Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Brought a skateboard to a gun fight.
Comments
-
The difference is intent. Just unwanted touching can be an assault.
-
I'll be sure to let him know a CUOG! from Salem Oregon has concerns about his son's welfare.salemcoog said:
Only Liberal fucktards take their kids to protests that always eventually get violent.creepycoug said:Post-script:
A colleague of mine ... let's just say a guy with a lot to lose ... wanted to make a point I guess and took his son to a protest. I told him I thought that was a bad idea for a guy who lives on Lake Washington. Let's take the boat out instead eh buddy?.
Of course, creep was right. Some asshole threw something ... forget what it was like a phone or thermos or some shit ... it his kid in the face and cracked an orbital bone. Not the end of the world, but not what he bargained for either.
The people who spend day after day doing this shit ... whether it's antifa or proud boys or something else ... are the "other" people. One should always keep that in mind. They don't have the same stake in an ordered society that we all have and thus act accordingly with any stimulant.
CSD needs to pay a visit. And you need less fucktarded friends. -
If you were emotionally involved you might have taken the trouble to avail yourself to the facts. You're a lazy emotionalist who doesn't bother to make yourself aware of the facts. I estimate your emotional involvement correctly.creepycoug said:
I don't trust you. And you do overestimate my emotional involvement - drastically so. And that's ok. It's a good rhetorical device to accuse the other guy of being hysterical. I use it with my wife all the tim, even when she's right.SFGbob said:
Trust me, you confusing your feelings for facts isn't me overestimating the value of your feelings.creepycoug said:
You drastically overestimate my feelings. My heart and feelings are for my wife and kids. My balls are for business, and this is business.SFGbob said:
Been there done that. You ignore everything I say and plough straight on with your fact free feelings.creepycoug said:
No. Since you seem to know more about it, then just spit it out. Like my friend, NW, I'm happy to be set straight and admit I was wrong. And "if only we had a system where both sides could present evidence" isn't spitting it out.SFGbob said:
See what I mean.creepycoug said:
Well, ostensibly he did shoot him because he was losing. I think even the members of the Zimmerman Fan Club say as much.NorthwestFresh said:
He also thinks that Zimmerman started the fight with Saint Skittles and then shot him because he was losing.SFGbob said:
But you do believe in beating a man unconscious and into a coma if he accidentally hits a kid that was playing in the street.HustlinOwl said:I'd want to see what caused the fight to break out. I don't think you should be able to start a fight with someone then shoot the guy when you start to get your ass kicked.
But I've never read anything in the transcript of that trial that established with any credible proof (in other words, more than George's version) who technically started the fight. Nobody was around for that besides George and Trayvon.
And, that night at least, he was Saint Skittles. There has never even been an allegation that he was doing anything wrong when George ID'd him as one of those "assholes who always get away."
If only there had been a trial where all of the evidence could have been presented. -
Never really thought of it as that. But I guess that works too.creepycoug said:
Based solely on that one clip - freely admit I've not seen others - no, I don't agree she's criminally assaulting him with that little shoulder nudge to get him off of her jock. I get bumped harder by little Asian women at the Holiday Lane parade in Bellevue. If she did something more before that, then maybe. But like I said - I literally get that much contact at the meet freezer at Costco.TurdBomber said:
You do realize that she's criminally assaulting him by pushing him, don't you? Whether his action was excessive or not, he had a right to push her away.dnc said:
He deserved to get his ass beatGrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
-
salemcoog said:
Many years ago when I played the blood sport of co Ed indoor soccer, I had a girl basically doing this to me for half of the game as I played keeper. Finally I had enough and let her drop step work and then hip checked her to the ground. She actually cried.GrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
Of course she ignored the 23 other warnings I Gave her and I was the bad guy.
-
I see your point. My sincerest apologies for taking so long. I'm a Cuog after all, so bear with me.SFGbob said:
Ignore all that, I have really strong feelings about what went down with that case and those feelings are more important than your pesky facts. Did you know the police ordered him not to chase Trademark?NorthwestFresh said:
If only there had been a trial with witnesses and stuff and an acquittal.SFGbob said:
See what I mean.creepycoug said:
Well, ostensibly he did shoot him because he was losing. I think even the members of the Zimmerman Fan Club say as much.NorthwestFresh said:
He also thinks that Zimmerman started the fight with Saint Skittles and then shot him because he was losing.SFGbob said:
But you do believe in beating a man unconscious and into a coma if he accidentally hits a kid that was playing in the street.HustlinOwl said:I'd want to see what caused the fight to break out. I don't think you should be able to start a fight with someone then shoot the guy when you start to get your ass kicked.
But I've never read anything in the transcript of that trial that established with any credible proof (in other words, more than George's version) who technically started the fight. Nobody was around for that besides George and Trayvon.
And, that night at least, he was Saint Skittles. There has never even been an allegation that he was doing anything wrong when George ID'd him as one of those "assholes who always get away."
The intellectually massive difference between police dispatch telling him "we don't need you to do that, ok" and a police order clears up the fog considerably. With this illuminating clarification, and the heavy breathing business, I now see it your way. -
You are incorrect sir. Your estimation is entirely inaccurate, unless you've managed to acquire that mind reading thing we used to talk about.SFGbob said:
If you were emotionally involved you might have taken the trouble to avail yourself to the facts. You're a lazy emotionalist who doesn't bother to make yourself aware of the facts. I estimate your emotional involvement correctly.creepycoug said:
I don't trust you. And you do overestimate my emotional involvement - drastically so. And that's ok. It's a good rhetorical device to accuse the other guy of being hysterical. I use it with my wife all the tim, even when she's right.SFGbob said:
Trust me, you confusing your feelings for facts isn't me overestimating the value of your feelings.creepycoug said:
You drastically overestimate my feelings. My heart and feelings are for my wife and kids. My balls are for business, and this is business.SFGbob said:
Been there done that. You ignore everything I say and plough straight on with your fact free feelings.creepycoug said:
No. Since you seem to know more about it, then just spit it out. Like my friend, NW, I'm happy to be set straight and admit I was wrong. And "if only we had a system where both sides could present evidence" isn't spitting it out.SFGbob said:
See what I mean.creepycoug said:
Well, ostensibly he did shoot him because he was losing. I think even the members of the Zimmerman Fan Club say as much.NorthwestFresh said:
He also thinks that Zimmerman started the fight with Saint Skittles and then shot him because he was losing.SFGbob said:
But you do believe in beating a man unconscious and into a coma if he accidentally hits a kid that was playing in the street.HustlinOwl said:I'd want to see what caused the fight to break out. I don't think you should be able to start a fight with someone then shoot the guy when you start to get your ass kicked.
But I've never read anything in the transcript of that trial that established with any credible proof (in other words, more than George's version) who technically started the fight. Nobody was around for that besides George and Trayvon.
And, that night at least, he was Saint Skittles. There has never even been an allegation that he was doing anything wrong when George ID'd him as one of those "assholes who always get away."
If only there had been a trial where all of the evidence could have been presented.
And, yes, I had to edit that. -
It's where I do my best work.Alexis said:
Never really thought of it as that. But I guess that works too.creepycoug said:
Based solely on that one clip - freely admit I've not seen others - no, I don't agree she's criminally assaulting him with that little shoulder nudge to get him off of her jock. I get bumped harder by little Asian women at the Holiday Lane parade in Bellevue. If she did something more before that, then maybe. But like I said - I literally get that much contact at the meet freezer at Costco.TurdBomber said:
You do realize that she's criminally assaulting him by pushing him, don't you? Whether his action was excessive or not, he had a right to push her away.dnc said:
He deserved to get his ass beatGrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
-
Unless it is Joe Biden getting handsy again.WestlinnDuck said:The difference is intent. Just unwanted touching can be an assault.
-
I don't think you're going to get too far with that in that context. If he's managing to technically not touch her with what he was doing before she nudged her shoulder, it's a miracle, and in any event if we're being that nitpicky then we could also argue assault on his part because you don't need physical contact for that. You just need to reasonably be in apprehension of physical harm.WestlinnDuck said:The difference is intent. Just unwanted touching can be an assault.
No judge on the planet would do anything with what she did in that clip given what he was already doing. -
Makes it even more ridiculous that they went at him with their skateboards.LoneStarDawg said:Didn’t he display/draw while in the crowd then walked away? There could be issues with brandishing a firearm
-
My favorite part is the rape whistling going on. Sounds like the HH fight song.GrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
-
The way I see it is that he was not trying to touch her or assault her at all. He simply wanted around her and so she purposely stepped in his way with her arms stretched out and shoulder against him.
I'm somewhere in the middle. It isn't something that warrants being dragged to the ground, but it's also not nothing either. It's an action that in my experience causes people to become agitated. Not victim blaming, so don't twist.
-
It was more of a come hither/fuck me look. At least back in the 80's that's how it would have been interpretted.RaceBannon said:
I think she smirked at himFenderbender123 said:
Are you sure? I'm watching it and it looks like she is purposely moving in front of him to block him, resulting in contact.creepycoug said:
I'd say otherwise. Watch it again. He arguably initiated the contact, and what she did in response was barely anything and for sure didn't warrant what he did. Her back was to him the entire time ... at least in the clip.Fenderbender123 said:Yeah I don't really have an opinion on that situation either way. Just noticed that the physical contact, based on that video, was initiated by the woman. I wouldn't have dragged her to the ground.
Though like I said, I agree...I don't think it warrants the reaction he had.
And if the chick is going to try to block out, she should get her butt down and feet spread at least shoulder width apart. That was pure Ricky Mahorn on the throw down.
-
This is a reasonable take. Please gtfo of the tug with that shit.Fenderbender123 said:The way I see it is that he was not trying to touch her or assault her at all. He simply wanted around her and so she purposely stepped in his way with her arms stretched out and shoulder against him.
I'm somewhere in the middle. It isn't something that warrants being dragged to the ground, but it's also not nothing either. It's an action that in my experience causes people to become agitated. Not victim blaming, so don't twist. -
Not twisting. But you and I, and every other mentally balanced adult, would have walked 5 or so yards in either direction away from her, or used a better first step, and just make our way around. Or, better yet, we wouldn't GAF and assess it wasn't worth engaging with someone in an already cranked up situation.Fenderbender123 said:The way I see it is that he was not trying to touch her or assault her at all. He simply wanted around her and so she purposely stepped in his way with her arms stretched out and shoulder against him.
I'm somewhere in the middle. It isn't something that warrants being dragged to the ground, but it's also not nothing either. It's an action that in my experience causes people to become agitated. Not victim blaming, so don't twist.
I know guys like him. I think in all liklihood he was looking for a fight and wanted that shit to happen. Not the shoot-out. But the scuffle with the chick. He doesn't portray as the image of a normal person saying "excuse me. may I pass through? i'm just on my way." -
Nevermind that it's the law.dnc said:
Criminal assault?TurdBomber said:
You do realize that she's criminally assaulting him by pushing him, don't you? Whether his action was excessive or not, he had a right to push her away.dnc said:
He deserved to get his ass beatGrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
This is the snowflakiest post ever.
Holy shit pull your tampon out man.
Sorry if that inconvenience interferes with your ignorance. -
You think this is bad wait and see what a verdict brings or sooner, Trump wins again.HoustonHusky said:I think this all goes back to proving why we just need to defund and disband the police.
The next 150 days are going to be nuts.
The chair is against the wall. John has a long mustache. -
Sorry Creep, but what she's doing is illegal and codified in the law. You can't "restrain" someone from going where they want to go. I wouldn't have done what the guy did, and as I stated, his force would probably be deemed unreasonable, subjecting him to charges of his own. She technically has no legal right to impede or restrain his movement.creepycoug said:
Based solely on that one clip - freely admit I've not seen others - no, I don't agree she's criminally assaulting him with that little shoulder nudge to get him off of her jock. I get bumped harder by little Asian women at the Holiday Lane parade in Bellevue. If she did something more before that, then maybe. But like I said - I literally get that much contact at the meet freezer at Costco.TurdBomber said:
You do realize that she's criminally assaulting him by pushing him, don't you? Whether his action was excessive or not, he had a right to push her away.dnc said:
He deserved to get his ass beatGrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
Why this matters is because it's happening daily, all over the CHAZ, and those ignorant fucks are breaking the law every time they step in front and make contact with people by pushing or grabbing them. A lot of CHAZ outsiders are missing Golden Opportunities to clock those skinny legged fucks every day, because they don't know the law. And that makes me sad. -
There is nothing at all criminal about what she's doing.TurdBomber said:
Nevermind that it's the law.dnc said:
Criminal assault?TurdBomber said:
You do realize that she's criminally assaulting him by pushing him, don't you? Whether his action was excessive or not, he had a right to push her away.dnc said:
He deserved to get his ass beatGrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
This is the snowflakiest post ever.
Holy shit pull your tampon out man.
Sorry if that inconvenience interferes with your ignorance.
No DA in the country would take that case.
IRYK
STOp. -
So what about the pack of goons that followed the guy and gang attacked him? Seems like a separate incident and I’m glad that black-clad LARPer with the backpack got shot. Oh well, do stupid shit, expect the worst. Kind of like your dipshit friend with the house on the lake taking his son out for a stroll into a riot.creepycoug said:
Not twisting. But you and I, and every other mentally balanced adult, would have walked 5 or so yards in either direction away from her, or used a better first step, and just make our way around. Or, better yet, we wouldn't GAF and assess it wasn't worth engaging with someone in an already cranked up situation.Fenderbender123 said:The way I see it is that he was not trying to touch her or assault her at all. He simply wanted around her and so she purposely stepped in his way with her arms stretched out and shoulder against him.
I'm somewhere in the middle. It isn't something that warrants being dragged to the ground, but it's also not nothing either. It's an action that in my experience causes people to become agitated. Not victim blaming, so don't twist.
I know guys like him. I think in all liklihood he was looking for a fight and wanted that shit to happen. Not the shoot-out. But the scuffle with the chick. He doesn't portray as the image of a normal person saying "excuse me. may I pass through? i'm just on my way." -
You are wrong. But don't let me stop you.dnc said:
There is nothing at all criminal about what she's doing.TurdBomber said:
Nevermind that it's the law.dnc said:
Criminal assault?TurdBomber said:
You do realize that she's criminally assaulting him by pushing him, don't you? Whether his action was excessive or not, he had a right to push her away.dnc said:
He deserved to get his ass beatGrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
This is the snowflakiest post ever.
Holy shit pull your tampon out man.
Sorry if that inconvenience interferes with your ignorance.
No DA in the country would take that case.
IRYK
STOp. -
Okay make your argument. What exactly does she do to assault him. Put her arms out? Graze him with her shoulder? At what point in the video do her actions come anywhere near the line of criminality?TurdBomber said:
You are wrong. But don't let me stop you.dnc said:
There is nothing at all criminal about what she's doing.TurdBomber said:
Nevermind that it's the law.dnc said:
Criminal assault?TurdBomber said:
You do realize that she's criminally assaulting him by pushing him, don't you? Whether his action was excessive or not, he had a right to push her away.dnc said:
He deserved to get his ass beatGrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
This is the snowflakiest post ever.
Holy shit pull your tampon out man.
Sorry if that inconvenience interferes with your ignorance.
No DA in the country would take that case.
IRYK
STOp. -
Yes, you join a pack of goons and start beating on someone who's running away from you and you bought what you get. Regardless of whether the guy is a tool.NorthwestFresh said:
So what about the pack of goons that followed the guy and gang attacked him? Seems like a separate incident and I’m glad that black-clad LARPer with the backpack got shot. Oh well, do stupid shit, expect the worst. Kind of like your dipshit friend with the house on the lake taking his son out for a stroll into a riot.creepycoug said:
Not twisting. But you and I, and every other mentally balanced adult, would have walked 5 or so yards in either direction away from her, or used a better first step, and just make our way around. Or, better yet, we wouldn't GAF and assess it wasn't worth engaging with someone in an already cranked up situation.Fenderbender123 said:The way I see it is that he was not trying to touch her or assault her at all. He simply wanted around her and so she purposely stepped in his way with her arms stretched out and shoulder against him.
I'm somewhere in the middle. It isn't something that warrants being dragged to the ground, but it's also not nothing either. It's an action that in my experience causes people to become agitated. Not victim blaming, so don't twist.
I know guys like him. I think in all liklihood he was looking for a fight and wanted that shit to happen. Not the shoot-out. But the scuffle with the chick. He doesn't portray as the image of a normal person saying "excuse me. may I pass through? i'm just on my way."
Not like my friend at all, who is anything but a dipshit. We all make mistakes. -
I was mostly responding to (triggered by) the notion that she had made some sort of very aggressive contact with him using her shoulder, which I didn't see as a big deal and certainly something you or I would have just walked away from.TurdBomber said:
Sorry Creep, but what she's doing is illegal and codified in the law. You can't "restrain" someone from going where they want to go. I wouldn't have done what the guy did, and as I stated, his force would probably be deemed unreasonable, subjecting him to charges of his own. She technically has no legal right to impede or restrain his movement.creepycoug said:
Based solely on that one clip - freely admit I've not seen others - no, I don't agree she's criminally assaulting him with that little shoulder nudge to get him off of her jock. I get bumped harder by little Asian women at the Holiday Lane parade in Bellevue. If she did something more before that, then maybe. But like I said - I literally get that much contact at the meet freezer at Costco.TurdBomber said:
You do realize that she's criminally assaulting him by pushing him, don't you? Whether his action was excessive or not, he had a right to push her away.dnc said:
He deserved to get his ass beatGrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
Why this matters is because it's happening daily, all over the CHAZ, and those ignorant fucks are breaking the law every time they step in front and make contact with people by pushing or grabbing them. A lot of CHAZ outsiders are missing Golden Opportunities to clock those skinny legged fucks every day, because they don't know the law. And that makes me sad. -
Without legal authority or consent, intentionally contacts him at least twice, maintains her screen as he moves right to avoid her (doubling down on her obvious intent to block his path), impeding and restraining his ability to move in the path he desires, thereby denying him his well-recognized liberty interest to go where he wants.dnc said:
Okay make your argument. What exactly does she do to assault him. Put her arms out? Graze him with her shoulder? At what point in the video do her actions come anywhere near the line of criminality?TurdBomber said:
You are wrong. But don't let me stop you.dnc said:
There is nothing at all criminal about what she's doing.TurdBomber said:
Nevermind that it's the law.dnc said:
Criminal assault?TurdBomber said:
You do realize that she's criminally assaulting him by pushing him, don't you? Whether his action was excessive or not, he had a right to push her away.dnc said:
He deserved to get his ass beatGrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
This is the snowflakiest post ever.
Holy shit pull your tampon out man.
Sorry if that inconvenience interferes with your ignorance.
No DA in the country would take that case.
IRYK
STOp.
Argue it all day long, or learn this lesson: You can't block other people from going where they want to go on public property. It's against the law. So is touching a person without their consent.
Sorry you didn't know this. Now you do. -
None of which constitutes criminal assault.TurdBomber said:
Without legal authority or consent, intentionally contacts him at least twice, maintains her screen as he moves right to avoid her (doubling down on her obvious intent to block his path), impeding and restraining his ability to move in the path he desires, thereby denying him his well-recognized liberty interest to go where he wants.dnc said:
Okay make your argument. What exactly does she do to assault him. Put her arms out? Graze him with her shoulder? At what point in the video do her actions come anywhere near the line of criminality?TurdBomber said:
You are wrong. But don't let me stop you.dnc said:
There is nothing at all criminal about what she's doing.TurdBomber said:
Nevermind that it's the law.dnc said:
Criminal assault?TurdBomber said:
You do realize that she's criminally assaulting him by pushing him, don't you? Whether his action was excessive or not, he had a right to push her away.dnc said:
He deserved to get his ass beatGrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
This is the snowflakiest post ever.
Holy shit pull your tampon out man.
Sorry if that inconvenience interferes with your ignorance.
No DA in the country would take that case.
IRYK
STOp.
Argue it all day long, or learn this lesson: You can't block other people from going where they want to go on public property. It's against the law. So is touching a person without their consent.
Sorry you didn't know this. Now you do. -
Sounds like Dazzler's got himself a future partner. Or client.dnc said:
None of which constitutes criminal assault.TurdBomber said:
Without legal authority or consent, intentionally contacts him at least twice, maintains her screen as he moves right to avoid her (doubling down on her obvious intent to block his path), impeding and restraining his ability to move in the path he desires, thereby denying him his well-recognized liberty interest to go where he wants.dnc said:
Okay make your argument. What exactly does she do to assault him. Put her arms out? Graze him with her shoulder? At what point in the video do her actions come anywhere near the line of criminality?TurdBomber said:
You are wrong. But don't let me stop you.dnc said:
There is nothing at all criminal about what she's doing.TurdBomber said:
Nevermind that it's the law.dnc said:
Criminal assault?TurdBomber said:
You do realize that she's criminally assaulting him by pushing him, don't you? Whether his action was excessive or not, he had a right to push her away.dnc said:
He deserved to get his ass beatGrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
This is the snowflakiest post ever.
Holy shit pull your tampon out man.
Sorry if that inconvenience interferes with your ignorance.
No DA in the country would take that case.
IRYK
STOp.
Argue it all day long, or learn this lesson: You can't block other people from going where they want to go on public property. It's against the law. So is touching a person without their consent.
Sorry you didn't know this. Now you do. -
This is not true in my state but you know, differences.dnc said:
None of which constitutes criminal assault.TurdBomber said:
Without legal authority or consent, intentionally contacts him at least twice, maintains her screen as he moves right to avoid her (doubling down on her obvious intent to block his path), impeding and restraining his ability to move in the path he desires, thereby denying him his well-recognized liberty interest to go where he wants.dnc said:
Okay make your argument. What exactly does she do to assault him. Put her arms out? Graze him with her shoulder? At what point in the video do her actions come anywhere near the line of criminality?TurdBomber said:
You are wrong. But don't let me stop you.dnc said:
There is nothing at all criminal about what she's doing.TurdBomber said:
Nevermind that it's the law.dnc said:
Criminal assault?TurdBomber said:
You do realize that she's criminally assaulting him by pushing him, don't you? Whether his action was excessive or not, he had a right to push her away.dnc said:
He deserved to get his ass beatGrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
This is the snowflakiest post ever.
Holy shit pull your tampon out man.
Sorry if that inconvenience interferes with your ignorance.
No DA in the country would take that case.
IRYK
STOp.
Argue it all day long, or learn this lesson: You can't block other people from going where they want to go on public property. It's against the law. So is touching a person without their consent.
Sorry you didn't know this. Now you do.
What she's doing would be considered assault here. Would it get tossed in court? Probably. Would she get hauled off until then? Very possible. Especially if gender was out of the equation.
You can't restrain people without their consent in a public place.
Would he get hauled off too for his response? Definitely.
This is all legal fluff but I can tell you how I know it from my state.
His response was outsized. In turn, they were probably going to stab him and leave him for dead. Also outsized.
Escalation is going to continue as long as the Dems in charge allow this shit. Probably part of their desire as then they can bring out the "right wing extremists" boogieman. They are already doing it. Look at the reporting on this case. -
You would have. Turd Eater would have shrieked in a high pitch that she'd committed criminal assault.creepycoug said:
I was mostly responding to (triggered by) the notion that she had made some sort of very aggressive contact with him using her shoulder, which I didn't see as a big deal and certainly something you or I would have just walked away from.TurdBomber said:
Sorry Creep, but what she's doing is illegal and codified in the law. You can't "restrain" someone from going where they want to go. I wouldn't have done what the guy did, and as I stated, his force would probably be deemed unreasonable, subjecting him to charges of his own. She technically has no legal right to impede or restrain his movement.creepycoug said:
Based solely on that one clip - freely admit I've not seen others - no, I don't agree she's criminally assaulting him with that little shoulder nudge to get him off of her jock. I get bumped harder by little Asian women at the Holiday Lane parade in Bellevue. If she did something more before that, then maybe. But like I said - I literally get that much contact at the meet freezer at Costco.TurdBomber said:
You do realize that she's criminally assaulting him by pushing him, don't you? Whether his action was excessive or not, he had a right to push her away.dnc said:
He deserved to get his ass beatGrundleStiltzkin said:It's going to be a chinteresting adjudication.
Why this matters is because it's happening daily, all over the CHAZ, and those ignorant fucks are breaking the law every time they step in front and make contact with people by pushing or grabbing them. A lot of CHAZ outsiders are missing Golden Opportunities to clock those skinny legged fucks every day, because they don't know the law. And that makes me sad.
