Rants, Raves and Opinions AKA "The Octagon"

[QUOTE=RufusFirefly;6037067]If you choose to not discuss religion or politics you are missing out on learning new ideas.

This is the problem with our country. People are scared to speak what they think because those that disagree will claim they are offended because they are ignorant. So you are falling into their tramp. What we need is open and honest communication so we can share ideas.[/QUOTE]Totally agree I'm just not sure how interested I am in political deep dives on a forum about hookers. Also this seems like a Fox News versus MSNBC or NPR debate. What you watch is how you think. It's boring and predictable. Everybody go get laid.

[QUOTE=BelowMe;6037926]If what you say is true then who was it that bailed all those rioters out of jail? Wait I'll answer that for you it was Kamala Harris I believe she's a Democrat. The Democrats were never appalled by those riots they encourage them and if you think otherwise that's on you.[/QUOTE]That's just ignorant.

Incomprehensibly ignorant.

Baaaaaa. Sheep.

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6039257]That's just ignorant.

Incomprehensibly ignorant.

Baaaaaa. Sheep.[/QUOTE]Well, Harris did tweet out a link to all of her followers that would let you donate to the bail money of jailed protestors after the killing of George Floyd. As of last fall, she hadn't deleted the tweet.

So, not totally ignorant.

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6039257]That's just ignorant.

Incomprehensibly ignorant.

Baaaaaa. Sheep.[/QUOTE]Proof that the Force has a Strong effect on the weak-minded...

Tgd.

[QUOTE=MarblesKyle;6039283]Well, Harris did tweet out a link to all of her followers that would let you donate to the bail money of jailed protestors after the killing of George Floyd. As of last fall, she hadn't deleted the tweet. So, not totally ignorant.[/QUOTE][URL]https://secure.actblue.com/donate/bailfunds[/URL]

Major Democrat fundraising organization Act Blue still allows you to donate money for the sole purpose of bailing out jailed leftist activists. Maybe some like-minded mongers will donate their hooker money to Act Blue (balled).

[QUOTE=WanderingAbout;6039759][URL]https://secure.actblue.com/donate/bailfunds[/URL]

Major Democrat fundraising organization Act Blue still allows you to donate money for the sole purpose of bailing out jailed leftist activists. Maybe some like-minded mongers will donate their hooker money to Act Blue (balled).[/QUOTE]And there were GoFundMe's for Kyle Rittinghaus's criminal defense- for killing 3 people. You point?

[QUOTE=DrDave39;6039821]And there were GoFundMe's for Kyle Rittinghaus's criminal defense- for killing 3 people. You point?[/QUOTE]If you call that anything but self defense you're an idiot.

[QUOTE=DrDave39;6039821]And there were GoFundMe's for Kyle Rittinghaus's criminal defense- for killing 3 people. You point?[/QUOTE]Individual vs Political party and 12 affiliated sub organizations. Big difference in intent and scope.

[QUOTE=Bullet454;6039963]If you call that anything but self defense you're an idiot.[/QUOTE]They tried to beat him to a pulp with blunt object and had him on the ground. Oh, and he was running to find a cop. What movie did you watch?

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6039257]That's just ignorant.

Incomprehensibly ignorant.

Baaaaaa. Sheep.[/QUOTE]Hahaha. Remember it's only a conspiracy theory until it's proved to be true. Typically you offer no defense of your statements, as expected. Just call people names, adult like.

[QUOTE=Bullet454;6039963]If you call that anything but self defense you're an idiot.[/QUOTE]Political donations for a legal criminal case. Ring a bell, "idiot"? See "BLM". You're griping that politics gets involved in the legal system, but it's OK when YOUR team does it? See "hypocrisy".

[QUOTE=DrDave39;6040452]Political donations for a legal criminal case. Ring a bell, "idiot"? See "BLM". You're griping that politics gets involved in the legal system, but it's OK when YOUR team does it? See "hypocrisy".[/QUOTE]Right, but the Rittenhouse thing wasn't tweeted out by the person campaigning to be Vice President.

[QUOTE=DrDave39;6040452]Political donations for a legal criminal case. Ring a bell, "idiot"? See "BLM". You're griping that politics gets involved in the legal system, but it's OK when YOUR team does it? See "hypocrisy".[/QUOTE]No I'm not, it's not my side either. It was self defense. The politics were when he got charged. I was mad that they stood back and let the riots happen. People have a right to protest, not riot. People have a right to defend themselves. How you spend your personal or groups money is none of my business. They should have called out the national guard and stopped the riots when they starte, by not doing that they encouraged it to occur across the country. Rittenhouse and that couple in St. Louis were defending themselves and should have never been charged. You’re an idiot for using Rittenhouse as an example

[QUOTE=MarblesKyle;6040517]Right, but the Rittenhouse thing wasn't tweeted out by the person campaigning to be Vice President.[/QUOTE]Many Republican politicians did. Including Trump as I recall.

My point is I don't like that, no matter which side does it.

[QUOTE=Bullet454;6040579]that couple in St. Louis were defending themselves and should have never been charged.[/QUOTE]This.

What On earth were the St. Louis wackos "defending themselves" against??

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6043851]This.

What On earth were the St. Louis wackos "defending themselves" against??[/QUOTE]Uhm they had a fenced yard that people broke down to gain access. They came out with guns, to deter them from damaging any more property or worse. I guess your ok with the burning shit down, damaging property, and hurting people. They were or I guess are liberals by the way.

[QUOTE=Bullet454;6043904]Uhm they had a fenced yard that people broke down to gain access. They came out with guns, to deter them from damaging any more property or worse. I guess your ok with the burning shit down, damaging property, and hurting people. They were or I guess are liberals by the way.[/QUOTE]They had to plea to misdemeanor charges too. It was bullshit. The rioters were on their property, they had every right to defend their home.

C92.

[QUOTE=Chunks92;6044376]They had to plea to misdemeanor charges too. It was bullshit. The rioters were on their property, they had every right to defend their home.

C92.[/QUOTE]Yes insane, seems individuals property and rights don't matter when rioting over a criminal who overdosed in police custody. You know what the difference between rittenhouse and Pfizer is?

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6043851]This.

What On earth were the St. Louis wackos "defending themselves" against??[/QUOTE]"Them". You know.

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6043851]This.

What On earth were the St. Louis wackos "defending themselves" against??[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=DrDave39;6044462]"Them". You know.[/QUOTE][B]It's always "they"[/B]

The attached picture should explain everything.

You are all nothing but a bunch a whinny babies. Ohh boo hooo.

[QUOTE=RogerOver;6044979][B]It's always "they"[/B]

The attached picture should explain everything.[/QUOTE]I always forget about THEM! THEY are always lurking in the background, even though THEY are a publicly traded company on the NASDAQ. Every time I read something, there THEY are. I see THEM on Fox News all the time. A lot of my buddies are always talking about THEM, but THEY can never really name names, just that THEY are bad.

[QUOTE=Chunks92;6044376]They had to plea to misdemeanor charges too. It was bullshit. The rioters were on their property, they had every right to defend their home.

C92.[/QUOTE]This is a lie. The Protesters were not actually ON their property, merely passing through the "gated" community.

None of us have EVER passed through a "gated" community before, right?!

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6045350]I always forget about THEM! THEY are always lurking in the background, even though THEY are a publicly traded company on the NASDAQ. Every time I read something, there THEY are. I see THEM on Fox News all the time. A lot of my buddies are always talking about THEM, but THEY can never really name names, just that THEY are bad.[/QUOTE]Pretty sure its illegal to publicly trade 'they' since lincon.

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6045354]This is a lie. The Protesters were not actually ON their property, merely passing through the "gated" community. None of us have EVER passed through a "gated" community before, right?![/QUOTE]The protesters ultimate destination was the home of the mayor of St Louis, Lyda Krewson. The protesters opened a closed, large iron gate with "No Trespassing" and "Private Street" signs posted. The protesters walked peacefully down a 'Private' street / drive news reports stated. The protesters did not go onto anyone's property other proceed down that 'Private' street. Once the gate was opened, and the protested crossed the 'Private' property line past the "No Trespassing" and "Private Street" signs posted, they were on 'their' (the residents) 'Private' property as the 'Private' street is part of 'their' 'Private' community. Nine people were cited for trespassing by the police but not prosecuted due to fear of heightening racial tensions at the time.

[QUOTE=WanderingMong;6045355]Pretty sure its illegal to publicly trade 'they' since lincon.[/QUOTE]At least not until TheyDo and TheyA, which are private companies, go public.

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6045354]This is a lie. The Protesters were not actually ON their property, merely passing through the "gated" community.

None of us have EVER passed through a "gated" community before, right?![/QUOTE]Posting for a friend.

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6045354]This is a lie. The Protesters were not actually ON their property, merely passing through the "gated" community.

None of us have EVER passed through a "gated" community before, right?![/QUOTE]You tell me man, here is the footage, were they on their property or not? Because you are correct, that is the difference between crime and no crime.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EWJ7L6O91c[/URL]

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6045354]This is a lie. The Protesters were not actually ON their property, merely passing through the "gated" community.

None of us have EVER passed through a "gated" community before, right?![/QUOTE]Not only were the protesters in fact on the property, they actually broke into a locked gate to get on the property. They weren't just "passing through".

[QUOTE=Chunks92;6045776]You tell me man, here is the footage, were they on their property or not? Because you are correct, that is the difference between crime and no crime.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EWJ7L6O91c[/URL][/QUOTE]Unarmed people cut through a "gated" community. Big deal. Normal procedure is they are asked to leave. They get fined if they don't.

I've been through "gated" communities up here in northern Cinci and never once has anyone said a thing. Course, I'm not black. And the remedy is certainly not pointing guns, AR or not, at someone.

There is a thing in the law about defending yourself and it has to do with like levels of threats. Clearly, a group was trespassing and broke the law, and another group used excessive levels of response and they broke the law. That's it.

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6045903]Unarmed people cut through a "gated" community. Big deal. Normal procedure is they are asked to leave. They get fined if they don't.

I've been through "gated" communities up here in northern Cinci and never once has anyone said a thing. Course, I'm not black. And the remedy is certainly not pointing guns, AR or not, at someone.

There is a thing in the law about defending yourself and it has to do with like levels of threats. Clearly, a group was trespassing and broke the law, and another group used excessive levels of response and they broke the law. That's it.[/QUOTE]They were a obvious threat. And as you can see they were at that location to do just that. I feel that you are on my yard to cause trouble, trouble will fine you. One toe on the property is enough. You are either pregnant or you are not. Can't be just a little bit pregnant.

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6045354]This is a lie. The Protesters were not actually ON their property, merely passing through the "gated" community.

None of us have EVER passed through a "gated" community before, right?![/QUOTE]Feet off the curb and on the property is trespass.

[QUOTE=SimonPieMan;6045767]Posting for a friend.[/QUOTE]If she aimed that gun at me, I'd have pulled mine out and shot her. They were on the fucking sidewalk.

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6045903]Unarmed people cut through a "gated" community. Big deal. Normal procedure is they are asked to leave. They get fined if they don't.

I've been through "gated" communities up here in northern Cinci and never once has anyone said a thing. Course, I'm not black. And the remedy is certainly not pointing guns, AR or not, at someone.

There is a thing in the law about defending yourself and it has to do with like levels of threats. Clearly, a group was trespassing and broke the law, and another group used excessive levels of response and they broke the law. That's it.[/QUOTE]Number of problems here; what is your definition of like levels of threat? Almost all use of deadly force is used when you deem your life at risk! If I see your point your saying that ten people versus one means you have to fist fight all ten? No! Common sense should lead you to truth. Now was it right to pull out heavy artillery as they went by no, but I'm sure because of other issues that happened throughout the city they didn't want their property getting fucked up. It only takes one instigator to gets things to tip over the edge. That's the main reason crowd control used to be a big thing, to keep things at a minimum. Now it's like we will put up fences etc, but after that fuck it.

None of the trespassers were convicted because of fear of further racial tensions escalating.

Next issue I'm sure you know since you posted but if the gated community is private with its own paid for maintenance then the entire property is private property, but based on your statement means you know that the city performs all street maintenance like potholes, snow removal etc. I'm not in the know of those facts, but I do know 99% of truly gated communities are all private that's what they pay for!

[QUOTE=Twisted69;6046381]Number of problems here; what is your definition of like levels of threat? Almost all use of deadly force is used when you deem your life at risk! If I see your point your saying that ten people versus one means you have to fist fight all ten? No! Common sense should lead you to truth. Now was it right to pull out heavy artillery as they went by no, but I'm sure because of other issues that happened throughout the city they didn't want their property getting fucked up. It only takes one instigator to gets things to tip over the edge. That's the main reason crowd control used to be a big thing, to keep things at a minimum. Now it's like we will put up fences etc, but after that fuck it.

None of the trespassers were convicted because of fear of further racial tensions escalating.

Next issue I'm sure you know since you posted but if the gated community is private with its own paid for maintenance then the entire property is private property, but based on your statement means you know that the city performs all street maintenance like potholes, snow removal etc. I'm not in the know of those facts, but I do know 99% of truly gated communities are all private that's what they pay for![/QUOTE]The reason the court ruled the way that it did was, despite a large group of people walking past their house, there wasn't any proof that they or their property were in any danger. They (the couple) went out and brandished their weapons despite that no one was on their property, no was was destroying their property, no one was coming up to their door, and there was no evidence that they were in any danger. By all accounts people were just walking past them. They (the couple) pointed weapons at people who, by all evidence, were just walking past. Any threat that they perceived wasn't because of any overt action directed at them or their property. As the judge stated in his ruling, people walking past your house does not give you the right to threaten them.

Self-defense only applies if there is an imminent threat. There wasn't. They may say they felt threatened, but without that overt act directed at them, there was none. Thus, the court ruled, that they (the couple) were guilty.

[QUOTE=RogerOver;6046192]If she aimed that gun at me, I'd have pulled mine out and shot her. They were on the fucking sidewalk.[/QUOTE]Hopefully this is more clear.

[QUOTE=DNut;6046484]The reason the court ruled the way that it did was, despite a large group of people walking past their house, there wasn't any proof that they or their property were in any danger. They (the couple) went out and brandished their weapons despite that no one was on their property, no was was destroying their property, no one was coming up to their door, and there was no evidence that they were in any danger. By all accounts people were just walking past them. They (the couple) pointed weapons at people who, by all evidence, were just walking past. Any threat that they perceived wasn't because of any overt action directed at them or their property. As the judge stated in his ruling, people walking past your house does not give you the right to threaten them.

Self-defense only applies if there is an imminent threat. There wasn't. They may say they felt threatened, but without that overt act directed at them, there was none. Thus, the court ruled, that they (the couple) were guilty.[/QUOTE]Correct! The property owners should have stayed in their residence and had firearms at the ready, just in case. There is nothing unreasonable and unlawful about that. IF there was an imminent threat such as someone kicking in their door, then that is a different story. Hopefully, they would have recorded the imminent threat while it was happening for evidence later on. By them coming outside and actually brandishing (and aiming) their guns, they were in the wrong. That situation could have turned very bad very quickly!

I am a lawful and common sense gun owner and I cringed when I saw that video. The property owners, by their own actions, made it easy for the liberal media to use that clip as gun control / white supremacy / etc fodder.

[QUOTE=DNut;6046484]The reason the court ruled the way that it did was, despite a large group of people walking past their house, there wasn't any proof that they or their property were in any danger. They (the couple) went out and brandished their weapons despite that no one was on their property, no was was destroying their property, no one was coming up to their door, and there was no evidence that they were in any danger. By all accounts people were just walking past them. They (the couple) pointed weapons at people who, by all evidence, were just walking past. Any threat that they perceived wasn't because of any overt action directed at them or their property. As the judge stated in his ruling, people walking past your house does not give you the right to threaten them.

Self-defense only applies if there is an imminent threat. There wasn't. They may say they felt threatened, but without that overt act directed at them, there was none. Thus, the court ruled, that they (the couple) were guilty.[/QUOTE]Dnut, I totally respect you as a highly regarded senor member who has contributed a ton of info. At this moment I respectfully disagree with this post content.

First, after searching I found that the house this couple lives in was built for Anna Busch of the Anheiser Busch family, the streets were built privately and are maintained privately, hence the entire gated section is all private property. In other words walking on their street is trespassing!

Second, the court did not rule in the case, there was a misdemeanor plea agreement. They are both attorneys. They were pardoned by the governor several months later.

Third, which some may see as coincidence and others as a contributing part of the saga, the city prosecutor was just the first black elected to that office in 2019.

Fourth, the trespassers had charges dropped to not further escalate racial tensions because of the time frame of all the George Floyd protests.

I was going to add all the links but, what the hell it only took 5 minutes to find.

[QUOTE=Twisted69;6047574]Dnut, I totally respect you as a highly regarded senor member who has contributed a ton of info. At this moment I respectfully disagree with this post content.

First, after searching I found that the house this couple lives in was built for Anna Busch of the Anheiser Busch family, the streets were built privately and are maintained privately, hence the entire gated section is all private property. In other words walking on their street is trespassing!

Second, the court did not rule in the case, there was a misdemeanor plea agreement. They are both attorneys. They were pardoned by the governor several months later.

Third, which some may see as coincidence and others as a contributing part of the saga, the city prosecutor was just the first black elected to that office in 2019.

Fourth, the trespassers had charges dropped to not further escalate racial tensions because of the time frame of all the George Floyd protests.

I was going to add all the links but, what the hell it only took 5 minutes to find.[/QUOTE]Like nobody has ever taken a shortcut through private property before!

I guess they even let trailer trash like these two live in one. I would only expect to have a gun pointed at me if I were going through a trailer park. I guess all the money in the world still can't buy trailer trash a trash bag full of CLASS.

[QUOTE=BengalMan;6049176]Like nobody has ever taken a shortcut through private property before!

I guess they even let trailer trash like these two live in one. I would only expect to have a gun pointed at me if I were going through a trailer park. I guess all the money in the world still can't buy trailer trash a trash bag full of CLASS.[/QUOTE]Yes, Bengalman I have taken a short cut through a farm once and got shot at with salt pellets from a shotgun! Back in the day when you could get shotgun shells with salt pellets, wish we still could! And another time hunting we migrated just off one farm onto another and had bullets fired just above our heads to let us know we weren't in oz anymore Toto. I wish I grew up in your tree hugging panacea.

Let me ask everyone, if you owned 10 acres of property and you were eating dinner on side patio and 200 people protesting showed up at your doorstep 1000 feet from the entrance to the property; would you be defensive or be like bengalman and say hey glad you could stop by. Keep in mind that at the time out of the tons of protests going on only a fraction of them remained peaceful per the media at that time.