VFW members duct tape flag burner to flag pole

[LouDiamond 1]

Please continue.......I do so enjoy a good story.


Dan Brown, if you're reading this, watch out, Lucky is onto something here.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

That is one person whose side has been told. The police is another. They have stated that neither party wishes to press charges. Since the kid had the chance to have his tapers arrested yet declined that is a pretty good sign that he was a willing participant.

And the cops feel exactly how about this? I got in a car accident 3 years ago, this chick was texting and ran a light. She alos had a ticket 9 months prior for running a light at 38 in a 45..... not texting there, no. Anyway, this cop comes out and talks to her for 45 mins, a different cop takes ny info and leaves, then the first cop says, "Ok sir, you can go now." I said, "Statements, are you going to take statements?" He said, "No, I'm not citing anyone, so not statements are needed." Anyway, it got worse from there. Point is, if you feel cops are objecctive then you have had little experienc with them. I've had them refuse to take a report - no report / no crime.

As for willing participant, if I get guys to surround you, give you the choice of rendering all your money or getting beat, you surrender your cash and I walk away saying it was consensual. That's the logic you're losing.

Quote

I don't have to assume the kid was the burner. According to the vets and the cops he admitted to it.

The cops stated so? The vet also said they gave him the option of a beating or a taping, textbook coercion.

Quote

The kid had every chance, and still does, to tell his side. He has thus far declined. That is a good indicator his story would be pretty darn close to what has already been told.

I believe the entire story except the part about offerring to call the cops. I think was a throw in to cover their ass and act as if they gave the kid an out. I wish I was there when Clem and Jeb and the rest of the assholes showed up. I would have said they need to find the nuts to break in and see how that works for them. If the cops came I would tell the kid to say nothing. Now if the guys showed up in a civil manner, I would suggest the kid needs to cooperate reasonably. Obvioulsy you can't replace the sentiment of the flag, but if he could financially repay them for it he should.

Quote

Be that as it may, if the vets and the kid and the cops are all satisfied with the outcome then why should it matter what you think?

They don't, nor do they care what you think. We're here to discuss this amongst us, this is not for them.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

So, you're NOT ok with threatening violence against a known perp.

Sure, anyone with a prior conviction, I say we just have the right to threaten them at will. In fact, the word, "outlaw" used to mean since you operated as a law breaker you were outside thje protection of teh law.

Quote

You're FOR the threat of violence in order to redistribute wealth.

Now this is:

A) about me

B) about taxation?????

How am I for the threat of violence in order to redistribute wealth. Since you must tangent, pls tell me how.

I'll just let you tell you how.

Quote

So aside from the fact that the top 20% hold 93% of the cash and 85% of all cash and asset, that's growing even more obscene. Taxing teh rich is the only way to reverse it.

1. the act of coercing; use of force or intimidation to obtain compliance.

2. force or the power to use force in gaining compliance, as by a government or police force.

Again, to further your tangent:

Great, you can cut-n-paste; super proud of you, now tie in increased taxes to threats or coercion. Hell, you could be a fine, fine president like Reagan or GWB and under those major tax cuts if you fail to pay taxes you will be jailed ,etc. So how are tax increases about threats, intimidation and coercion? Are you saying any taxes are about the above? That's what's difficult about answering cut-n-pasters, they are extremely ambiguous.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

No, I don't have a legal standing am I'm pretty sure the cops aren't interested; I think we know how the coips feeel about this. This would make a hell of a civil case.

There you go assuming again. Why don't you go ahead and tell us how the cops feel? As far as anyone knows they are just fine with how the case resolved itself.
Yes, it would make for a hell of a civil case. Except the kid was a willing participant and he has refused to press charges. Both are sure signs that he feels no wrong has been done.

Quote

Except the kid was a willing participant

I've posted the definition of coercion several times, ignored everytime, the kid no longer became a willing participant when threats were made. Of course you won't address that.

[TankBuster 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

So, you're NOT ok with threatening violence against a known perp.

Sure, anyone with a prior conviction, I say we just have the right to threaten them at will. In fact, the word, "outlaw" used to mean since you operated as a law breaker you were outside thje protection of teh law.

Quote

You're FOR the threat of violence in order to redistribute wealth.

Now this is:

A) about me

B) about taxation?????

How am I for the threat of violence in order to redistribute wealth. Since you must tangent, pls tell me how.

I'll just let you tell you how.

Quote

So aside from the fact that the top 20% hold 93% of the cash and 85% of all cash and asset, that's growing even more obscene. Taxing teh rich is the only way to reverse it.

1. the act of coercing; use of force or intimidation to obtain compliance.

2. force or the power to use force in gaining compliance, as by a government or police force.

Again, to further your tangent:

Great, you can cut-n-paste; super proud of you, now tie in increased taxes to threats or coercion. Hell, you could be a fine, fine president like Reagan or GWB and under those major tax cuts if you fail to pay taxes you will be jailed ,etc. So how are tax increases about threats, intimidation and coercion? Are you saying any taxes are about the above? That's what's difficult about answering cut-n-pasters, they are extremely ambiguous.

Your own words are confusing you?

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Please continue.......I do so enjoy a good story.


Dan Brown, if you're reading this, watch out, Lucky is onto something here.

Thx for more participation and thx for ignoring the definition of coercion and the known statements of the VFWer that threats were made. Fun to be able to cherrypick.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

So, you're NOT ok with threatening violence against a known perp.

Sure, anyone with a prior conviction, I say we just have the right to threaten them at will. In fact, the word, "outlaw" used to mean since you operated as a law breaker you were outside thje protection of teh law.

Quote

You're FOR the threat of violence in order to redistribute wealth.

Now this is:

A) about me

B) about taxation?????

How am I for the threat of violence in order to redistribute wealth. Since you must tangent, pls tell me how.

I'll just let you tell you how.

Quote

So aside from the fact that the top 20% hold 93% of the cash and 85% of all cash and asset, that's growing even more obscene. Taxing teh rich is the only way to reverse it.

1. the act of coercing; use of force or intimidation to obtain compliance.

2. force or the power to use force in gaining compliance, as by a government or police force.

Again, to further your tangent:

Great, you can cut-n-paste; super proud of you, now tie in increased taxes to threats or coercion. Hell, you could be a fine, fine president like Reagan or GWB and under those major tax cuts if you fail to pay taxes you will be jailed ,etc. So how are tax increases about threats, intimidation and coercion? Are you saying any taxes are about the above? That's what's difficult about answering cut-n-pasters, they are extremely ambiguous.

Your own words are confusing you?

TRANSLATION: You have nothing to add, cannot address coercion. Thx for playing.

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

Quote

Please continue.......I do so enjoy a good story.


Dan Brown, if you're reading this, watch out, Lucky is onto something here.

Thx for more participation and thx for ignoring the definition of coercion and the known statements of the VFWer that threats were made. Fun to be able to cherrypick.

ATTENTION, ATTENTION EVERYONE! Let it be known that in this thread and only in this thread and no where else in the real world, that the word OPTIONS really means threats. OK, now that we have that out of the way, please continue with your tirade on the evils of cops and the locals who are also known as "necks" and "turds".


I just opened another Guinness and popped some pop corn, this looks like its gonna be an amusing tale gang.



Please, continue your tale.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Please continue.......I do so enjoy a good story.


Dan Brown, if you're reading this, watch out, Lucky is onto something here.

Thx for more participation and thx for ignoring the definition of coercion and the known statements of the VFWer that threats were made. Fun to be able to cherrypick.

ATTENTION, ATTENTION EVERYONE! Let it be known that in this thread and only in this thread and no where else in the real world, that the word OPTIONS really means threats. OK, now that we have that out of the way, please continue with your tirade on the evils of cops and the locals who are also known as "necks" and "turds".


I just opened another Guinness and popped some pop corn, this looks like its gonna be an amusing tale gang.



Please, continue your tale.

When a forced option includes threats of violence, they're one in the same, at least in reality.

Another point, the statement byu teh VFWer was something like, "fight a vet." Who says that? No one, it's mor elike, 'we'll beat your ass.' The VFWer certainly calmed down his rhetoric for the sake of the media.

Quote

Please, continue your tale.

Please continue your ingoring of COERCION, it's fun to watch selective cherrypicking.

[LouDiamond 1]

Like I said, I'm not here to try and get you to change your position. I'm simply observing the weaving of your tale.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[futuredivot 0]

Almost missed this following you through fantasy land.

Quote

Without sidestepping, are you calling me a pussy, yes or no

Oh shit-do you want me to check a box like on the love notes I got in 2nd grade?

Just basing on this

Quote

If I were that kid or were there to help him handle this matter, I would have said to not let the nuts in

If you pulled some vandalism stunt like this, particularly like this-being a flag at the VFW, a cross at a Christian church, a painting of Dr. King in the NAACP office AND when confronted chose to cower behind a locked door calling someone to protect you. Yes, in my opinion (the only one that truly matters to me), that would make you a pussy. It would make you a lot of things, pussy being the most pleasant to say in mixed company.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Like I said, I'm not here to try and get you to change your position. I'm simply observing the weaving of your tale.

I understand, you don't care about coercion, constitutional due process, thuggery; you;re just here to defend the vets regardless of any/all laws. As well, I really think your understanding of statute is limited anyway. Address coercion as Iposted it in regard to the VFWer.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Oh shit-do you want me to check a box like on the love notes I got in 2nd grade?

If you're such a man, clarify.

Quote

If you pulled some vandalism stunt like this, particularly like this-being a flag at the VFW, a cross at a Christian church, a painting of Dr. King in the NAACP office AND when confronted chose to cower behind a locked door calling someone to protect you. Yes, in my opinion (the only one that truly matters to me), that would make you a pussy. It would make you a lot of things, pussy being the most pleasant to say in mixed company.

Not if this or that, are you calling me a pussy in this thread?

[futuredivot 0]

Clarity of observation isn't one of your strong points is it?

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Clarity of observation isn't one of your strong points is it?

Elusive behavior is yours. Not sure if you called me one or not, in my years if someone wanted to call me one they would just do it, so I assume you are not.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

No, I don't have a legal standing am I'm pretty sure the cops aren't interested; I think we know how the coips feeel about this. This would make a hell of a civil case.

There you go assuming again. Why don't you go ahead and tell us how the cops feel? As far as anyone knows they are just fine with how the case resolved itself.
Yes, it would make for a hell of a civil case. Except the kid was a willing participant and he has refused to press charges. Both are sure signs that he feels no wrong has been done.

Quote

Except the kid was a willing participant

I've posted the definition of coercion several times, ignored everytime, the kid no longer became a willing participant when threats were made. Of course you won't address that.

You keep forgetting that the kid was also offered the option of letting the legal system deal with it....a perfectly legal option which, by its inclusion, made the other two options also perfectly legal activities if the kid had chosen either one of them. It is very simple...maybe too simple for you to grasp...that the kid chose against letting the courts settle the dispute, a place where he could have plead innocent and not been taped or beaten. This was offered to him and he turned it down in favor of being taped.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[futuredivot 0]

Skippy, I'm not OZ. I can't give you a medal or a mydol and make you anything. I gave you my criteria. Only you can decide if you're a pussy or not. I can say that, just based on observing how far afield you're willing to go to justify what you want to be without any regard to what is; if I'm in a situation and things go to shit, I don't want you covering my back.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Skippy, I'm not OZ. I can't give you a medal or a mydol and make you anything. I gave you my criteria. Only you can decide if you're a pussy or not. I can say that, just based on observing how far afield you're willing to go to justify what you want to be without any regard to what is; if I'm in a situation and things go to shit, I don't want you covering my back.

Well, I decide I'm not then, thx for agreeing.

Contrary, if you were that 21YO kid, you want a guy to go toe-to-toe with those MFers. I know everyone accused is guilty, but what if he wasn't guilty of this crime? What if he was but didn't want to get his ass kicked? Shouldn't he have the right to due process? Or fuck the constitution?

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

You keep forgetting that the kid was also offered the option of letting the legal system deal with it....a perfectly legal option which, by its inclusion, made the other two options also perfectly legal activities if the kid had chosen either one of them.

That doesn't mitigate the coercion. And again, we have to believe the hunter and abductor. I believe most of what he says, but no one says, "fight a vet" they say, we can kick your ass or we can tape you to a pole. Either way it doesn't matter, all that matters is once violence is an option, that person is under the intimidation of the criminals. I'm ok with it that you can't see that, but it is a legal standard and of teh many trials I've seen, that would fly as an element of threats, intimidation, coercion.

Quote

It is very simple...maybe too simple for you to grasp...that the kid chose against letting the courts settle the dispute, a place where he could have plead innocent and not been taped or beaten. This was offered to him and he turned it down in favor of being taped.

Based on the words of the guy who tracked this kiid down, likely a group of them, and taped him to a pole with a sign that endangered him from angry passersby. Again, once intimidation was introduced, everything from that point was coerced, doesn't matter if they offered him a trip to Disneyland.

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

Quote

Like I said, I'm not here to try and get you to change your position. I'm simply observing the weaving of your tale.

I understand, you don't care about coercion, constitutional due process, thuggery; you;re just here to defend the vets regardless of any/all laws. As well, I really think your understanding of statute is limited anyway. Address coercion as Iposted it in regard to the VFWer.

Please, don't let me confuse the issue with facts and the reality of the situation. I would hate for you to loose your focus on the laws in your mind/world and your interpretations of them. Frankly, after hearing how you were done an injustice at the traffic intersection, I'm surprised you're not down at City Hall giving a class on the Law to the local authorities. Please continue to enlighten us with your wisdom on the law and definitions of words since we all have such a limited understanding of them.


I'm gonna hit "post" now since I need to run to the fridge and grab another Guinness but I will check back to find out what color the sky is in your world as it is all SOOOO interesting to hear you tell it.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Skippy, I'm not OZ. I can't give you a medal or a mydol and make you anything. I gave you my criteria. Only you can decide if you're a pussy or not. I can say that, just based on observing how far afield you're willing to go to justify what you want to be without any regard to what is; if I'm in a situation and things go to shit, I don't want you covering my back.

Well, I decide I'm not then, thx for agreeing.

Contrary, if you were that 21YO kid, you want a guy to go toe-to-toe with those MFers. I know everyone accused is guilty, but what if he wasn't guilty of this crime? What if he was but didn't want to get his ass kicked? Shouldn't he have the right to due process? Or fuck the constitution?

In case you forgot again, he was offered that option and turned it down.
If somebody offers to punch you there is no law broken until you say "no" and you get punched anyway. If you accept the offer then you get punched willingly. Boxers do it all the time.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Like I said, I'm not here to try and get you to change your position. I'm simply observing the weaving of your tale.

I understand, you don't care about coercion, constitutional due process, thuggery; you;re just here to defend the vets regardless of any/all laws. As well, I really think your understanding of statute is limited anyway. Address coercion as Iposted it in regard to the VFWer.

Please, don't let me confuse the issue with facts and the reality of the situation. I would hate for you to loose your focus on the laws in your mind/world and your interpretations of them. Frankly, after hearing how you were done an injustice at the traffic intersection, I'm surprised you're not down at City Hall giving a class on the Law to the local authorities. Please continue to enlighten us with your wisdom on the law and definitions of words since we all have such a limited understanding of them.


I'm gonna hit "post" now since I need to run to the fridge and grab another Guinness but I will check back to find out what color the sky is in your world as it is all SOOOO interesting to hear you tell it.

I have a BS in Justice, was a process server for a decade and am now taking paralegal courses. I've spent months watching trials as well. My legal understanding dwarfs yours.

Apparently you stop *trying* to direct your posts at fact when you drink.....explains much.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

In case you forgot again, he was offered that option and turned it down.

1) According to the guy who abducted the kid and taped him to a ploe.

2) Even if that was offered, if violence is offered up, this is a case of coercion. Having a 3rd, 4th , 5th option isn't relevant, they came to his door and gave him options of which 1 was violence.

Quote

If somebody offers to punch you there is no law broken until you say "no" and you get punched anyway.

But if someone gives me an ultimatum that one of the things that might happen is violence, hence do it our way, that is coercion. This was not an offer, it was an ultimatum.

Quote

If you accept the offer then you get punched willingly. Boxers do it all the time.

Going to someone's house after tracking them down, offering/giving an ultimatum of violence is worlds from a group of guys meeting at a sanctioned arena to fight. I may have paraphrased thjis being an offer, but that would be lowballing it, this was an ultimatum.

[billvon 3,085]

>Sure it is, we have a vid clip of the VFWers actions, they teamed up and
> according to them he confessed.

Right. So like all the rest of the article, it's what some guy said.

>There was no evidence the kid burned the flag.

No hard evidence, no. Other than what some guy said. Just as there is no evidence that there was any coercion. Other than what you THINK some guy said.

>When you have a video confession that this group hunted down a man,
>offered him 1 of 3 choices of which at least 1 was violence, there is a case
>a prosecutor could fall to sleep on and win.

So why are you sitting here blathering away on the Internet when you could hand a prosecutor a case he could fall asleep and win? Hmm. You have just posted, in your own words, that you could solve this problem once and for all - but you can't be bothered.

But hey, I can understand that - because that would require you doing something in the real world rather than complaining on the Internet. So keep posting! I expect at least another 2000 words from you before tomorrow night.

>Hmm, do I have to go look it up?

Don't bother with what anyone actually said! Just make something up again. It's easy and fun, and will be no more or less accurate than anything else on this thread.

> I don't wonder why you refuse to address the definition, it's a lock.

Of course; you've tried and convicted him. I mean, the trial would be a mere formality; you've posted 72 times about this on the Internet! That's proof positive of guilt for most people who live on the Net.

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

Quote

Clarity of observation isn't one of your strong points is it?

Elusive behavior is yours. Not sure if you called me one or not, in my years if someone wanted to call me one they would just do it, so I assume you are not.

Lots of experience with people calling you a puss?

That sucks.

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.