MAGAtard attempts terrorism

[Cuddles]

We will just note that your position is if the driver is black then it perfectly acceptable for them to get out and beat up a white guy, and if they driver is white it is not acceptable for them to do anything.

Your position and complete bias are duly noted.

good luck w/that narrative, the readers will judge accordingly

 

[Tsing Tao]

good luck w/that narrative, the readers will judge accordingly

And we have. You're the guy getting your ass beat in the second video.

 

[El OchoCinco]

If you throw a brick at the window of someone driving a vehicle it is attempted homicide. Don't be surprised when they get out and react appropriately to your attempt to kill them.

This gets back to the fact that rioters need to take personal responsibility for their actions.

So tell me once again.... did the white guy physically harm anyone in his response?

From your perspective "issuing a beat down" is a perfectly acceptable response. Can the driver beat them half to death. Just how far can they beat to rioter. Is there an allowed number of punches and kicks.

Now that you established the standard that issuing a beat down for breaking a window on a vehicle is perfectly acceptable for civilians -- then I expect the same standard is perfectly acceptable for cops. The next time a rioter breaks a police car window then -- based on your standard -- it is perfectly acceptable for the cops to get out and "issue a beat down".

GWB I see where your logic is going but unfortunately cops have a different standard and law they have to follow with response. Also you guys are wrong on what JR Smith did.

First off, JR SMith can be arrested for assault for what he did. You guys skipped right over that. His defense is made up of the fact the guy threw a brick threw his window and the guy would also be arrested. But he is not off the hook, he just has a defense to raise to address his charge.

Cops are held to a higher standard and if the crowd throws shit at the car and he then attempts to drive through the crowd, he is not directing his action at the brick thrower but at the crowd in general. Assume he clips 4 of the people and knocks him down, then he could be fired and charged with an assault.

This is not politics, but straightforward law. Anyone who purposely aims and drives their car through a crowd is committing a crime. The only defense would be if the crowd was swarming the car, breaking windows to drag the driver out and using weapons and the driver needed to flee . Not the case here.

So JR Smith is guilty of assault and the cop is guilty of a more serious crime. You guys are simply arguing over mitigating circumstances.

 

[Cuddles]

GWB I see where your logic is going but unfortunately cops have a different standard and law they have to follow with response. Also you guys are wrong on what JR Smith did.

First off, JR SMith can be arrested for assault for what he did. You guys skipped right over that. His defense is made up of the fact the guy threw a brick threw his window and the guy would also be arrested. But he is not off the hook, he just has a defense to raise to address his charge.

Cops are held to a higher standard and if the crowd throws shit at the car and he then attempts to drive through the crowd, he is not directing his action at the brick thrower but at the crowd in general. Assume he clips 4 of the people and knocks him down, then he could be fired and charged with an assault.

This is not politics, but straightforward law. Anyone who purposely aims and drives their car through a crowd is committing a crime. The only defense would be if the crowd was swarming the car, breaking windows to drag the driver out and using weapons and the driver needed to flee . Not the case here.

So JR Smith is guilty of assault and the cop is guilty of a more serious crime. You guys are simply arguing over mitigating circumstances.

there's another vid of deranged lunatic in the latter posts (private citizen, not LEO), but acting as the 1st vid. pretty much.

 

[Tsing Tao]

GWB I see where your logic is going but unfortunately cops have a different standard and law they have to follow with response. Also you guys are wrong on what JR Smith did.

First off, JR SMith can be arrested for assault for what he did. You guys skipped right over that. His defense is made up of the fact the guy threw a brick threw his window and the guy would also be arrested. But he is not off the hook, he just has a defense to raise to address his charge.

Cops are held to a higher standard and if the crowd throws shit at the car and he then attempts to drive through the crowd, he is not directing his action at the brick thrower but at the crowd in general. Assume he clips 4 of the people and knocks him down, then he could be fired and charged with an assault.

This is not politics, but straightforward law. Anyone who purposely aims and drives their car through a crowd is committing a crime. The only defense would be if the crowd was swarming the car, breaking windows to drag the driver out and using weapons and the driver needed to flee . Not the case here.

So JR Smith is guilty of assault and the cop is guilty of a more serious crime. You guys are simply arguing over mitigating circumstances.

Not positive, but I believe GWB is commenting on the first of the two videos H4M posted regarding the civilian whose SUV was hit with a brick and then decided to get out and confront the kids who threw it before getting back into his SUV and chasing them down the street.

Please note that GWB wasn't supporting the guy's actions. All he was saying is essentially "play stupid games, win stupid prizes." You want to throw bricks at people's cars? Eventually you're going to hit the wrong car and someone is going to expect you to pay the tab one way or the other.

 

[El OchoCinco]

Not positive, but I believe GWB is commenting on the first of the two videos H4M posted regarding the civilian whose SUV was hit with a brick and then decided to get out and confront the kids who threw it before getting back into his SUV and chasing them down the street.

Please note that GWB wasn't supporting the guy's actions. All he was saying is essentially "play stupid games, win stupid prizes." You want to throw bricks at people's cars? Eventually you're going to hit the wrong car and someone is going to expect you to pay the tab one way or the other.

Yes but as unfair as it is, if the guy came out of the car and ran his sword all the way through one of the kids because his car got hit with a rock, he would be arrested for murder. First of all he has no idea which kid threw the rock or bottle. The law does not play games of you get the right to kill someone because they threw a rock at your car, it is called vigilantism and police and DAs frown on that.

That is why JR is still guilty of assault and the sword carrier is lucky he only scared them off and did catch one to bury his sword like King Arthur

 

[gwb-trading]

GWB I see where your logic is going but unfortunately cops have a different standard and law they have to follow with response. Also you guys are wrong on what JR Smith did.

First off, JR SMith can be arrested for assault for what he did. You guys skipped right over that. His defense is made up of the fact the guy threw a brick threw his window and the guy would also be arrested. But he is not off the hook, he just has a defense to raise to address his charge.

Cops are held to a higher standard and if the crowd throws shit at the car and he then attempts to drive through the crowd, he is not directing his action at the brick thrower but at the crowd in general. Assume he clips 4 of the people and knocks him down, then he could be fired and charged with an assault.

This is not politics, but straightforward law. Anyone who purposely aims and drives their car through a crowd is committing a crime. The only defense would be if the crowd was swarming the car, breaking windows to drag the driver out and using weapons and the driver needed to flee . Not the case here.

So JR Smith is guilty of assault and the cop is guilty of a more serious crime. You guys are simply arguing over mitigating circumstances.

You are actually correct. I concede that.

The issue is that if someone gets out and defends themselves from rioters throwing objects at their car --- then the action is either always acceptable or never acceptable. There is no line for the race of the driver or the exact actions they took, etc. etc.

 

[Cuddles]

You are actually correct. I concede that.

The issue is that if someone gets out and defends themselves from rioters throwing objects at their car --- then the action is either always acceptable or never acceptable. There is no line for the race of the driver or the exact actions they took, etc. etc.

See, that's where the law disagrees

 

[gwb-trading]

See, that's where the law disagrees

So once again you stated if was perfectly acceptable for the NBA player to "issue a beat down".

 

[Cuddles]

So once again you stated if was perfectly acceptable for the NBA player to "issue a beat down".

No, I said it was a measured response. Knowing if the protester got in his space prior to beat down would seal my opinion.

Yes but as unfair as it is, if the guy came out of the car and ran his sword all the way through one of the kids because his car got hit with a rock, he would be arrested for murder. First of all he has no idea which kid threw the rock or bottle. The law does not play games of you get the right to kill someone because they threw a rock at your car, it is called vigilantism and police and DAs frown on that.

That is why JR is still guilty of assault and the sword carrier is lucky he only scared them off and did catch one to bury his sword like King Arthur

Watch the 2nd vid after the knife wielding, it's quite telling