Straight Dope Message Board

[Acsenray]

Magiver, you’re a fucking moron. Possibly a dangerous moron. 451

[margin]

Originally Posted by Bullitt

I have not followed the discussion, and particularly on this point, but to me, the worse incident was the driver pummeling the pedestrian. Once the pedestrian was down and hit he was clearly outmatched and any more hits was too much, IMO. I counted 6 punches. He should have stopped at one or two.

Does that answer your question, Czarcasm?

So not until the driver gets out of the car? 452

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Bullitt

I have not followed the discussion, and particularly on this point, but to me, the worse incident was the driver pummeling the pedestrian. Once the pedestrian was down and hit he was clearly outmatched and any more hits was too much, IMO. I counted 6 punches. He should have stopped at one or two.

Does that answer your question, Czarcasm?

It answers whatever question you wished I had asked, which was to be expected. 453

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Bullitt

I have not followed the discussion, and particularly on this point, but to me, the worse incident was the driver pummeling the pedestrian. Once the pedestrian was down and hit he was clearly outmatched and any more hits was too much, IMO. I counted 6 punches. He should have stopped at one or two.

Does that answer your question, Czarcasm?

What's the pity is that reactions to "answers" like yours(What is worse: A or B? C, of course!), and that thread from a supposed "moderate" that tries to promote Michael Savage will be used to show how we are intolerant towards conservatives. 454

[margin]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

What's the pity is that reactions to "answers" like yours(What is worse: A or B? C, of course!), and that thread from a supposed "moderate" that tries to promote Michael Savage will be used to show how we are intolerant towards conservatives.

I like how the question is, "Driver or pedestrian?" and he changed the driver into a pedestrian by omitting the whole part where the guy has already committed assault with a deadly weapon. A 4,000 deadly weapon is a hard to ignore scale-tipper, but conservatives like to remove stuff like that, then whine that the driver was the victim. The fact that every conservative here has tried to handwave away or just disappear the vehicle entirely is proof they know exactly what they are doing and that they are aware that honesty is not their friend.

So: Guy drives vehicle into pedestrian. Conservatives protest guy is antifa and that blocking traffic is worse than murdering little babies. (As long as they're not brown ones.) Driver gets out of vehicle, there's a scuffle, driver throws guy to the ground and punches him several times.

The Rightwing in general always attempt to argue that the "guy who got hurt" is antifa and that antifa are evil and dangerous, despite there being no evidence of that. What are Nazis famous for, again? Gardening? And don't whine at "Nazis". The standard Reichwing whine is that the Left calls everyone they disagree with "Nazis" (when the right is not arguing were Nazis were reallysocialists) but that ignores all the white nationalists in the White House, at Trump rallies, or marching while wearing swastikas at these rightwing rallies like "Unite the Right."

Meanwhile, rightwingers are still trying to blame Heather Heyer rather than James Alex Fields for her murder, just like this thread has been one long stream of he asked for it and he got it hurr hurr hurr. In both cases, the argument's been made that both victims got themselves killed, because doncha know that white men ought to get to run down and murder people who disagree with them.

Yeah, and don't @me about the baseball shooter, either, because as much as I despise Bernie Sanders, the guy has not made hatred the central plank of his platform.

Trump has. That's why the odd shooting and/or bike lock here and there is meaningless against three years of Trump bellowing and whining by turns, "LOCK HER UP!" "WITCH HUNT! WITCH HUNT!" (So ironic, that one.) And, "SEND THEM BACK! SEND THEM BACK!" Not to mention his repeated suggestions that "you second amendment people" might find "a solution" if Hillary "stole the election."

Every time a rightwinger refuses to answer the question----or, even worse, claim they did so (without acknowledging they omitted the most damning part) it's an admission of guilt. And this is the background to every discussion here. Conservatives refuse to answer questions, or answer the question they wish you'd asked, or they demand cites they never read, or just repeat the same behavior and make the same debunked claims in a few months. 455

[QuickSilver]

Originally Posted by margin

Every time a rightwinger refuses to answer the question----or, even worse, claim they did so (without acknowledging they omitted the most damning part) it's an admission of guilt. And this is the background to every discussion here. Conservatives refuse to answer questions, or answer the question they wish you'd asked, or they demand cites they never read, or just repeat the same behavior and make the same debunked claims in a few months.

Every time this happens, a demon in hell gets his horns. 456

[margin]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

Every time this happens, a demon in hell gets his horns.

There's nothing quite like that first time you're sitting across the table from somebody and you ask him one question but he provides an answer to an entirely different one. 457

[octopus]

There's a strawman genocide in this thread. 458

[QuickSilver]

Originally Posted by octopus

There's a strawman genocide in this thread.

Is that a fact?

Originally Posted by octopus

I think the average actual Nazi is more dangerous than the actual antifa. Take that for what you will. I think neither have a right to initiate violence based upon another individual's exercise of fundamental liberties.

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

Not at all what I'm asking. But you know that.

I'll assume you don't want to answer the questions as posed, for reasons you also don't wish to disclose. Duly noted.

Want to try answering the questions I asked you back on the 3rd page of this thread? Third time's the charm, they say. 459

[SteveG1]

Originally Posted by Chisquirrel

For some reason, it's always the big bad Trumpist driving into liberals, while our board cowards cry about how dangerous ANTIFA is.

" ... it's always the big bad NAZI driving into liberals..."

Based on past history (Charlottesville). 460

[margin]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

Is that a fact?





Want to try answering the questions I asked you back on the 3rd page of this thread? Third time's the charm, they say.

I don't see that he answered; am I missing something? 461

[QuickSilver]

Originally Posted by margin

I don't see that he answered; am I missing something?

His last activity was today at 1:24pm. But not in this thread. I hope you've not been holding your breath. Seems highly unlikely the cowardly hypocrite will respond. Even if summoned again. 462

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by Acsenray

Magiver, you’re a fucking moron. Possibly a dangerous moron.

You're clearly filled with hate. Hate is what drives people to harass others without provocation. 463

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by MrDibble

So, more like a pistol whipping, then?

A pistol whipping would cause harm. There seems to be disconnect between the fantasy people hold in this thread that the driver ran him over. Didn't happen. Not only did it not happen but he pulled back to the curb.

Stick guy then went on to strike the car in what clearly sounded like something that would damage the vehicle. Big surprise the driver reacted as he did. 464

[Guest-starring: Id!]

I'd say stickman's dress was more of a black and royal blue than a white and gold. 465

[Kobal2]

Originally Posted by Magiver

A pistol whipping would cause harm. There seems to be disconnect between the fantasy people hold in this thread that the driver ran him over. Didn't happen. Not only did it not happen but he pulled back to the curb.

Dude, the pedestrian had to lift himself up on the hood. Had they lost their footing, or had their hands slipped on the hood, they would absolutely have been run over.

The driver didn't limit himself to putting bumper against flesh and inching forward to get the message across. They gunned it and pushed the guy a good 15 meters, at some speed. That's dangerous and reckless, and just because an accident didn't happen in this specific case doesn't mean it's a harmless act generally speaking. Once more with feeling : if I shoot at you and miss, that's still harm intended. 466

[SteveG1]

Originally Posted by Guest-starring: Id!

I'd say stickman's dress was more of a black and royal blue than a white and gold.

… and he kept saying "yanni" 467

[SteveG1]

Originally Posted by Magiver

You're clearly filled with hate. Hate is what drives people to harass others without provocation.

Being called a fucking moron is a bit better than getting damn near run over and then getting an ass kicking. Toughen up some if you wanna side with the SUPPOSED "tough guy" who beat up a SUPPOSED BUT NOT EXACTLY "Antifa" guy. --- by the way, that whole "he was Antifa" argument turned out to be fake.

But then it seems SOME folks like using their car as a weapon these days - or at least they like keeping it open as an option. 468

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by SteveG1

Being called a fucking moron is a bit better than getting damn near run over and then getting an ass kicking.

Except he wasn't damn near run over. the driver pulled out slowly and away from the curb and then stopped. Stick man only needed to step back from whatever verbal confrontation they had. That's it.

Originally Posted by SteveG1

Toughen up some if you wanna side with the SUPPOSED "tough guy" who beat up a SUPPOSED BUT NOT EXACTLY "Antifa" guy. --- by the way, that whole "he was Antifa" argument turned out to be fake.

By the way, didn't make the claim, doesn't matter, don't care.

Originally Posted by SteveG1

But then it seems SOME folks like using their car as a weapon these days - or at least they like keeping it open as an option.

If the driver was using it as a weapon then stick man would be thinner. As it is, he was not hurt until he continued the confrontation. 469

[QuickSilver]

Originally Posted by Magiver

If the driver was using it as a weapon then stick man would be thinner. As it is, he was not hurt until he continued the confrontation.

If I threaten you with a baseball bat, perhaps stick it in your ribs and give you a good shove, but don't beat you senseless with it... have I assaulted you or have I stopped short of doing so? 470

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

If I threaten you with a baseball bat, perhaps stick it in your ribs and give you a good shove, but don't beat you senseless with it... have I assaulted you or have I stopped short of doing so?

You are disregarding the first part of the scenario. Stick man had already confronted the driver he was blocking. He then advanced on the car continuing the confrontation.

To make a comparison a masked person would have had to block my movement and then continue to do so after after a verbal confrontation to the point he advances on on me with a stick. If I push that person out of the way with a gun in my hand I have not injured him with the gun. If he then continues the confrontation with a weapon and I beat the tar out him without shooting him then not only did I not use the gun as a weapon but the injuries to the person are a result for his continued confrontation.

You do whatever you think is best with masked people who block your passage and then continue the confrontation with a weapon in hand. 471

[Chingon]

This is some of the dumbest shit I've ever read. 472

[Bullitt]

Originally Posted by Chingon

This is some of the dumbest shit I've ever read.

For.

The.

Win! 473

[jayjay]

My god, it must be a horrible existence to be a conservative. Everyone's a threat and must be met with a loaded gun or a weaponized vehicle unless proven innocuous. 474

[Kobal2]

Originally Posted by Magiver

You are disregarding the first part of the scenario. Stick man had already confronted the driver he was blocking. He then advanced on the car continuing the confrontation.

Uh huh. Why, he could even have smudged the paint job. Clearly he needed to die. 475

[QuickSilver]

Originally Posted by Magiver

You are disregarding the first part of the scenario. Stick man had already confronted the driver he was blocking. He then advanced on the car continuing the confrontation.

You frighten easy.

Originally Posted by Magiver

You do whatever you think is best with masked people who block your passage and then continue the confrontation with a weapon in hand.

Halloween must be a nightmare scenario for you. Masked people on you street, knowing where you live, knocking on your door. 476

[running coach]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

Halloween must be a nightmare scenario for you. Masked people on you street, knowing where you live, knocking on your door.

Don't forget extortion.
"That's a nice window you have there. It would be a shame if some soap got on it." 477

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

Halloween must be a nightmare scenario for you. Masked people on you street, knowing where you live, knocking on your door.

Yes, a masked man blocking traffic with a weapon who continues to confront someone is somehow the same as children on Halloween. Good analogy. 478

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by jayjay

My god, it must be a horrible existence to be a conservative. Everyone's a threat and must be met with a loaded gun or a weaponized vehicle unless proven innocuous.

If the driver had weaponized his vehicle you'd have a point. The only person weaponizing anything was stick man. The driver just wanted to continue on his way. He did so in a manner that allowed stick man to walk away. But no, stick man continued to walk toward the car. This is not what a rational person does. 479

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by Kobal2

Uh huh. Why, he could even have smudged the paint job. Clearly he needed to die.

Actually he could have busted the window out and injured the driver having already demonstrated the use of the stick.

I'm not sure why you think he needed to die because nobody suggested that nor did the driver harm him prior to the door strike. 480

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Magiver

Actually he could have busted the window out and injured the driver having already demonstrated the use of the stick.

I'm not sure why you think he needed to die because nobody suggested that nor did the driver harm him prior to the door strike.

It would be nice if you would shove your vivid imagination up your ass and discuss what actually happened. 481

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

It would be nice if you would shove your vivid imagination up your ass and discuss what actually happened.

I did. You, on the other hand fall into the category of posters who throw insults without adding anything to the conversation.

But by all means, elaborate on your insult. 482

[Chisquirrel]

Originally Posted by Magiver

Actually he could have busted the window out and injured the driver having already demonstrated the use of the stick.

I'm not sure why you think he needed to die because nobody suggested that nor did the driver harm him prior to the door strike.

For someone that adamantly states that there's no way the pedestrian could have been hurt by being run into by a vehicle, you're really pushing the slight possibility of a broken window to justify the subsequent assault. 483

[Superdude]

Originally Posted by Magiver

No. Already discussed this. It's a tactical error to let a threat approach you like that.

Given your ridiculous ideas about how Benghazi should have been handled, I feel comfortable saying that people are better off doing the opposite of what your "tactical" ideas suggest. 484

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by Superdude

Given your ridiculous ideas about how Benghazi should have been handled, I feel comfortable saying that people are better off doing the opposite of what your "tactical" ideas suggest.

I cited the technology available in the Benghazi thread which was relatively old as military hardware goes. and I went on to cite the turn-time of cargo aircraft in what was also pretty mundane for both military and civilian aircraft.

By all means, do the tactical opposite of what I posted. That's my suggestion to you. 485

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by Chisquirrel

For someone that adamantly states that there's no way the pedestrian could have been hurt by being run into by a vehicle, you're really pushing the slight possibility of a broken window to justify the subsequent assault.

Stick man physically demonstrated the use of a weapon. That bumps up the "slight possibility of a broken window" considerably.

And I didn't say stickman could not have been hurt. I said the drivers actions avoided hurting him. There's a difference. 486

[Superdude]

Merely citing that doesn't deny the absolute ridiculousness of your tactical evaluation of the situation. I'll have to dig that thread out to allow the others who missed your strategic glory to get caught up on your GI Joe view of the world. 487

[crowmanyclouds]

Originally Posted by Superdude

{...} I'll have to dig that thread ou...{...}

Here 'tis!

CMC fnord! 488

[Superdude]

That's the one. Thanks! 489

[DrFidelius]

Forgive me if I missed it, but do we know when, where, and involving whom this horrendous vehicle vs stick encounter occurred? 490

[Chisquirrel]

Originally Posted by Magiver

Stick man physically demonstrated the use of a weapon. That bumps up the "slight possibility of a broken window" considerably.



And I didn't say stickman could not have been hurt. I said the drivers actions avoided hurting him. There's a difference.

Truck man physically demonstrated the use of a weapon.

But he gets a pass, for reasons.

Again, why is it always the liberals that are getting hit by vehicles, and conservatives twisting themselves in knots to defend their assaults? 491

[DrFidelius]

I still don't know why we are accepting the narrative from Redstate.
For all we know, truck guy could have stolen stick guy's parking space. We have no context.
One dude in the road does not a protest make. 492

[Mundane Super Hero]

Originally Posted by running coach

Don't forget extortion.
"That's a nice window you have there. It would be a shame if some soap got on it."

"Officer, they advanced on the door, continuing their attempted extortion. Of Course I Beat Them! Wait, why are you getting out your cuffs...?" 493

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by Chisquirrel

Truck man physically demonstrated the use of a weapon.

I disagree. There were no injuries involved. Had he gunned it and run him over then I would agree. This didn't happen.

Originally Posted by Chisquirrel

But he gets a pass, for reasons.

he gets a pass because he is not the person instigating it. At least not in the video. They have some kind of verbal confrontation and then stick man continues blocking the car and actually moves closer to it.

Originally Posted by Chisquirrel

Again, why is it always the liberals that are getting hit by vehicles, and conservatives twisting themselves in knots to defend their assaults?

Where in the thread was the political affiliation established for either parties. And cite there is any kind of trend for your statement. Just based on the politics of this thread it appears liberals have a greater problem controlling their emotions. We already lost one of them because of that. And that lesson was ignored by someone telling me off on behalf of the individual who got banned as if it were my fault and not the actions of the person who was banned for things said on other threads. 494

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by Superdude

Merely citing that doesn't deny the absolute ridiculousness of your tactical evaluation of the situation. I'll have to dig that thread out to allow the others who missed your strategic glory to get caught up on your GI Joe view of the world.

my evaluation of the situation was based on knowledge of how long it takes to launch a plane and what assets are listed by the military for such missions. This is why we have various teams trained specifically for this type of situation. That you think nothing of immediate swat team responses to a school shooting but think it's a miracle to load and launch an airplane in a timely manner doesn't make sense.

All that aside, at the time the attack started, we had no idea how long they could hold out. The entire "we couldn't launch a plane in 6 hours" bullshit statement just happened to coincide with the time they managed to hold out and it was made after the fact. Nobody in the news ever challenged the statement or ever bothered to ask just how long it took to insert an ops team or how they couldn't hold out based on that estimate.

I'm pretty sure that they would have launched a rescue mission if President Obama was under attack. It's not like his administration was shy about attacking Libya.

But since you can't seem bothered to discuss THIS thread you seem destined to attack me on another thread and even then you can't be bothered to discuss the thread. 495

[crowmanyclouds]

Originally Posted by Magiver

Stick man physically demonstrated the use of a weapon.

Umm, who exactly was injured by the stick.

CMC fnord! 496

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by DrFidelius

I still don't know why we are accepting the narrative from Redstate.
For all we know, truck guy could have stolen stick guy's parking space. We have no context.
One dude in the road does not a protest make.

Yes, we don't know the narrative that started it. I would think it unusual to confront someone over a parking space while wearing a mask and carrying a stick.

While we don't know the narrative we do know the person videoing it yells at stickman to get out of the street. It's not out of context to consider the likelihood that masked stick guy was in fact, deliberately blocking traffic. He clearly continues to block the driver throughout the video. 497

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by crowmanyclouds

Umm, who exactly was injured by the stick.

CMC fnord!

Nobody was injured by the stick. However, the truck was damaged using the stick which demonstrates it's use as a weapon. 498

[Wolf333]

According to some folks on this board, vehicles are deadlier weapons than guns. According to you, sticks are deadlier weapos than vehicles. Does that mean that sticks are deadlier than guns, or is this like rack, scissors, paper? 499

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by Wolf333

According to some folks on this board, vehicles are deadlier weapons than guns. According to you, sticks are deadlier weapos than vehicles. Does that mean that sticks are deadlier than guns, or is this like rack, scissors, paper?

Yes, vehicles can be used effectively as weapons. But until they're used as weapons they're vehicles. The same goes for the stick. It's just a stick until you start hitting things with it. Then it becomes a weapon. 500