Favorite team:LSU 
Location:Baton Rouge
Biography:
Interests:
Occupation:
Number of Posts:5944
Registered on:7/16/2008
Online Status:Not Online

Recent Posts

Message
quote:

It is believed that Iran left the chemicals at the port, because they were afraid that Israel would target them if they moved it to a military base. So they left it at a commerical port.


So Muslims are hiding their weapons of war behind civilians?

shocked [not shocked]
quote:

I gave a presentation then stood in the back for a few minutes.


Everyone failing to read seems to be assuming that everything you described was occurring while you were speaking and not while you were observing the audience during the next presentation. More evidence of the lack of attention span beyond the first sentence.

re: About 10/7......

Posted by Jack Bauers HnK on 4/19/25 at 6:57 am
There are persons of equal intelligence who speculate that Trump faked his own assassination attempt too.
quote:

Right wingers say China is down and about to collapse, but there is no objective evidence of this. Meanwhile the US markets for both bonds and equities continue to get hammered and countries continue to align away from Trump's America.


So we’re to believe that China is completely immune to American tariffs? Their economy is so completely robust that they can replace us with other buyers around the world or pay our tariffs without any negative effect?

Or… could it be that China doesn’t have a free press that hates its country to trumpet those negative effects as we have in our country?
Don’t the Muslims give monetary compensation to family members who kill themselves in service of murdering non-Muslims? Is that similar to what we see happening here?
When will we get some disclosure of trial lawyer profits since so much concern is given to insurance company profits?
You take a female officer to the ground and a male officer has to come deal with you, you can expect a beat down, especially if you are still resisting.
quote:

Say someone is getting mugged, it's on CCTV... the mugee then shoots or shanks the mugger, still in view of CCTV.


Then you might accurately say, “it appears such and such occurred” without claiming factually that it did occur. You didn’t actually see it occur. You were not an eye witness. You saw a representation on a screen of something occurring. Journalists aren’t going to rely on the accuracy of video, an arrest affidavit, a law enforcement press conference, etc. and communicate an accusation of guilt to their huge audience on their own without the qualifier.

Again, the concern one takes for their own potential liability for libel or slander affects how much thought and effort goes into these considerations and language.
quote:

why are we still using the word 'alleged'?


Because the accused are innocent until proven guilty (as in convicted in court). They are only alleged to have committed the action, crime, etc. until their guilt is proven.

If someone publicly describes someone as having committed some crime without an adjudication of guilt, or the qualifier “alleged”, they open themselves up to civil claims of libel or slander. You might not be a big enough target on a random message board, but journalists and their employers would certainly be a big target with their large audiences and deep pockets.
Why assume they were paying taxes and not collecting tax “credits”?
Ah, so the democrat “plaintiffs” and the democrat “defendants” will “settle” the dispute and “stipulate” that the law is unconstitutional without having to have a judge actually rule on it.

Wasn’t a similar procedural vehicle being used at the federal level for something a few years back?
How does the world’s largest consumer economy effectively “collectively bargain” against other centrally planned economies without doing a little central planning of our own?

It’s not really free trade when the trading partners are coordinating against us with tariffs, currency manipulation, labor conditions that we don’t allow in our own country, etc.
quote:

Tariffs as proposed are good policy, and I will disapprove if the president lifts them in the name of “negotiation tactic.


Spankings are a good method of discipline and I will disapprove if a father fails to administer them even when the child has started to behave.

quote:

Tariffs aren’t a good policy, but the President is using them as a negotiation tool. I will disapprove of their long term implementation.


Spankings are a bad method of discipline but a good way to motivate a child to behave. I will disapprove of the father actually spanking the child when the child misbehaves even though it results in improved behavior.
The bullet begins to fall vertically with gravity once it’s fired. If there were no obstructions, on flat ground and in a vacuum, it would take the bullet fired horizontally about the same time to hit the ground as a bullet dropped without any horizontal motion. Depending on the velocity of the bullet and the distance to target, that bullet drop may need to be accounted for by firing at a slightly upward trajectory so that the bullet travels in a parabolic arc and strikes the intended target.
My experience buying trucks out of state is that they collect Louisiana taxes based on my residency if they are registering the vehicle for me. I’d imagine the same should be true of teslas. If you register it in Florida, Louisiana is still going to want their taxes when you register it in Louisiana.
quote:

Where does this end?


Where should it begin? Are we obligated to tolerate all speech of foreigners in our country?

re: Put your hands up P**sy

Posted by Jack Bauers HnK on 3/27/25 at 12:36 pm
quote:

Well of course the leg is less deadly than the head or chest WTF are you on


The point is that if the threat is such that you’re willing to employ “less deadly” force, then why were you using deadly force at all? Suddenly it looks like you were just wanting to shoot a dude who wanted to fight, not defending yourself against a deadly threat. You should never want it to (even arguably) look like you wanted to shoot, or that you shot for any reason other than you were reasonably in fear of death.

re: Put your hands up P**sy

Posted by Jack Bauers HnK on 3/27/25 at 11:49 am
quote:

For the sake of the shooter, he better hope you're not on his jury


lol, I’m not even arriving at an opinion, just observing the grey area the shooter would find himself in. Wouldn’t you agree that if, for example, the video only showed the aggressive guy advancing quickly, never stopping, gaining on the shooter despite his retreating, and the single shot coming only once the guy got within a few feet, would that not be a stronger scenario for the shooter to argue self defense?

Attorneys don’t exist to deal with open and shut cases, they exist to explore those grey areas from either side.

re: Put your hands up P**sy

Posted by Jack Bauers HnK on 3/27/25 at 11:37 am
quote:

Not the slightest effort to deescalate? Dude backed up a few steps, pulled a gun on that lunatic, and told him multiple times to "get down." And only shot him once he was more aggressive (shirt off) and got to within like two feet of him with threats of bodily harm.


None of this is untrue. However, the scenario I imagine is the prosecutor, or the plaintiff attorney, asking why the shooter felt the need to stand there in defense of that little square of concrete. What did he plan to do, force the man to lay on the ground and hold him at gunpoint? Make him beg for forgiveness for wanting to fight him? Why did he stop there and not continue backing up? Just because he had a “right” not to back down? If he wasn’t in fear enough for his life to shoot center mass, why was a shot in the leg a better choice than another step, or many steps, backwards, while the guy was taking off his shirt?

If I shoot someone, I don’t want there to be any question as to whether I did everything I could to avoid pulling that trigger.

re: Put your hands up P**sy

Posted by Jack Bauers HnK on 3/27/25 at 11:17 am
quote:

And he lowers the gun to avoid shooting him in the face or chest...that actually seems like more of an argument for self-defense as well. Why is shooting him in the leg dumb IYO?


If deadly force is justified, then apply deadly force. Calmly aiming down to a leg (as though that’s less deadly, there’s still a femoral artery there…) instead of backing up away from the dude isn’t exactly the strongest argument for reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm.

I don’t know what started the encounter, but I wouldn’t want to be defending myself against criminal and civil charges with video of me just standing there for all those seconds and not showing the slightest effort to deescalate, back up, etc.