You must live one paranoid, sad life. No one is going to car jack you - take a deep breath buddy.
Which is why I stopped debating him over a year ago. My life is much better, LOL.
How naïve are you? I had a guy pull a gun and attempt to car jack us, I think. I hit the gas and took off.
If there had been some other thugs in front of my car I would gladly have run their ****ing asses over.
From what I see the crowd doesn't form around the car; the car tried to force it's way through the crowd. The driver should be charged. Also using the video, if the people obstructing traffic can be identified, they can be charged or ticketed, whichever is appropriate for the laws where it happened.
It's unbelievable. No spine. He doesn't take a stance. He just misrepresents everyone else and attacks them with things they either didn't say or that are off topic.
I'd rather debate with apdst or NavyPride - at least they stand for something.
You seriously can't figure out where I stand on this? I bet you're, like, the only one.
If you see a car coming at you, are you going to argue about who's right or get out of the way? :roll:
I know what I'd do.
I just noticed that almost every reply to X Factor begins with me pointing out that he misrepresented my stance.
OMG you're okayyyyy with SUVs running down motorcycles!!!!!!!
Why are you suddenly trying to act that you think a person in a car could be threatened by those outside it? Are you trying to sound all reasonable in this thread? In that other thread not once did you acknowledge what the driver could be feeling.
Stop trying to manufacture reasons to agree with me.
The police need tranquilizer darts to shoot all those idiots. Open season. Arrest them all...
So what? Driving through a crowd carefully is not against the law.
Why is there no option for posters that don't lean either way?
Do you apply that logic to all protestors or just those in the OP Bodhi?
Eh, ignore my previous question to you Bodhi, you're clearly just trolling.
Do you apply that logic to all protestors or just those in the OP Bodhi?
He's mellowing some to suggest tranquilizer darts. Lol.
It's an interesting question. If the protestors were Tea partiers (of course, they wouldn't block lanes of traffic and/or surround cars) or a pro life rally, it would be interesting to see if that would change anything.
To be clear, in your case, I truly don't believe that it would make a difference (didn't want you to think I was implying anything about you).
All protestors who block traffic and inconvenience an entire city... yeah.
Initially the car comes up really slow. The crowd does not want to let him through and he proceeds anyway. Both sides were aggressive. He doesn't hit anybody until they start attacking his car.
Why is there no option for people who think that nobody was right and the whole thing is just a big bucket of wrong?
I can support that arrests may be warranted (depending on the situation), but i don't support shooting protestors (unless such force was reasonably necessary to protect yourself or others if they faced imminent harm.) I most certainly do not support it just because someone may be convenienced time wise and have to wait a little longer to get from from A to B).
The car starts pushing against people immediately before any attack on the car is made. If you are operating a motor vehicle and you can avoid hitting a person without endangering another person, it should be your responsibility to do so.
You seriously can't figure out where I stand on this? I bet you're, like, the only one.
That is obviously a mis-representation of what he does...
It's totally funny how you want to be all hyperbolic about what the driver did but yet completely downplay a crowd illegally gathered in the street as just being "people near your car". :lamo:
And your argument is that people illegally gathered in the street bear no responsibility in anything. Is there anything thing that Ferguson protestors did anywhere that you'd actually join conservatives in criticizing or condemning?
Didn't think so.
No worries, my friend. He's trying to downplay the prominent role that claim had in his argument just as much as he's trying to downplay the actions of the mob (think he'll have any problem with using the word "mob" even though it's absolutely accurate?).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?