Would you be happier if it was just “He sucks” “+1”?
So, which idiot do you decide to concentrate your ire upon?
The lesser, of course.
Dude, that’s Bricker’s whole schtick. Don’t mess it up for him.
And he’s a Republican, dammit! Lay off the poor man! I mean just because he’s a public official with the power to screw with people’s lives, and even if **boffking **is just some nobody with a laptop who found a seat at Starbucks, that’s no reason to denounce him!
Yes because that’s actually what happened.
Eh, I disagree with a lot of what Bricker says, but he’s right on this one. Lepage didn’t make a death threat, and to try to argue that he did is just silly.
That said, I don’t think Boffkingis an “idiot” as Bricker states.
From the very same link the OP so helpfully provided:
:rolleyes:
Unless you think time travel is a real possibility, it wasn’t a death threat. And even if dueling were legal, the other party involved would still have to agree to the duel for it to be legal. Read what Bricker posted.
That’s right. All he is saying is that the only thing stopping him from shooting another man in the face, a man that has not threatened him physically in any way, is a pesky law.
Listen, ya’ll are being kind of obtuse, don’tcha think?
I know nothing but law, but Bricker cited legal statute to back up his position. If you are so convinced the guy broke the law, present your own legal argument.
‘‘Nuh-huh!’’ isn’t a very compelling rebuttal.
Of the two, I concentrate on the one that is a poster here, inasmuch as he’s in a position to read my remarks and profit by the factual correction – or, I suppose, rebut my correction and defend his conclusion that Lepage’s words constitute a crime.
Were Lepage a poster, I would certainly devote more effort to offering up a critique of his positions.
He is quite adept at presenting partisan advocacy as objective analysis, yes, in the hope of getting his adopted pro bono client/party a reduced verdict. But this is the Court of Public Opinion and you don’t have to play his silly little games.
Grrr!, would you feel better about calling it a threat of *assault *instead? Since he didn’t actually say he’d pull the trigger, I guess. But do please consider where you’re choosing to draw the line.
A “pesky,” law, plus agreement by the challenged party.
In other words, even if dueling were legal – even if the pesky law were changed – That’s NOT the only thing standing in the way. If dueling were legal, then it would still be necessary for Lepage to challenge Gattine to a duel and Gattine to accept.
Lepage is not saying that he wishes it were legal to ambush Gattine and shoot him in the back. He’s saying that he wishes it were legal to invite Gattine to face him, armed, and exchange shots.
To characterize it as you did is inaccurate.
And of course… even if your summary were actually accurate, it still would not be criminal. That is, even if Lepage had called Gattine and said, “Gattine, you goat fucker, I hate you so much that if murder were legal the last thing you’d see is me aiming my H&K straight between your eyes,” that STILL would not constitute a criminal threat within the meaning of §210(1).
Sigh … just tell Bricker “Congratulations, you win again” and maybe he’ll shut up.
Lepage is a reprehensible dick. I am NOT defending his words. The only argument I’m trying to make is his words do not constitute a crime.
And if Lepage’s words were directed at me, I personally wouldn’t feel “threatened”. No way in hell is a sitting governor, going to load his gun, get in his car, drive to my house and then proceed to shoot me. It just ain’t gonna happen, and you know this. So let’s stop trying to argue that this is a credible threat. Because it isn’t.
It really bothers you that Bricker is usually right, doesn’t it?
You’re not quite getting it, are you? Yes, he’s adept at redefining or limiting the topic to an area where he can claim victory, but you don’t have to let him do that. So how is it that you fail to recognize a tactic you’ve seen on display so often?
I’m kinda weirded out that the Governor of Maine feels he needs to introduce himself with his title and first middle and last name before leaving unhinged voicemails on a state reps phone. Does the state rep have other Governors, or other people named Richard LePage, leaving him voicemails calling him a cocksucker, and LePage wanted to make extra sure he wouldn’t get confused which one he was?
Anyhoo, suggesting its criminal is silly. And kind of distracts from how crazy it is, which is the real story.
Congratulations on letting yourself be Brickered.
You’re insisting LePage’s words don’t mean anything at all, then. Not a damn thing. Okay then.
This board is supposed to be about fighting ignorance. If posters like boffking make unsupported claims about the law, it’s perfectly fine if Bricker, or other knowledgeable posters, make a correction.
Do you not agree?