The Idiot Thread

1272830323341

Comments

  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 4,422
    dignin said:
    dignin said:
    PJPOWER said:
    dignin said:
    dignin said:
    dignin said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    jeffbr said:
    dignin said:
    Common sense is gone if anyone thinks this woman should be penalized for destroying that gun. Idiot thread indeed.
    Well, I would agree in general and on the surface. But what you're saying is that it is OK to commit a crime as long as your intentions are good. That isn't how the rule of law works. She could have gone about this differently. She could have truly rendered the firearm inoperable to start with, and there would have been no issue. She could have ignorantly committed the federal offense privately, and taken the pieces to law enforcement, and it would be a non-issue. But she decided to publicly commit the crime and document it on video. If she'd simply cut the firearm in half this would be a non-issue. But she cut the barrel off. Anyone with a vague notion about gun laws knows that is a no-no. If she owned a firearm and was ignorant of one of the most basic laws, that is on her and she probably never should have possessed it. She may have cut the barrel off, and then proceeded to cut it into smaller pieces, but she still shortened the barrel of a functional firearm. Cut it in half first, and then cut those halves into smaller pieces. It may seem like a minor point, but again, publicly violating a well-known federal firearms law puts you in Trump-stupid territory.

    It seems you missed the part, “it was inoperable before I cut it.” Also, do you believe every gun owner knows all “basic” gun laws prior to or during gun ownership? 
    No evidence of that whatsoever ever in the video.  Looks like a fully functional ar-15 to me.  She is just saying that after the fact in a weak effort to cover her ass.  Anyways, it’s up to the ATF to decide now as literally thousands of people have already reported her.

    She didn't record it so it must not have happened.

    That's what you're going with?

    ...ok then...
    if Kellyanne Conway was caught with a bag of cocaine on her, and she tried to claim she found it and was on her way to turning into police, would you take her word for it? Whether she was telling the truth is irrelevant. would you believe her?

    I find it very interesting how quickly people are defending this woman. Isn't the law the law? Shouldn't our politicians be held to a standard of at LEAST not breaking the law, especially when it relates to proper handling and storage of a firearms?
    Again with the terrible drug analogies. 
    change "bag of cocaine" with "modified AR-15" then. 
    She wasn't caught with anything. 

    If she cut the barrel of the gun off and was later found in possession of the gun by police then came up with the "I was trying to destroy the gun" story then that analogy might make some sense. 

    fine. let's redo it. if Kellyanne posted the same video that this woman did, what would your HONEST reaction be? "no big deal"? "hey, she's destroying a gun! I think....". 

    do you not think this should at least be addressed? I mean, the potential for some kid watching that video and getting some bright idea.....
    The potential of some kid destroying a gun then turning into law enforcement? Why would I be worried about that? I would applaud that. If Donald Trump himself made that exact same video I would applaud him too.
    Again, you miss the fact that she did not destroy it.  She just made the barrel shorter.  It will still fire...
    She should have just given it to police to start with instead of committing a felony in the process of grandstanding.

    And you keep leaving out the whole story. The gun was inoperable before she cut the barrel, then they dismantled it and gave it to the police. That was the obvious plan all along, you are making this out to be something sinister because you don't agree with her politics. Nobody watching that video is thinking she is doing that to make the weapon illegal.
    how do you know the gun was inoperable before she cut the barrel?
    I don't. All I have to go on is her statement that is was, and I have no reason to not believe her. Do you know it was operable? 
    Video evidence shows that it “most likely” was operable, counter to her claim.  I pointed out some of the features that led me to this conclusion earlier.  
    There is more evidence that it is operable than there is of it not.

    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,979
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    dignin said:
    PJPOWER said:
    dignin said:
    dignin said:
    dignin said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    jeffbr said:
    dignin said:
    Common sense is gone if anyone thinks this woman should be penalized for destroying that gun. Idiot thread indeed.
    Well, I would agree in general and on the surface. But what you're saying is that it is OK to commit a crime as long as your intentions are good. That isn't how the rule of law works. She could have gone about this differently. She could have truly rendered the firearm inoperable to start with, and there would have been no issue. She could have ignorantly committed the federal offense privately, and taken the pieces to law enforcement, and it would be a non-issue. But she decided to publicly commit the crime and document it on video. If she'd simply cut the firearm in half this would be a non-issue. But she cut the barrel off. Anyone with a vague notion about gun laws knows that is a no-no. If she owned a firearm and was ignorant of one of the most basic laws, that is on her and she probably never should have possessed it. She may have cut the barrel off, and then proceeded to cut it into smaller pieces, but she still shortened the barrel of a functional firearm. Cut it in half first, and then cut those halves into smaller pieces. It may seem like a minor point, but again, publicly violating a well-known federal firearms law puts you in Trump-stupid territory.

    It seems you missed the part, “it was inoperable before I cut it.” Also, do you believe every gun owner knows all “basic” gun laws prior to or during gun ownership? 
    No evidence of that whatsoever ever in the video.  Looks like a fully functional ar-15 to me.  She is just saying that after the fact in a weak effort to cover her ass.  Anyways, it’s up to the ATF to decide now as literally thousands of people have already reported her.

    She didn't record it so it must not have happened.

    That's what you're going with?

    ...ok then...
    if Kellyanne Conway was caught with a bag of cocaine on her, and she tried to claim she found it and was on her way to turning into police, would you take her word for it? Whether she was telling the truth is irrelevant. would you believe her?

    I find it very interesting how quickly people are defending this woman. Isn't the law the law? Shouldn't our politicians be held to a standard of at LEAST not breaking the law, especially when it relates to proper handling and storage of a firearms?
    Again with the terrible drug analogies. 
    change "bag of cocaine" with "modified AR-15" then. 
    She wasn't caught with anything. 

    If she cut the barrel of the gun off and was later found in possession of the gun by police then came up with the "I was trying to destroy the gun" story then that analogy might make some sense. 

    fine. let's redo it. if Kellyanne posted the same video that this woman did, what would your HONEST reaction be? "no big deal"? "hey, she's destroying a gun! I think....". 

    do you not think this should at least be addressed? I mean, the potential for some kid watching that video and getting some bright idea.....
    The potential of some kid destroying a gun then turning into law enforcement? Why would I be worried about that? I would applaud that. If Donald Trump himself made that exact same video I would applaud him too.
    Again, you miss the fact that she did not destroy it.  She just made the barrel shorter.  It will still fire...
    She should have just given it to police to start with instead of committing a felony in the process of grandstanding.

    And you keep leaving out the whole story. The gun was inoperable before she cut the barrel, then they dismantled it and gave it to the police. That was the obvious plan all along, you are making this out to be something sinister because you don't agree with her politics. Nobody watching that video is thinking she is doing that to make the weapon illegal.
    It was inoperable because she said so after the fact?  And in the video, there is nothing validating that statement.  All parts that make it operable seem to be in place.  I didn’t miss her statement, there is just no proof validating it.  And once again, there is no “intent” written into the law.  It doesn’t matter what she was trying to do, it’s what she did that matters.  She created an SBR...plain and simple.
    There is nothing in the law that says “if you accidentally make an illegal firearm while trying to destroy it, it’s all good”

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

    Argument from ignorance, also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence") is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.
    So her statement has not been proven true or false, see how that works?  In other words, your statement holds no merit of truth  and mine doesn’t either regarding her statement regarding what happened before the video.  Cannot be validated.  But, the video itself displays evidence that the gun was not inoperable before she cut the barrel down.  The charging handle, lower receiver and stock are all in place.  

    ftfa:
    "Virginia Beach Police confirmed Thursday afternoon the gun was in their possession and waiting to be picked up by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives."

    If there was anyone to validate your accusations, it appears they have already been involved and declined to press any charges.


    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 4,422
    edited March 9
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    dignin said:
    PJPOWER said:
    dignin said:
    dignin said:
    dignin said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    jeffbr said:
    dignin said:
    Common sense is gone if anyone thinks this woman should be penalized for destroying that gun. Idiot thread indeed.
    Well, I would agree in general and on the surface. But what you're saying is that it is OK to commit a crime as long as your intentions are good. That isn't how the rule of law works. She could have gone about this differently. She could have truly rendered the firearm inoperable to start with, and there would have been no issue. She could have ignorantly committed the federal offense privately, and taken the pieces to law enforcement, and it would be a non-issue. But she decided to publicly commit the crime and document it on video. If she'd simply cut the firearm in half this would be a non-issue. But she cut the barrel off. Anyone with a vague notion about gun laws knows that is a no-no. If she owned a firearm and was ignorant of one of the most basic laws, that is on her and she probably never should have possessed it. She may have cut the barrel off, and then proceeded to cut it into smaller pieces, but she still shortened the barrel of a functional firearm. Cut it in half first, and then cut those halves into smaller pieces. It may seem like a minor point, but again, publicly violating a well-known federal firearms law puts you in Trump-stupid territory.

    It seems you missed the part, “it was inoperable before I cut it.” Also, do you believe every gun owner knows all “basic” gun laws prior to or during gun ownership? 
    No evidence of that whatsoever ever in the video.  Looks like a fully functional ar-15 to me.  She is just saying that after the fact in a weak effort to cover her ass.  Anyways, it’s up to the ATF to decide now as literally thousands of people have already reported her.

    She didn't record it so it must not have happened.

    That's what you're going with?

    ...ok then...
    if Kellyanne Conway was caught with a bag of cocaine on her, and she tried to claim she found it and was on her way to turning into police, would you take her word for it? Whether she was telling the truth is irrelevant. would you believe her?

    I find it very interesting how quickly people are defending this woman. Isn't the law the law? Shouldn't our politicians be held to a standard of at LEAST not breaking the law, especially when it relates to proper handling and storage of a firearms?
    Again with the terrible drug analogies. 
    change "bag of cocaine" with "modified AR-15" then. 
    She wasn't caught with anything. 

    If she cut the barrel of the gun off and was later found in possession of the gun by police then came up with the "I was trying to destroy the gun" story then that analogy might make some sense. 

    fine. let's redo it. if Kellyanne posted the same video that this woman did, what would your HONEST reaction be? "no big deal"? "hey, she's destroying a gun! I think....". 

    do you not think this should at least be addressed? I mean, the potential for some kid watching that video and getting some bright idea.....
    The potential of some kid destroying a gun then turning into law enforcement? Why would I be worried about that? I would applaud that. If Donald Trump himself made that exact same video I would applaud him too.
    Again, you miss the fact that she did not destroy it.  She just made the barrel shorter.  It will still fire...
    She should have just given it to police to start with instead of committing a felony in the process of grandstanding.

    And you keep leaving out the whole story. The gun was inoperable before she cut the barrel, then they dismantled it and gave it to the police. That was the obvious plan all along, you are making this out to be something sinister because you don't agree with her politics. Nobody watching that video is thinking she is doing that to make the weapon illegal.
    It was inoperable because she said so after the fact?  And in the video, there is nothing validating that statement.  All parts that make it operable seem to be in place.  I didn’t miss her statement, there is just no proof validating it.  And once again, there is no “intent” written into the law.  It doesn’t matter what she was trying to do, it’s whatthat matters.  She created an SBR...plain and simple.
    There is nothing in the law that says “if you accidentally make an illegal firearm while trying to destroy it, it’s all good”

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

    Argument from ignorance, also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence") is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.
    So her statement has not been proven true or false, see how that works?  In other words, your statement holds no merit of truth  and mine doesn’t either regarding her statement regarding what happened before the video.  Cannot be validated.  But, the video itself displays evidence that the gun was not inoperable before she cut the barrel down.  The charging handle, lower receiver and stock are all in place.  

    ftfa:
    "Virginia Beach Police confirmed Thursday afternoon the gun was in their possession and waiting to be picked up by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives."

    If there was anyone to validate your accusations, it appears they have already been involved and declined to press any charges.


    Why would they turn it over to the BATFE if there was no issue and the BATFE was not investigating?  Lol. This validates my accusation even further
    “VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. (WVEC) -- The Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is investigating congressional candidate Karen Mallard after she posted a video on Facebook that shows her cutting apart an AR-15 rifle”

    https://www.king5.com/amp/article?section=news&subsection=local&topic=mycity&subtopic=virginia-beach&headline=atf-investigating-after-congressional-candidate-cut-apart-ar-15&contentId=291-526898428
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,979
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    dignin said:
    PJPOWER said:
    dignin said:
    dignin said:
    dignin said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    jeffbr said:
    dignin said:
    Common sense is gone if anyone thinks this woman should be penalized for destroying that gun. Idiot thread indeed.
    Well, I would agree in general and on the surface. But what you're saying is that it is OK to commit a crime as long as your intentions are good. That isn't how the rule of law works. She could have gone about this differently. She could have truly rendered the firearm inoperable to start with, and there would have been no issue. She could have ignorantly committed the federal offense privately, and taken the pieces to law enforcement, and it would be a non-issue. But she decided to publicly commit the crime and document it on video. If she'd simply cut the firearm in half this would be a non-issue. But she cut the barrel off. Anyone with a vague notion about gun laws knows that is a no-no. If she owned a firearm and was ignorant of one of the most basic laws, that is on her and she probably never should have possessed it. She may have cut the barrel off, and then proceeded to cut it into smaller pieces, but she still shortened the barrel of a functional firearm. Cut it in half first, and then cut those halves into smaller pieces. It may seem like a minor point, but again, publicly violating a well-known federal firearms law puts you in Trump-stupid territory.

    It seems you missed the part, “it was inoperable before I cut it.” Also, do you believe every gun owner knows all “basic” gun laws prior to or during gun ownership? 
    No evidence of that whatsoever ever in the video.  Looks like a fully functional ar-15 to me.  She is just saying that after the fact in a weak effort to cover her ass.  Anyways, it’s up to the ATF to decide now as literally thousands of people have already reported her.

    She didn't record it so it must not have happened.

    That's what you're going with?

    ...ok then...
    if Kellyanne Conway was caught with a bag of cocaine on her, and she tried to claim she found it and was on her way to turning into police, would you take her word for it? Whether she was telling the truth is irrelevant. would you believe her?

    I find it very interesting how quickly people are defending this woman. Isn't the law the law? Shouldn't our politicians be held to a standard of at LEAST not breaking the law, especially when it relates to proper handling and storage of a firearms?
    Again with the terrible drug analogies. 
    change "bag of cocaine" with "modified AR-15" then. 
    She wasn't caught with anything. 

    If she cut the barrel of the gun off and was later found in possession of the gun by police then came up with the "I was trying to destroy the gun" story then that analogy might make some sense. 

    fine. let's redo it. if Kellyanne posted the same video that this woman did, what would your HONEST reaction be? "no big deal"? "hey, she's destroying a gun! I think....". 

    do you not think this should at least be addressed? I mean, the potential for some kid watching that video and getting some bright idea.....
    The potential of some kid destroying a gun then turning into law enforcement? Why would I be worried about that? I would applaud that. If Donald Trump himself made that exact same video I would applaud him too.
    Again, you miss the fact that she did not destroy it.  She just made the barrel shorter.  It will still fire...
    She should have just given it to police to start with instead of committing a felony in the process of grandstanding.

    And you keep leaving out the whole story. The gun was inoperable before she cut the barrel, then they dismantled it and gave it to the police. That was the obvious plan all along, you are making this out to be something sinister because you don't agree with her politics. Nobody watching that video is thinking she is doing that to make the weapon illegal.
    It was inoperable because she said so after the fact?  And in the video, there is nothing validating that statement.  All parts that make it operable seem to be in place.  I didn’t miss her statement, there is just no proof validating it.  And once again, there is no “intent” written into the law.  It doesn’t matter what she was trying to do, it’s whatthat matters.  She created an SBR...plain and simple.
    There is nothing in the law that says “if you accidentally make an illegal firearm while trying to destroy it, it’s all good”

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

    Argument from ignorance, also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence") is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.
    So her statement has not been proven true or false, see how that works?  In other words, your statement holds no merit of truth  and mine doesn’t either regarding her statement regarding what happened before the video.  Cannot be validated.  But, the video itself displays evidence that the gun was not inoperable before she cut the barrel down.  The charging handle, lower receiver and stock are all in place.  

    ftfa:
    "Virginia Beach Police confirmed Thursday afternoon the gun was in their possession and waiting to be picked up by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives."

    If there was anyone to validate your accusations, it appears they have already been involved and declined to press any charges.


    Why would they turn it over to the BATFE if there was no issue and the BATFE was not investigating?  Lol. This validates my accusation even further

    Sounds like standard operating procedure to dispose of a gun.

    Did you want her to put in the trash for next week's garbage day pick up?  Take it to the recycling center?  Ship it back to Colt's Manufacturing Company?
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 4,422
    edited March 9
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    dignin said:
    PJPOWER said:
    dignin said:
    dignin said:
    dignin said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    jeffbr said:
    dignin said:
    Common sense is gone if anyone thinks this woman should be penalized for destroying that gun. Idiot thread indeed.
    Well, I would agree in general and on the surface. But what you're saying is that it is OK to commit a crime as long as your intentions are good. That isn't how the rule of law works. She could have gone about this differently. She could have truly rendered the firearm inoperable to start with, and there would have been no issue. She could have ignorantly committed the federal offense privately, and taken the pieces to law enforcement, and it would be a non-issue. But she decided to publicly commit the crime and document it on video. If she'd simply cut the firearm in half this would be a non-issue. But she cut the barrel off. Anyone with a vague notion about gun laws knows that is a no-no. If she owned a firearm and was ignorant of one of the most basic laws, that is on her and she probably never should have possessed it. She may have cut the barrel off, and then proceeded to cut it into smaller pieces, but she still shortened the barrel of a functional firearm. Cut it in half first, and then cut those halves into smaller pieces. It may seem like a minor point, but again, publicly violating a well-known federal firearms law puts you in Trump-stupid territory.

    It seems you missed the part, “it was inoperable before I cut it.” Also, do you believe every gun owner knows all “basic” gun laws prior to or during gun ownership? 
    No evidence of that whatsoever ever in the video.  Looks like a fully functional ar-15 to me.  She is just saying that after the fact in a weak effort to cover her ass.  Anyways, it’s up to the ATF to decide now as literally thousands of people have already reported her.

    She didn't record it so it must not have happened.

    That's what you're going with?

    ...ok then...
    if Kellyanne Conway was caught with a bag of cocaine on her, and she tried to claim she found it and was on her way to turning into police, would you take her word for it? Whether she was telling the truth is irrelevant. would you believe her?

    I find it very interesting how quickly people are defending this woman. Isn't the law the law? Shouldn't our politicians be held to a standard of at LEAST not breaking the law, especially when it relates to proper handling and storage of a firearms?
    Again with the terrible drug analogies. 
    change "bag of cocaine" with "modified AR-15" then. 
    She wasn't caught with anything. 

    If she cut the barrel of the gun off and was later found in possession of the gun by police then came up with the "I was trying to destroy the gun" story then that analogy might make some sense. 

    fine. let's redo it. if Kellyanne posted the same video that this woman did, what would your HONEST reaction be? "no big deal"? "hey, she's destroying a gun! I think....". 

    do you not think this should at least be addressed? I mean, the potential for some kid watching that video and getting some bright idea.....
    The potential of some kid destroying a gun then turning into law enforcement? Why would I be worried about that? I would applaud that. If Donald Trump himself made that exact same video I would applaud him too.
    Again, you miss the fact that she did not destroy it.  She just made the barrel shorter.  It will still fire...
    She should have just given it to police to start with instead of committing a felony in the process of grandstanding.

    And you keep leaving out the whole story. The gun was inoperable before she cut the barrel, then they dismantled it and gave it to the police. That was the obvious plan all along, you are making this out to be something sinister because you don't agree with her politics. Nobody watching that video is thinking she is doing that to make the weapon illegal.
    It was inoperable because she said so after the fact?  And in the video, there is nothing validating that statement.  All parts that make it operable seem to be in place.  I didn’t miss her statement, there is just no proof validating it.  And once again, there is no “intent” written into the law.  It doesn’t matter what she was trying to do, it’s whatthat matters.  She created an SBR...plain and simple.
    There is nothing in the law that says “if you accidentally make an illegal firearm while trying to destroy it, it’s all good”

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

    Argument from ignorance, also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence") is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.
    So her statement has not been proven true or false, see how that works?  In other words, your statement holds no merit of truth  and mine doesn’t either regarding her statement regarding what happened before the video.  Cannot be validated.  But, the video itself displays evidence that the gun was not inoperable before she cut the barrel down.  The charging handle, lower receiver and stock are all in place.  

    ftfa:
    "Virginia Beach Police confirmed Thursday afternoon the gun was in their possession and waiting to be picked up by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives."

    If there was anyone to validate your accusations, it appears they have already been involved and declined to press any charges.


    Why would they turn it over to the BATFE if there was no issue and the BATFE was not investigating?  Lol. This validates my accusation even further

    Sounds like standard operating procedure to dispose of a gun.

    Did you want her to put in the trash for next week's garbage day pick up?  Take it to the recycling center?  Ship it back to Colt's Manufacturing Company?
    Not standard operating procedure:
    https://www.king5.com/amp/article?section=news&subsection=local&topic=mycity&subtopic=virginia-beach&headline=atf-investigating-after-congressional-candidate-cut-apart-ar-15&contentId=291-526898428
    “The Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is investigating congressional candidate Karen Mallard after she posted a video on Facebook that shows her cutting apart an AR-15 rifle.”

    I think that the law enforcement agency would just destroy it or auction it off if it wasn’t an illegal firearm...but instead, they thought the BATFE should look into it?l
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 4,422
    This article shows the proper procedure for destroying a firearm if anyone is interested and wants to avoid committing a felony:
    https://virginia.ourcommunitynow.com/news/karen-mallard-rifle-felony/
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,979
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:

    Sounds like standard operating procedure to dispose of a gun.

    Did you want her to put in the trash for next week's garbage day pick up?  Take it to the recycling center?  Ship it back to Colt's Manufacturing Company?
    Not standard operating procedure:
    https://www.king5.com/amp/article?section=news&subsection=local&topic=mycity&subtopic=virginia-beach&headline=atf-investigating-after-congressional-candidate-cut-apart-ar-15&contentId=291-526898428
    “The Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is investigating congressional candidate Karen Mallard after she posted a video on Facebook that shows her cutting apart an AR-15 rifle.”

    I think that the law enforcement agency would just destroy it or auction it off if it wasn’t an illegal firearm...but instead, they thought the BATFE should look into it?l

    They probably have some obligation to investigate because a bunch of gun nuts reported her.  

    If the ATF didn't investigate, you'd have a bunch of gun nuts screaming about the deep state or some other dumb crap.

    I look forward the ATF's statement: "We've looked into the situation and closed our file, thank you for your concern."
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 4,422
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:

    Sounds like standard operating procedure to dispose of a gun.

    Did you want her to put in the trash for next week's garbage day pick up?  Take it to the recycling center?  Ship it back to Colt's Manufacturing Company?
    Not standard operating procedure:
    https://www.king5.com/amp/article?section=news&subsection=local&topic=mycity&subtopic=virginia-beach&headline=atf-investigating-after-congressional-candidate-cut-apart-ar-15&contentId=291-526898428
    “The Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is investigating congressional candidate Karen Mallard after she posted a video on Facebook that shows her cutting apart an AR-15 rifle.”

    I think that the law enforcement agency would just destroy it or auction it off if it wasn’t an illegal firearm...but instead, they thought the BATFE should look into it?l

    They probably have some obligation to investigate because a bunch of gun nuts reported her.  

    If the ATF didn't investigate, you'd have a bunch of gun nuts screaming about the deep state or some other dumb crap.

    I look forward the ATF's statement: "We've looked into the situation and closed our file, thank you for your concern."
    I look forward to her not being allowed to run for Congress because she has a felony on her record.  But you’re right, totally up to the ATF at this point.  

    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • tbergstbergs Posts: 5,179
    The difference seems to be who are we willing to believe and give a benefit of the doubt to. In this case, some think Mallard should get the benefit of the doubt. I don't know her and have nothing to base any trust on, whereas a Donald Trump and Kellyane Conway have been shown to lie about any little thing they can no matter how obvious the lie. Credibility matters and in this case I am neutral until I hear otherwise.

    I think it needs to be followed up on by someone in LE if it hasn't already happened so Mallard understands the confusion her video may create for those unfamiliar with gun laws.  
    It's a hopeless situation...
  • dignindignin Posts: 6,635
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:

    Sounds like standard operating procedure to dispose of a gun.

    Did you want her to put in the trash for next week's garbage day pick up?  Take it to the recycling center?  Ship it back to Colt's Manufacturing Company?
    Not standard operating procedure:
    https://www.king5.com/amp/article?section=news&subsection=local&topic=mycity&subtopic=virginia-beach&headline=atf-investigating-after-congressional-candidate-cut-apart-ar-15&contentId=291-526898428
    “The Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is investigating congressional candidate Karen Mallard after she posted a video on Facebook that shows her cutting apart an AR-15 rifle.”

    I think that the law enforcement agency would just destroy it or auction it off if it wasn’t an illegal firearm...but instead, they thought the BATFE should look into it?l

    They probably have some obligation to investigate because a bunch of gun nuts reported her.  

    If the ATF didn't investigate, you'd have a bunch of gun nuts screaming about the deep state or some other dumb crap.

    I look forward the ATF's statement: "We've looked into the situation and closed our file, thank you for your concern."
    The headline of the article was more clickbait I'm sure. When you read the whole article it says nothing about the investigation till the very end.

    Master Police Officer Tonya Pierce, spokeswoman for the Virginia Beach Police Department, confirmed that the rifle was in the department's possession. Pierce told 13News Now the ATF was looking into the situation.

    That's it. 
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 17,429
    Funny thing is, I hadn’t even heard of her until the gun nutters nutted and went nuts.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 4,422
    Funny thing is, I hadn’t even heard of her until the gun nutters nutted and went nuts.
    Same here, I had never heard of her until she committed a felony and recorded it.
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 17,429
    PJPOWER said:
    Funny thing is, I hadn’t even heard of her until the gun nutters nutted and went nuts.
    Same here, I had never heard of her until she committed a felony and recorded it.
    You’re convinced of the felony, eh? Wonder how you’d respond had it been a repube?
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 16,136
    tbergs said:
    The difference seems to be who are we willing to believe and give a benefit of the doubt to. In this case, some think Mallard should get the benefit of the doubt. I don't know her and have nothing to base any trust on, whereas a Donald Trump and Kellyane Conway have been shown to lie about any little thing they can no matter how obvious the lie. Credibility matters and in this case I am neutral until I hear otherwise.

    I think it needs to be followed up on by someone in LE if it hasn't already happened so Mallard understands the confusion her video may create for those unfamiliar with gun laws.  
    agree 100%. I, for one, have not claimed that she was guilty or innocent. the video warranted an investigation of sorts. if that has or will happen, then good. 
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 4,422
    tbergs said:
    The difference seems to be who are we willing to believe and give a benefit of the doubt to. In this case, some think Mallard should get the benefit of the doubt. I don't know her and have nothing to base any trust on, whereas a Donald Trump and Kellyane Conway have been shown to lie about any little thing they can no matter how obvious the lie. Credibility matters and in this case I am neutral until I hear otherwise.

    I think it needs to be followed up on by someone in LE if it hasn't already happened so Mallard understands the confusion her video may create for those unfamiliar with gun laws.  
    agree 100%. I, for one, have not claimed that she was guilty or innocent. the video warranted an investigation of sorts. if that has or will happen, then good. 
    Agreed for the most part.  I just believe that law makers should be held to high standards on knowing laws and made examples of when they break them.
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    dignin said:
    PJPOWER said:
    dignin said:
    dignin said:
    dignin said:
    CM189191 said:
    PJPOWER said:
    jeffbr said:
    dignin said:
    Common sense is gone if anyone thinks this woman should be penalized for destroying that gun. Idiot thread indeed.
    Well, I would agree in general and on the surface. But what you're saying is that it is OK to commit a crime as long as your intentions are good. That isn't how the rule of law works. She could have gone about this differently. She could have truly rendered the firearm inoperable to start with, and there would have been no issue. She could have ignorantly committed the federal offense privately, and taken the pieces to law enforcement, and it would be a non-issue. But she decided to publicly commit the crime and document it on video. If she'd simply cut the firearm in half this would be a non-issue. But she cut the barrel off. Anyone with a vague notion about gun laws knows that is a no-no. If she owned a firearm and was ignorant of one of the most basic laws, that is on her and she probably never should have possessed it. She may have cut the barrel off, and then proceeded to cut it into smaller pieces, but she still shortened the barrel of a functional firearm. Cut it in half first, and then cut those halves into smaller pieces. It may seem like a minor point, but again, publicly violating a well-known federal firearms law puts you in Trump-stupid territory.

    It seems you missed the part, “it was inoperable before I cut it.” Also, do you believe every gun owner knows all “basic” gun laws prior to or during gun ownership? 
    No evidence of that whatsoever ever in the video.  Looks like a fully functional ar-15 to me.  She is just saying that after the fact in a weak effort to cover her ass.  Anyways, it’s up to the ATF to decide now as literally thousands of people have already reported her.

    She didn't record it so it must not have happened.

    That's what you're going with?

    ...ok then...
    if Kellyanne Conway was caught with a bag of cocaine on her, and she tried to claim she found it and was on her way to turning into police, would you take her word for it? Whether she was telling the truth is irrelevant. would you believe her?

    I find it very interesting how quickly people are defending this woman. Isn't the law the law? Shouldn't our politicians be held to a standard of at LEAST not breaking the law, especially when it relates to proper handling and storage of a firearms?
    Again with the terrible drug analogies. 
    change "bag of cocaine" with "modified AR-15" then. 
    She wasn't caught with anything. 

    If she cut the barrel of the gun off and was later found in possession of the gun by police then came up with the "I was trying to destroy the gun" story then that analogy might make some sense. 

    fine. let's redo it. if Kellyanne posted the same video that this woman did, what would your HONEST reaction be? "no big deal"? "hey, she's destroying a gun! I think....". 

    do you not think this should at least be addressed? I mean, the potential for some kid watching that video and getting some bright idea.....
    The potential of some kid destroying a gun then turning into law enforcement? Why would I be worried about that? I would applaud that. If Donald Trump himself made that exact same video I would applaud him too.
    Again, you miss the fact that she did not destroy it.  She just made the barrel shorter.  It will still fire...
    She should have just given it to police to start with instead of committing a felony in the process of grandstanding.

    And you keep leaving out the whole story. The gun was inoperable before she cut the barrel, then they dismantled it and gave it to the police. That was the obvious plan all along, you are making this out to be something sinister because you don't agree with her politics. Nobody watching that video is thinking she is doing that to make the weapon illegal.

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

    Argument from ignorance, also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence") is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.
    So her statement has not been proven true or false, see how that works?  In other words, your statement holds no merit of truth  and mine doesn’t either regarding her statement regarding what happened before the video.  Cannot be validated.  But, the video itself displays evidence that the gun was not inoperable before she cut the barrel down.  The charging handle, lower receiver and stock are all in place.  

    ftfa:
    "Virginia Beach Police confirmed Thursday afternoon the gun was in their possession and waiting to be picked up by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives."

    If there was anyone to validate your accusations, it appears they have already been involved and declined to press any charges.


    Why would they turn it over to the BATFE if there was no issue and the BATFE was not investigating?  Lol. This validates my accusation even further

    Sounds like standard operating procedure to dispose of a gun.

    Did you want her to put in the trash for next week's garbage day pick up?  Take it to the recycling center?  Ship it back to Colt's Manufacturing Company?
    Not standard operating procedure:
    https://www.king5.com/amp/article?section=news&subsection=local&topic=mycity&subtopic=virginia-beach&headline=atf-investigating-after-congressional-candidate-cut-apart-ar-15&contentId=291-526898428
    “The Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is investigating congressional candidate Karen Mallard after she posted a video on Facebook that shows her cutting apart an AR-15 rifle.”

    I think that the law enforcement agency would just destroy it or auction it off if it wasn’t an illegal firearm...but instead, they thought the BATFE should look into it?l

    Auction it off? So keep it in circulation? Kind of defeats the purpose don't you think?

    I can see why people are so up in arms over this though... some Americans place the value of guns over the value of children. This mutilation of the AR15 was likely shocking to some.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 19,820
    Miami Beach Nightclub Shut Down After a Bikini-Clad Woman Rode Horse Onto Dance Floor - People https://apple.news/Arjnj6W95RoOgGXU_LyuDyA
    This kind of stuff makes me sick , she should be charged with cruelty to an animal !
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • AnnafalkAnnafalk SwedenPosts: 3,762
    Miami Beach Nightclub Shut Down After a Bikini-Clad Woman Rode Horse Onto Dance Floor - People https://apple.news/Arjnj6W95RoOgGXU_LyuDyA
    This kind of stuff makes me sick , she should be charged with cruelty to an animal !
    Makes me sick too, this woman must have zero brain cells. 
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 4,422
    Miami Beach Nightclub Shut Down After a Bikini-Clad Woman Rode Horse Onto Dance Floor - People https://apple.news/Arjnj6W95RoOgGXU_LyuDyA
    This kind of stuff makes me sick , she should be charged with cruelty to an animal !
    Horse can’t handle its liquor...seen this all too many times, lol. Seriously, though, how idiotic and cruel.
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 16,136
    PJPOWER said:
    tbergs said:
    The difference seems to be who are we willing to believe and give a benefit of the doubt to. In this case, some think Mallard should get the benefit of the doubt. I don't know her and have nothing to base any trust on, whereas a Donald Trump and Kellyane Conway have been shown to lie about any little thing they can no matter how obvious the lie. Credibility matters and in this case I am neutral until I hear otherwise.

    I think it needs to be followed up on by someone in LE if it hasn't already happened so Mallard understands the confusion her video may create for those unfamiliar with gun laws.  
    agree 100%. I, for one, have not claimed that she was guilty or innocent. the video warranted an investigation of sorts. if that has or will happen, then good. 
    Agreed for the most part.  I just believe that law makers should be held to high standards on knowing laws and made examples of when they break them.
    i agree with that as well. 
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 9,028
    PJPOWER said:
    tbergs said:
    The difference seems to be who are we willing to believe and give a benefit of the doubt to. In this case, some think Mallard should get the benefit of the doubt. I don't know her and have nothing to base any trust on, whereas a Donald Trump and Kellyane Conway have been shown to lie about any little thing they can no matter how obvious the lie. Credibility matters and in this case I am neutral until I hear otherwise.

    I think it needs to be followed up on by someone in LE if it hasn't already happened so Mallard understands the confusion her video may create for those unfamiliar with gun laws.  
    agree 100%. I, for one, have not claimed that she was guilty or innocent. the video warranted an investigation of sorts. if that has or will happen, then good. 
    Agreed for the most part.  I just believe that law makers should be held to high standards on knowing laws and made examples of when they break them.
    Oh, I hope that applies to Trump, too.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • dignindignin Posts: 6,635
    PJPOWER said:
    tbergs said:
    The difference seems to be who are we willing to believe and give a benefit of the doubt to. In this case, some think Mallard should get the benefit of the doubt. I don't know her and have nothing to base any trust on, whereas a Donald Trump and Kellyane Conway have been shown to lie about any little thing they can no matter how obvious the lie. Credibility matters and in this case I am neutral until I hear otherwise.

    I think it needs to be followed up on by someone in LE if it hasn't already happened so Mallard understands the confusion her video may create for those unfamiliar with gun laws.  
    agree 100%. I, for one, have not claimed that she was guilty or innocent. the video warranted an investigation of sorts. if that has or will happen, then good. 
    Agreed for the most part.  I just believe that law makers should be held to high standards on knowing laws and made examples of when they break them.
    Oh, I hope that applies to Trump, too.
    Nah, he has an R beside his name. Everything's cool.
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 4,422
    PJPOWER said:
    tbergs said:
    The difference seems to be who are we willing to believe and give a benefit of the doubt to. In this case, some think Mallard should get the benefit of the doubt. I don't know her and have nothing to base any trust on, whereas a Donald Trump and Kellyane Conway have been shown to lie about any little thing they can no matter how obvious the lie. Credibility matters and in this case I am neutral until I hear otherwise.

    I think it needs to be followed up on by someone in LE if it hasn't already happened so Mallard understands the confusion her video may create for those unfamiliar with gun laws.  
    agree 100%. I, for one, have not claimed that she was guilty or innocent. the video warranted an investigation of sorts. if that has or will happen, then good. 
    Agreed for the most part.  I just believe that law makers should be held to high standards on knowing laws and made examples of when they break them.
    Oh, I hope that applies to Trump, too.
    It absolutely applies to Trump too.
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • BentleyspopBentleyspop Craft Beer Brewery, ColoradoPosts: 5,638
    Another anti-Semitic conspiracy theory idiot.....

    DC Lawmaker Blames Winter Storms On Jewish Bankers Who Control The Weather
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 17,429
    Another anti-Semitic conspiracy theory idiot.....

    DC Lawmaker Blames Winter Storms On Jewish Bankers Who Control The Weather
    Because money and weather just go together? WTF?
     
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Thirty Bills UnpaidThirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 15,751
    edited March 19
    Another anti-Semitic conspiracy theory idiot.....

    DC Lawmaker Blames Winter Storms On Jewish Bankers Who Control The Weather
    He apologized to the Jewish community, but he really needed to apologize for being such a moron. Holy crap, man. That is dumb.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • KatKat There's a lot to be said for nowhere.Posts: 3,455
    Gee, no one saw this coming. :( Condolences to the family and friends and I have to hope that when the family sues, they win BIG. 

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/self-driving-uber-involved-in-pedestrian-death-in-arizona_us_5aafeabbe4b0697dfe193348



    "Well, as far as I know, music makes people happy. I know it makes me happy." -- Fats Domino
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 9,028
    Kat said:
    Gee, no one saw this coming. :( Condolences to the family and friends and I have to hope that when the family sues, they win BIG. 

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/self-driving-uber-involved-in-pedestrian-death-in-arizona_us_5aafeabbe4b0697dfe193348



    That is sad, but the reality is that cars operated by humans hit and kill many, many people every day. It is extremely likely that driverless cars will injure and kill fewer people, but it will never be zero. 
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 44,241
    Kat said:
    Gee, no one saw this coming. :( Condolences to the family and friends and I have to hope that when the family sues, they win BIG. 

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/self-driving-uber-involved-in-pedestrian-death-in-arizona_us_5aafeabbe4b0697dfe193348



    That is sad, but the reality is that cars operated by humans hit and kill many, many people every day. It is extremely likely that driverless cars will injure and kill fewer people, but it will never be zero. 
    I agree. Driverless cars are WAAAAY safer than human operated ones. Nothing is ever 100%, but driverless sure gets us closer to it than dumb human drivers ever will. I hope we're ALL driverless in my lifetime... it will shrink accidents/traffic deaths to a tiny number, and it will also pretty much elimimate all traffic jams. I honestly could not care less about people "liking" the control they have as drivers, considering the benefits of getting the wheel out of all their hands.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • dankinddankind I am not your foot. Posts: 12,496
    edited March 19
Sign In or Register to comment.