for the clinically stupid like those who need to live out their Wild West Dreams.

while YOU might consider driving 18 miles to go see a movie as a mere inconvenience, many others probably don't share your viewpoint on it. But all in all, it's a pretty stupid statement from you, asking why this guy wasn't at the aurora shooting simply because he also carries a gun.

You're the one who made the point about how "far" the two cities are apart...not me.

it is my most fervent hope that when you see the next person wearing a gun, that you assault and try to kill them, then claim self defense.....if you are still alive, when the police show up.

Why not? After all, it worked for George Zimmerman...he assaulted and killed someone, then claimed self defense.

cops are paid to enforce the law, keep the peace, and maintain order. NOT PROTECT YOU. If you need any court precedents to confirm that, let me know.

It says right there on the car when they pull up..."To PROTECT and Serve..."

I can see right through the thin veneer of sarcastic ridicule you're trying to wear in order to mask your fear and cowardice. Do I need to look up some therapists for you?

Am I nervous around gun nuts who think they need to be packing like Wyatt Earp? You bet...there's no telling when they will hear a champagne cork pop, think they're being shot at and open fire. At least I can leave my home without needing to strap on the ol hogleg...unlike cowards who have to have their gun with them to feel brave.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

The only similarity between the theater shootings and this guy is the movie theater and a gun...

You want an analogy?

Praying is a right too...but most normal people understand that when radicals start whining about PUBLIC prayer, they are more concerned with making sure others get to watch them pray...not that their rights are infringed. If this guy REALLY cared, he could have worn a shoulder holster and kept it out of sight...but NOOOOOOOOOOOO...he's gotta go in with his "dick" swinging from his hip where everyone can see it and fear him.

I didn't realize you hadn't taken your medication today. I'm sorry I got you all riled up.

Well since we're talking about a gun nut who obviously doesn't have the common sense to understand what others might think when they see a gun at a movie so soon after the shootings, so maybe we do need some sort of system for the clinically stupid like those who need to live out their Wild West Dreams.

I'm not implementing a new debate clause, it's called the tombstone. Whenever some antigun moron refers to the 'wild west', they are 'tombstoning' the debate. Much like referring to nazis is godwin a thread, since the other half of the clinically retarded can't seem to get past the wild west.

You're the one who made the point about how "far" the two cities are apart...not me.

i'm always amazed when liberal idiots can equate two similar topics as being leagues apart, but 18 miles is just up the street for them. fantastic universe you idiots live in.

Why not? After all, it worked for George Zimmerman...he assaulted and killed someone, then claimed self defense.

you just zimmerman'd the thread also.

It says right there on the car when they pull up..."To PROTECT and Serve..."

wow, let me pwn the fuck out of you then.

Warren v. District of Columbia - "fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen."

DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services - The Court in DeShaney held that no duty arose because of a "special relationship," concluding that Constitutional duties of care and protection only exist as to certain individuals, such as incarcerated prisoners, involuntarily committed mental patients and others restrained against their will and therefore unable to protect themselves. "The affirmative duty to protect arises not from the State's knowledge of the individual's predicament or from its expressions of intent to help him, but from the limitation which it has imposed on his freedom to act on his own behalf."

Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department - The Court of Appeals concluded that DeShaney limited the circumstances that would give rise to a "special relationship" to instances of custody. Because no such custody existed in Balistreri, the Pacifica Police had no duty to protect her, so when they failed to do so and she was injured they were not liable.

California's Government Code, Sections 821, 845, and 846 which state, in part: "Neither a public entity or a public employee [may be sued] for failure to provide adequate police protection or service, failure to prevent the commission of crimes and failure to apprehend criminals."

Riss v. City of New York, 22 N.Y.2d 579, 293 NYS2d 897, 240 N.E.2d 860 (N.Y. Ct. of Ap. 1958) - The amount of protection that may be provided is limited by the resources of the community and by a considered legislative-executive decision as to how those resources may be deployed. there is no warrant in judicial tradition or in the proper allocation of the powers of government for the courts, in the absence of legislation, to carve out an area of tort liability for police protection to members of the public.

Freeman v. Ferguson - A police chief directed his officers not to enforce a restraining order against a woman's estranged husband because the man was a friend of the chief's. The man subsequently killed the woman and her daughter. no liability was foist upon the chief.

Am I nervous around gun nuts who think they need to be packing like Wyatt Earp? You bet...there's no telling when they will hear a champagne cork pop, think they're being shot at and open fire. At least I can leave my home without needing to strap on the ol hogleg...unlike cowards who have to have their gun with them to feel brave.

and the old and tired directed insinuations about gun carrying cowards. loving all the bullshit cliches you have to throw out to cover your inability to deal with guns.

I have an article for you to read.

The anti gun male by Julia Gorin

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/julia/gorin030802.asp

 

[zappasguitar]

I didn't realize you hadn't taken your medication today. I'm sorry I got you all riled up.

I'm not implementing a new debate clause, it's called the tombstone. Whenever some antigun moron refers to the 'wild west', they are 'tombstoning' the debate. Much like referring to nazis is godwin a thread, since the other half of the clinically retarded can't seem to get past the wild west.

i'm always amazed when liberal idiots can equate two similar topics as being leagues apart, but 18 miles is just up the street for them. fantastic universe you idiots live in.

you just zimmerman'd the thread also.

wow, let me pwn the fuck out of you then.

Warren v. District of Columbia - "fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen."

DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services - The Court in DeShaney held that no duty arose because of a "special relationship," concluding that Constitutional duties of care and protection only exist as to certain individuals, such as incarcerated prisoners, involuntarily committed mental patients and others restrained against their will and therefore unable to protect themselves. "The affirmative duty to protect arises not from the State's knowledge of the individual's predicament or from its expressions of intent to help him, but from the limitation which it has imposed on his freedom to act on his own behalf."

Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department - The Court of Appeals concluded that DeShaney limited the circumstances that would give rise to a "special relationship" to instances of custody. Because no such custody existed in Balistreri, the Pacifica Police had no duty to protect her, so when they failed to do so and she was injured they were not liable.

California's Government Code, Sections 821, 845, and 846 which state, in part: "Neither a public entity or a public employee [may be sued] for failure to provide adequate police protection or service, failure to prevent the commission of crimes and failure to apprehend criminals."

Riss v. City of New York, 22 N.Y.2d 579, 293 NYS2d 897, 240 N.E.2d 860 (N.Y. Ct. of Ap. 1958) - The amount of protection that may be provided is limited by the resources of the community and by a considered legislative-executive decision as to how those resources may be deployed. there is no warrant in judicial tradition or in the proper allocation of the powers of government for the courts, in the absence of legislation, to carve out an area of tort liability for police protection to members of the public.

Freeman v. Ferguson - A police chief directed his officers not to enforce a restraining order against a woman's estranged husband because the man was a friend of the chief's. The man subsequently killed the woman and her daughter. no liability was foist upon the chief.


and the old and tired directed insinuations about gun carrying cowards. loving all the bullshit cliches you have to throw out to cover your inability to deal with guns.

I have an article for you to read.

The anti gun male by Julia Gorin

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/julia/gorin030802.asp

Got it...all you gun nuts want to LOOK like Wyatt Earp with your 6-gun swingin from your hip, and you want to go around packing like Earp, you just don't like the comparisons drawn by those of us older than 13...

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Got it...all you gun nuts want to LOOK like Wyatt Earp with your 6-gun swingin from your hip, and you want to go around packing like Earp, you just don't like the comparisons drawn by those of us older than 13...

maybe you can explain something to us, if that's possible in your twisted alternate reality, but your signature is espousing the theory that gay marriage doesn't affect anyone elses life and why should they care, so why can't you draw the same inference to peoples right to carry a gun? hypocrisy much? or just your irrational fear of an inanimate object? there really is therapy for that, you know.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

Got it...all you gun nuts want to LOOK like Wyatt Earp with your 6-gun swingin from your hip, and you want to go around packing like Earp, you just don't like the comparisons drawn by those of us older than 13...

That's like saying all you 'free speech' nuts want to go around looking like Paul Rever. Exercise of a right does not make you nuts. Especially when you simply want to do so in peace.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

charges dropped against open carrier

Authorities dismissed charges against a man who was arrested while carrying a gun into a movie theater.

James Mapes has a permit to carry a gun. He had it strapped to his waist so others could see it on July 29. That was about a week after 12 people were shot and killed at the Century 16 Movie Theaters in Aurora.

Police arrested Mapes on a misdemeanor charge. They say he was carrying it in a way that caused alarm and fear for others at the Cinebarre Theater.

Someone had called police to say there was a man with a gun in the theater.

Mapes defended his decision to carry the gun into they theater. “I’ve always carried in there, opened or concealed, depends on the time of year,” he told FOX31 Denver. He criticizes Thornton police for overreacting.

 

[zappasguitar]

charges dropped against open carrier

Authorities dismissed charges against a man who was arrested while carrying a gun into a movie theater.

James Mapes has a permit to carry a gun. He had it strapped to his waist so others could see it on July 29. That was about a week after 12 people were shot and killed at the Century 16 Movie Theaters in Aurora.

Police arrested Mapes on a misdemeanor charge. They say he was carrying it in a way that caused alarm and fear for others at the Cinebarre Theater.

Someone had called police to say there was a man with a gun in the theater.

Mapes defended his decision to carry the gun into they theater. “I’ve always carried in there, opened or concealed, depends on the time of year,” he told FOX31 Denver. He criticizes Thornton police for overreacting.

No charges brought...Good.

Hopefully he learned a lesson about taking the feelings of others into consideration before strapping on the hogleg.

So he carries his gun to the theater often, sometimes in the open, sometimes concealed...depending the time of year.

A pity he didn't take a minute or two to consider the reaction of jittery moviegoers who spent the past week discussing the nutjob with a gun who killed 12 in a movie theater just across town.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

Hopefully he learned a lesson about taking the feelings of others into consideration before strapping on the hogleg.

Zap, if he was trying to exercise ANY other natural right you'd have a different tone. If he wanted to organize a protest, or bring his lawyer with him everywhere, or pass out copies of the Koran at Time Square, you'd be 100% supportive of him.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

No charges brought...Good.

Hopefully he learned a lesson about taking the feelings of others into consideration before strapping on the hogleg.

fuck the feelings of others.

So he carries his gun to the theater often, sometimes in the open, sometimes concealed...depending the time of year.

A pity he didn't take a minute or two to consider the reaction of jittery moviegoers who spent the past week discussing the nutjob with a gun who killed 12 in a movie theater just across town.

if people are that afraid of seeing a gun in the open, they must have a hard time dealing with cops.

 

[zappasguitar]

Zap, if he was trying to exercise ANY other natural right you'd have a different tone. If he wanted to organize a protest, or bring his lawyer with him everywhere, or pass out copies of the Koran at Time Square, you'd be 100% supportive of him.

Le'ts be clear.

If he cared one whit for the feelings of someone other than himself, he would have gone CONCEALED carry that night...but noooooo...he just had to show how big a man he was by pretending he's in the Old West.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Le'ts be clear.

If he cared one whit for the feelings of someone other than himself, he would have gone CONCEALED carry that night...but noooooo...he just had to show how big a man he was by pretending he's in the Old West.

when you're done projecting your masculine inadequacies, try considering that maybe seeing a weapon IN THE OPEN is a deterrent to criminal activity. you're smart enough for that, right?

 

[zappasguitar]

fuck the feelings of others.

Always nice to cut past all the flowery language and the phony patriotism and see another American show how much he REALLY cares about someone besides himself...

if people are that afraid of seeing a gun in the open, they must have a hard time dealing with cops.

Cops get PAID to deal with crime and they carry guns because they deal with human scum on a frequent basis.

Anyone so scared he's gotta carry on his hip like Marshall Dillon needs to seek professional help.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Always nice to cut past all the flowery language and the phony patriotism and see another American show how much he REALLY cares about someone besides himself...

phony patriotism? how is it phony patriotism that I prioritize being able to defend myself on a higher level than someones prejudicial feelings about seeing an inanimate object?

Cops get PAID to deal with crime and they carry guns because they deal with human scum on a frequent basis.

irrelevant. cops are authorized to carry a gun for self defense only. not to execute law breakers nor to act as vigilantes. cops are not super human beings that are more qualified to carry a gun than anyone else is.

Anyone so scared he's gotta carry on his hip like Marshall Dillon needs to seek professional help.

anyone so stupid to believe they don't need to be concerned about protecting themselves needs to seek professional help. anyone who can't help referring to wild west remarks because they don't like guns, should seek professional help.

 

[zappasguitar]

when you're done projecting your masculine inadequacies, try considering that maybe seeing a weapon IN THE OPEN is a deterrent to criminal activity. you're smart enough for that, right?

But this wasn't about deterring crime, was it?

Did he really think the cops needed his help one week after the fact? did he really think theaters wouldn't beef up security on their own?

No...this guy obviously wanted to cut a wide swath through the crowd and have everyone around him oooh-ing and ahhh-ing him for his magnificent hogleg.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

But this wasn't about deterring crime, was it?

you have proof it was otherwise?

Did he really think the cops needed his help one week after the fact? did he really think theaters wouldn't beef up security on their own?

when seconds count, the cops are minutes away. and there was no extra security at the theater.

No...this guy obviously wanted to cut a wide swath through the crowd and have everyone around him oooh-ing and ahhh-ing him for his magnificent hogleg.

prove it. by something other than your fear of weapons that causes you to feel less than a man.

 

[zappasguitar]

phony patriotism? how is it phony patriotism that I prioritize being able to defend myself on a higher level than someones prejudicial feelings about seeing an inanimate object?

irrelevant. cops are authorized to carry a gun for self defense only. not to execute law breakers nor to act as vigilantes. cops are not super human beings that are more qualified to carry a gun than anyone else is.

anyone so stupid to believe they don't need to be concerned about protecting themselves needs to seek professional help. anyone who can't help referring to wild west remarks because they don't like guns, should seek professional help.

Oh yeah...with shoulder holsters and small of the back holsters and and ankle holsters, it's perfectly understandable that someone needs the ol hogeg hanging from his hip like Wyatt Earp. Don't like the Wild West inferences, stop dressing like it's 1861 and you live in Dodge City.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Oh yeah...with shoulder holsters and small of the back holsters and and ankle holsters, it's perfectly understandable that someone needs the ol hogeg hanging from his hip like Wyatt Earp. Don't like the Wild West inferences, stop dressing like it's 1861 and you live in Dodge City.

a Glock 23 is hardly a 'hogleg' and they don't hang from the hip. you should really stop now while you only look idiotic instead of continuing and looking full retard.

 

[zappasguitar]

you have proof it was otherwise?

when seconds count, the cops are minutes away. and there was no extra security at the theater.

prove it. by something other than your fear of weapons that causes you to feel less than a man.

Nothing I will say is going to change your mind.

You will always have some excuse for the cowardly to play dress up.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Nothing I will say is going to change your mind.

because i'm right, that's why.

You will always have some excuse for the cowardly to play dress up.

LOL, it must really suck to have so little self esteem as a man.