Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 01-14-2020, 05:37 PM
Pantastic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kovitlac View Post
I feel that's the right take-away. While I'm not saying the dude should have lied about anything but, assuming everything played out the way he says, he should NOT have trusted his wife to admit to attacking him, first. Maybe he did say that and the cops dismissed it, in which case, he didn't really have much of a chance if they already chose who to believe. If he didn't seek any sort of council at all, that was definitely a huge mistake on his part.
He confessed to hitting his partner, and even the one-sided story from him seems questionable. He says that he slapped her in self-defense, which seems hard to sustain to me. Hitting someone or holding them to stop them from attacking you do seem like something you do to defend yourself, but slapping someone is the kind of thing you do to intimidate someone you don't actually think is a threat to you, you're hurting someone who you don't think will hurt you back. While some people seem to be arguing that a slapping around a partner is 'not as bad' as punching, to me the fact that he was slapping her around argues that he was acting to hurt her and not to stop her from hurting him, so undercuts the claim that he was actually acting in self-defense.
  #102  
Old 01-14-2020, 05:42 PM
Pantastic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kovitlac View Post
If it somehow came out that she didn't attack him, he threatened to shoot her, etc etc, not a single person here would argue against him having his gun rights taken away.
This is not true. People here have argued that misdemeanor domestic violence, that is that your case of 'hitting his domestic partner not in self defense,' should not be considered justification for being disallowed from owning firearms. And not in the sense of having specific arguments with where the exact line is drawn, but disagreement with the fundamental concept of the law.
  #103  
Old 01-14-2020, 07:10 PM
Isosleepy's Avatar
Isosleepy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Thank you. I'm glad someone agrees with me. It's hard being a God-fearing American Patriot in this liberal hive.
This shtick is getting old. The range of how funny you are and how funny you think you are, encompasses both Richard Pryor and Mike Penceís nutsack. Besides that, for something to be satire, doesnít it need to be just a little cleverer than this? Last, at what point does stating opinions you donít in fact hold become actual trolling? Maybe Itís like right about now, when it appears some dopers apparently read it straight.
  #104  
Old 01-14-2020, 08:50 PM
atimnie's Avatar
atimnie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 4,357
Straight or trolling, libtard still needs to be taken out of it. And I'm not entirely convinced it was trolling, the guy might actually be schizophrenic.

If it is trolling, the humor in it has long faded. Just state your point without pretending to be an asshole.
__________________
Wait, you can do signatures?
  #105  
Old 01-15-2020, 01:12 AM
FoieGrasIsEvil's Avatar
FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 18,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
This kind of thing happens to cops as well as military members.

The thing I don't like about the law is the word "misdemeanor". An act that removes someones civil rights permanently should be a felony. Lautenberg, in my opinion, was just another way to make more and more people ineligible to own firearms. Next it will be someone convicted of OWI, then shoplifting, etc..

BUT....it is the law right now even if we hate it, and FoieGrasIsEvil intentionally lied on a federal form and possessed a firearm when he had prior knowledge he was prohibited from having one. ANY conviction of DV, including Disorderly Conduct DV, does invalidate ones legal ability to own a firearm. The burden of knowing whether or not one can own one is upon each of us, not a BATFE agent knocking at our door.

All the anti-gun zealots on these boards clamoring for more and more gun laws ought to be appalled at his actions. Hell, look at all the shit I got for posting I'd more than likely not give a fellow officer a citation for a minor traffic offense. This is 2 felonies were talking about (actually 4 as he could be charged both state and federally).

Then, to be so stupid as to post this stuff online. Duh!

I used to like reading some of FoieGrasIsEvil posts. But I've completely lost respect for them. And for any gun control advocate that isn't giving him grief!
That's cool man. I will have to post again here tomorrow when I have more time. I never said I was right or wasn't up to the slings and arrows I knew I would face. Call me stupid all you want, wish imprisonment and multiple felonies all you want. It's cool. I knew it was coming.

I do believe that it was worth it, just for the multiplicity of opinions we are seeing. I thought awhile before posting, trust me. But I'm also a heart on his sleeve kinda guy for better or worse.

I may or may not have something to share tomorrow after some events unfold. Should be interesting at any rate.
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #106  
Old 01-15-2020, 05:15 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,493
Obviously I need to either make my schtick funnier or abandon it altogether. I'll attempt the latter. But first let me explain my purpose.

On an intelligence scale from 1 to 10, where Buttigieg and Klobuchar are 9's, most Dopers are 7's or 8's, and a moldy bale of hay is a 1, the typical American gun nut is about 3.3. Trying to get through to a 3.3 with reason is futile ó you'll end up wanting to smash sense into their heads with a baseball bat and just end up breaking the bat.

The American gun nut can learn nothing from rational thought. Even Americans who are otherwise intelligent become spluttering turds of idiocy and hatred when the subject turns to guns. So I "hold up a mirror" to the imbeciles by pretending to be a gun nut with 3.1 intelligence.

Since rational discourse is of no use, I try to jog them out of their nightmare by imitating a gun-idiot just slightly stupider than them. I hope they'll think "Well, at least I'm not that stupid" and perhaps introspect a little. If my caricature helps them shift from 3.3 to 3.5 on the intelligence scale, I've done a service.
  #107  
Old 01-15-2020, 06:06 AM
Ruken is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 7,917
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisquirrel View Post
And I'm ok with violent assholes not being allowed guns. Especially given that there is an accepted avenue for them to appeal said decisions even after the sentence is finished.
Just like the racists are ok with an accepted avenue to maybe eventually allow voting again. I bet they love this law too, as it's perfect for anyone scared of black people owning guns.

If someone is too dangerous to rejoin society, then they shouldn't rejoin society. We've no evidence that's the case here, just irrational fears.

But if you want to just ban the damn things outright, it's no skin off my back.
  #108  
Old 01-15-2020, 08:47 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 37,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
Hitting someone or holding them to stop them from attacking you do seem like something you do to defend yourself, but slapping someone is the kind of thing you do to intimidate someone you don't actually think is a threat to you, you're hurting someone who you don't think will hurt you back. While some people seem to be arguing that a slapping around a partner is 'not as bad' as punching, to me the fact that he was slapping her around argues that he was acting to hurt her and not to stop her from hurting him, so undercuts the claim that he was actually acting in self-defense.
Can you elaborate on this? Because I can't see how the shape of one's hand when hitting someone says whether or not you think they can hit back. I find it easier to slap at things than to punch them, and while I've never thrown a punch, I have slapped to defend myself--slapping away the arms.

Granted, I've never been in a real fight, which is part of why I never learned to throw a punch. I'm just thinking about when someone hit me or looked like they were going to hit me, both of which would count as self-defense, if I understand correctly.
  #109  
Old 01-15-2020, 08:53 AM
JRDelirious is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Displaced
Posts: 16,112
Quote:
If he didn't seek any sort of council
OK, just because I've been seeing it not only here but in other places: counSEL

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kovitlac View Post
Always lawyer up, kiddos.
Always. Sure, the system is set up to impress upon you that "you'll only make it harder for yourself if you make us work for it" but at the very least if you're gonna fold, fold with full knowledge of what you're doing.

And needless to say, then stick to the terms you have accepted. As mentioned, you take an even bigger risk by failing to do that.
  #110  
Old 01-15-2020, 09:00 AM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 27,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
I used to like reading some of FoieGrasIsEvil posts. But I've completely lost respect for them. And for any gun control advocate that isn't giving him grief!
Oh no. Gun nut doesn't respect the majority of Americans.

For the record, I lost confidence in you when you talked about how you go swimming while armed with a pistol. I mean, what the fuck.
  #111  
Old 01-15-2020, 09:22 AM
Pantastic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruken View Post
If someone is too dangerous to rejoin society, then they shouldn't rejoin society. We've no evidence that's the case here, just irrational fears.
No one was advocating preventing anyone from 'rejoining society', but instead banning them from a specific activity (posessing firearms). Jumping from 'restrict people who have a history of using violence inappropriately from owning tools extremely useful for violence' to 'ban them from society' doesn't seem like a reasonable leap to me.

Quote:
But if you want to just ban the damn things outright, it's no skin off my back.
I probably qualify as a gun nut to at least 80% of the people on this board, 'ban the damn things outright' is hilariously far from anything I'd want.
  #112  
Old 01-15-2020, 09:30 AM
Pantastic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,588
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
Can you elaborate on this? Because I can't see how the shape of one's hand when hitting someone says whether or not you think they can hit back. I find it easier to slap at things than to punch them, and while I've never thrown a punch, I have slapped to defend myself--slapping away the arms.
Slapping someone is simply not effective fighting compared to punching, kicking, elbowing, wrestling, etc. This is especially true when we're talking about slapping someone in the face vs flailing around trying to push someone's arms away, and the former is what the situation described for the OP sounds like. "I slapped her" has a lot of connotations, and I'm not going to pretend that those connotations don't exist, and I've already written more words explaining my interpretation than the original statement has.

Quote:
Granted, I've never been in a real fight, which is part of why I never learned to throw a punch. I'm just thinking about when someone hit me or looked like they were going to hit me, both of which would count as self-defense, if I understand correctly.
I'm pretty sure that the person in question had been in a fight before, and I'm pretty sure that what they called a slap was not just flailing away at someone's arms to push them away from him.
  #113  
Old 01-15-2020, 09:55 AM
margin is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisquirrel View Post
Not applicable to FGE, but it's fairly obvious that someone could be abusing their SO those entire fifteen years, but never be charged or convicted, even so long after their initial conviction.
Wait till the perennial "discussion" about whether sex offenders ever re-offend comes around, because the same guys who believe all women lie about rape also believe that guys who've been convicted of sex crimes apparently always tell the truth when self-reporting. Because sex offenders would never lie in a situation where telling the truth would get them put in jail. In these cases, "lack of arrests and/or convictions" is eagerly used as "proof of total and complete dewy-virgin-type innocence", but women who are likewise lacking arrests and/or convictions (or men dislike) are just regarded as being too cunning to get caught, ergo evil. "Lack of arrests=innocent" only applies to men.
  #114  
Old 01-15-2020, 10:14 AM
Cheesesteak's Avatar
Cheesesteak is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 13,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruken View Post
If someone is too dangerous to rejoin society, then they shouldn't rejoin society. We've no evidence that's the case here, just irrational fears.
There is evidence that our subject may not be an ideal gun owner. Admission of domestic violence with a child present. Admission of maintaining a close relationship with a violent person. Admission of alcohol abuse.

This is not a person who needs to be incarcerated for the safety of everyone else, and he might otherwise be a productive member of society, but we don't have to give him unfettered access to the most powerful handheld weapons humans have ever devised.
  #115  
Old 01-15-2020, 10:29 AM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 27,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak View Post
This is not a person who needs to be incarcerated for the safety of everyone else, and he might otherwise be a productive member of society, but we don't have to give him unfettered access to the most powerful handheld weapons humans have ever devised.
... the pen!!!!
  #116  
Old 01-15-2020, 01:02 PM
Chisquirrel is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruken View Post
Just like the racists are ok with an accepted avenue to maybe eventually allow voting again. I bet they love this law too, as it's perfect for anyone scared of black people owning guns.

If someone is too dangerous to rejoin society, then they shouldn't rejoin society. We've no evidence that's the case here, just irrational fears.

But if you want to just ban the damn things outright, it's no skin off my back.
Who is injured or murdered by a vote?
  #117  
Old 01-15-2020, 01:05 PM
Kovitlac is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
He confessed to hitting his partner, and even the one-sided story from him seems questionable. He says that he slapped her in self-defense, which seems hard to sustain to me. Hitting someone or holding them to stop them from attacking you do seem like something you do to defend yourself, but slapping someone is the kind of thing you do to intimidate someone you don't actually think is a threat to you, you're hurting someone who you don't think will hurt you back. While some people seem to be arguing that a slapping around a partner is 'not as bad' as punching, to me the fact that he was slapping her around argues that he was acting to hurt her and not to stop her from hurting him, so undercuts the claim that he was actually acting in self-defense.
And yet, though, all we have is his word, so that's what people are basing their decision on. If new facts suddenly came to light, a lot of people here would feel differently, depending on those facts. But that won't happen, as this is one person's story and we don't technically know if any of it even happened at all. So arguing details of a story that might actually be entirely fiction is, I feel, kind of moot.
  #118  
Old 01-15-2020, 02:01 PM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 11,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
For the record, I lost confidence in you when you talked about how you go swimming while armed with a pistol. I mean, what the fuck.
Why does that bother you?
  #119  
Old 01-15-2020, 03:53 PM
Pantastic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kovitlac View Post
And yet, though, all we have is his word, so that's what people are basing their decision on.
Some of us also have critical thinking, life experience, and common sense to draw on. You're free to just believe whatever people post on the internet if you want, of course.
  #120  
Old 01-15-2020, 04:02 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Why does that bother you?
Because it's hilarious that someone is so afraid, that they have to take a gun swimming with them?
  #121  
Old 01-15-2020, 04:20 PM
Bear_Nenno's Avatar
Bear_Nenno is offline
Endowment Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Bavaria
Posts: 9,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
Because it's hilarious that someone is so afraid, that they have to take a gun swimming with them?
The same could be said about the movie theater, the mall, or a BBQ. Is this actually about water sports, specifically, or are you just against concealed carry in general? Do you have a problem with an off-duty police officer carrying a firearm during other seemingly unscary activities like grocery shopping? If not, then what is it about swimming that seems to be an exception to you?
  #122  
Old 01-15-2020, 04:30 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bear_Nenno View Post
The same could be said about the movie theater, the mall, or a BBQ. Is this actually about water sports, specifically, or are you just against concealed carry in general? Do you have a problem with an off-duty police officer carrying a firearm during other seemingly unscary activities like grocery shopping? If not, then what is it about swimming that seems to be an exception to you?
Yes, I similarly find it hilarious that someone is so afraid in their daily life that they have to carry a gun around with them (work-required carry not included).

Taking it swimming, as if a gang of pirates is going to attack you in the ocean, just makes it all the funnier.
  #123  
Old 01-15-2020, 06:20 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,988
I ran into a shark once while swimming (snorkeling), when I lived in Guam. It was pretty good-sized, maybe about as big as me. The sharks around there are White Tip Sharks which can attack people.

That time it was as frightened as I was and swam away, but what about next time? The next one might be armed.
  #124  
Old 01-15-2020, 06:22 PM
atimnie's Avatar
atimnie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 4,357
Anyone who feels the need to carry a gun 24/7 is exactly the kind of person who shouldn't have a gun. A gun for in the home, non lethal weapons and defense outside the home. Remove whatever restrictions there are on pepper spray and tasers, the world would be a lot safer.
__________________
Wait, you can do signatures?
  #125  
Old 01-15-2020, 09:31 PM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 11,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
Because it's hilarious that someone is so afraid, that they have to take a gun swimming with them?
Thatís not the case at all

And how often do you think Iím swimming in the ocean?
  #126  
Old 01-15-2020, 10:00 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Thatís not the case at all

And how often do you think Iím swimming in the ocean?
Who knows? The fact that you take a gun to the beach with you is funny to me.
  #127  
Old 01-15-2020, 10:54 PM
Spiderman's Avatar
Spiderman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: somewhere East of there
Posts: 11,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atamasama View Post
I ran into a shark once while swimming (snorkeling), when I lived in Guam. It was pretty good-sized, maybe about as big as me. The sharks around there are White Tip Sharks which can attack people.

That time it was as frightened as I was and swam away, but what about next time? The next one might be armed.
This being the Dope & us having to be pendantic - fined.


Quote:
Originally Posted by atimnie View Post
Anyone who feels the need to carry a gun 24/7 is exactly the kind of person who shouldn't have a gun.
Why not? Do you have your next mugging planned in advance?
Quote:
Originally Posted by atimnie View Post
A gun for in the home, non lethal weapons and defense outside the home. Remove whatever restrictions there are on pepper spray and tasers, the world would be a lot safer.
Good luck getting the legislature to do that & do you really want pepper spray against a mugger with a knife or a gun, or are they now obeying weapons laws?
  #128  
Old 01-16-2020, 01:04 AM
FoieGrasIsEvil's Avatar
FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 18,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Thatís not the case at all

And how often do you think Iím swimming in the ocean?
You've never exceeded the speed limit in your 2014 Corvette? You didn't wink and nudge at the allegations against the speeding engineers....right?
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #129  
Old 01-16-2020, 08:07 AM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 11,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
You've never exceeded the speed limit in your 2014 Corvette? You didn't wink and nudge at the allegations against the speeding engineers....right?

Never.

And I said I understood their plight, not that they were justified in falling to temptation.

And pointing out the violations of others does not relieve you of the fact you committed at least 2 felonies and grossly disappointed those of us that were fond of you.
  #130  
Old 01-16-2020, 02:13 PM
Really Not All That Bright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 68,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airman Doors, USAF View Post
The simple fact is that defending a domestic violence charge (or any other charge) is expensive, and taking a plea for a lesser misdemeanor is a common thing in the justice system. In this case, though, that plea comes with a prize, and it takes a lot of people by surprise.
If the consequences of a plea take people by surprise, it's because they aren't paying attention. Even a marginally competent judge will never accept a guilty plea without a lengthy colloquy in which the potential consequences of the plea are explained to the defendant. Those will include not just the direct criminal consequences (e.g., imprisonment, fines, probation) but the collateral consequences like possible loss of immigration status, the right to vote, the firm to possess firearms, and even purely civil matters like disqualification for government benefits or professional licenses.
__________________
This can only end in tears.
  #131  
Old 01-16-2020, 05:06 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 27,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Thatís not the case at all

And how often do you think Iím swimming in the ocean?
If you have gone swimming once in the ocean while armed for self-defense, and you are not a SEAL, I think it's bizarre.

To use an analogy, that crazy magazine GOOP run by one of those famous actresses sells a bunch of woo, like crystals that a customer is supposed to insert in their vagina for "health reasons." That's bonkers, even though it may seem like a good idea to whatshername. Going swimming with a gun in your trunks is EXACTLY as weird as sticking rocks up there, in my estimation, whether it is done once or frequently. Both are totally baffling to me.
  #132  
Old 01-16-2020, 05:09 PM
needscoffee is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
You've never exceeded the speed limit in your 2014 Corvette? You didn't wink and nudge at the allegations against the speeding engineers....right?
Am I misinterpreting this, or are you actually comparing owning firearms illegally to exceeding the speed limit? A felony (repeated) to a traffic citation?
  #133  
Old 01-16-2020, 08:06 PM
Eva Luna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Chicago-ish, IL
Posts: 10,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisquirrel View Post
Given that the person in question never tried to correct the record, even after being arrested and charged, lends credence to the fact that he's not telling the whole story or too stupid to own firearms anyway.
IANAL, but I am an immigration paralegal. People's immigration status (or prospects of obtaining lawful immigration status) are often negatively affected by old criminal convictions. Sometimes it's possible to get post-conviction relief, i.e. with the assistance of a competent criminal attorney, convince a judge to reopen a criminal case to take into consideration evidence that wasn't provided at the time of the initial conviction.

In the immigration context, post-conviction relief is sometimes used in particularly sympathetic cases to make slight modifications to the sentence or to the particular charge in order to avoid disproportionately severe immigration consequences that the convicted person wasn't aware of at the time of the conviction. (For example, immigration law is quite unforgiving regarding even minor drug offenses.)

I have no idea how likely it would be in this case to get post-conviction relief so long after the fact in the particular jurisdiction under discussion, as "I want to be able to shoot at a firing range with my kids as a fun bonding activity" honestly doesn't seem like as compelling a reason to reopen a criminal case as "I don't want to be sent back to the hellhole where I was born, where I am likely to be persecuted and even murdered because of my race/religion/nationality/political opinion." But if it's important enough to the convicted person, perhaps it's something to look into.
  #134  
Old 01-16-2020, 08:12 PM
TokyoBayer's Avatar
TokyoBayer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by needscoffee View Post
Am I misinterpreting this, or are you actually comparing owning firearms illegally to exceeding the speed limit? A felony (repeated) to a traffic citation?
Yeah, FGE probably didn't feel that the other thread went so swimmingly, and is shocked that a law enforcement officer isn't happy with felons so he's lashing out.

This morning, I jaywalked!!!!! so my comments can be easily dismissed, but I'm going to take a brave stand here and go against committing felonies. I'd edgy that way.

Tomorrow I'll try my latte without sugar.
  #135  
Old 01-16-2020, 09:44 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is offline
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 43,907
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderman View Post
This being the Dope & us having to be pendantic - fined.
Finned, to be pedantic.
  #136  
Old 01-17-2020, 12:03 AM
FoieGrasIsEvil's Avatar
FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 18,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by TokyoBayer View Post
Yeah, FGE probably didn't feel that the other thread went so swimmingly, and is shocked that a law enforcement officer isn't happy with felons so he's lashing out.

This morning, I jaywalked!!!!! so my comments can be easily dismissed, but I'm going to take a brave stand here and go against committing felonies. I'd edgy that way.

Tomorrow I'll try my latte without sugar.
Nah, it really wasn't like that at all. It was more of a "glass houses" thing rather than any "lashing out" or whatever, but us felons often use faulty logic.

And Jesus, pkbites! Fond of me? Since when? And even so, I knowingly foisted myself on my own petard here. It wasn't like I wasn't aware of the consequences of putting my dirty laundry out there.

Plus, with gun discussions such as they are on the board here, I thought it might be a worthy discussion, condemnation or not.
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #137  
Old 01-17-2020, 02:00 AM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 11,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
And Jesus, pkbites! Fond of me? Since when?

Well, I liked reading some of your posts, even when I didn't necessarily like what you said or agree with them. Or even comment on them.

In all reality you should posted the other thread as a hypothetical or as something that happened to someone else. It would have resulted in the actual discussion you claim to have been wanting.
  #138  
Old 01-17-2020, 02:47 AM
FoieGrasIsEvil's Avatar
FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 18,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Well, I liked reading some of your posts, even when I didn't necessarily like what you said or agree with them. Or even comment on them.

In all reality you should posted the other thread as a hypothetical or as something that happened to someone else. It would have resulted in the actual discussion you claim to have been wanting.
Well..as many of us have done, we've been through life events since being Dopers. I have as honestly as I can have related events in my life. Who can forget when I killed my dog Riley?

Or when my former step-daughter became a heroin addict while I was married, causing much marital strife and went through it here online with many of you, including the situation that has reached out and proverbially slapped me 16 years later?

Or when I got a DUI and discovered life-altering liver damage in early 2017? And have been sober since the Summer of?

I have been decidedly open about my life, maybe moreso than I should have been, according to some. I'm a heart on a sleeve kinda guy.

The Dope has saved me in so many ways. But I persist in being an idiot..
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #139  
Old 01-17-2020, 02:51 AM
FoieGrasIsEvil's Avatar
FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 18,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright View Post
If the consequences of a plea take people by surprise, it's because they aren't paying attention. Even a marginally competent judge will never accept a guilty plea without a lengthy colloquy in which the potential consequences of the plea are explained to the defendant. Those will include not just the direct criminal consequences (e.g., imprisonment, fines, probation) but the collateral consequences like possible loss of immigration status, the right to vote, the firm to possess firearms, and even purely civil matters like disqualification for government benefits or professional licenses.
You'd like to think all courts were created equal.
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #140  
Old 01-17-2020, 02:53 AM
FoieGrasIsEvil's Avatar
FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 18,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by margin View Post
Wait till the perennial "discussion" about whether sex offenders ever re-offend comes around, because the same guys who believe all women lie about rape also believe that guys who've been convicted of sex crimes apparently always tell the truth when self-reporting. Because sex offenders would never lie in a situation where telling the truth would get them put in jail. In these cases, "lack of arrests and/or convictions" is eagerly used as "proof of total and complete dewy-virgin-type innocence", but women who are likewise lacking arrests and/or convictions (or men dislike) are just regarded as being too cunning to get caught, ergo evil. "Lack of arrests=innocent" only applies to men.
Nobody is bringing that up but you. How is this applicable to me again?
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #141  
Old 01-17-2020, 02:57 AM
FoieGrasIsEvil's Avatar
FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 18,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kovitlac View Post
And yet, though, all we have is his word, so that's what people are basing their decision on. If new facts suddenly came to light, a lot of people here would feel differently, depending on those facts. But that won't happen, as this is one person's story and we don't technically know if any of it even happened at all. So arguing details of a story that might actually be entirely fiction is, I feel, kind of moot.
However, it's real. I can't take any of it back.
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #142  
Old 01-17-2020, 06:21 PM
TokyoBayer's Avatar
TokyoBayer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
Nah, it really wasn't like that at all. It was more of a "glass houses" thing rather than any "lashing out" or whatever, but us felons often use faulty logic.
Poor you, being called out for a stupid decision. I’ve made plenty on bad decisions in my life, but trying to set up a citation level offense as the equivalent of a couple of felonies is fucking stupid and comes across badly.
  #143  
Old 01-17-2020, 10:54 PM
FoieGrasIsEvil's Avatar
FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 18,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by TokyoBayer View Post
Poor you, being called out for a stupid decision. Iíve made plenty on bad decisions in my life, but trying to set up a citation level offense as the equivalent of a couple of felonies is fucking stupid and comes across badly.
Never said poor me, not making excuses. Context.
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
  #144  
Old 01-21-2020, 12:42 PM
Really Not All That Bright is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 68,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
You'd like to think all courts were created equal.
I never believe for a minute that all courts are created equal. However, all judges hate being reversed on appeal, and criminal defendants frequently appeal convictions on the grounds that they were not informed of the consequences of their pleas.
__________________
This can only end in tears.
  #145  
Old 01-22-2020, 01:20 AM
FoieGrasIsEvil's Avatar
FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Land of Cheese Coneys
Posts: 18,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright View Post
I never believe for a minute that all courts are created equal. However, all judges hate being reversed on appeal, and criminal defendants frequently appeal convictions on the grounds that they were not informed of the consequences of their pleas.
I would never waste a court's time with such nonsense. I know it would be a stupid waste of time and if I had an OJ lawyer due to money, this thread would never have existed.
__________________
Posting From Above The Browns
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:58 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017