Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

I saw a darkie breaking into the house across the street...Follow

#527 Jul 30 2009 at 7:31 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Kavekk wrote:

Do me! Do me!
Smiley: oyvey
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#528 Jul 30 2009 at 7:40 AM Rating: Good
The One and Only toohotforu wrote:
Kavekk wrote:
Quote:
I think that's what will happen to Pensive. Except the guy will be a girl. And he will @#%^ her.

Anyone else wants their future read?


Do me! Do me!


I'm next!


I doubt you'll have to wait. I've heard Red likes to do two at a time.

He's very efficient.
#529 Jul 30 2009 at 7:52 AM Rating: Good
Kavekk wrote:
Quote:
I think that's what will happen to Pensive. Except the guy will be a girl. And he will @#%^ her.

Anyone else wants their future read?


Do me! Do me!


Kavekk: You will have a successful and disinguished career in Academia, thanks to your ground-breaking work on the use of nano-technology to implant annoyingly repetitve and yet catchy pop songs into the conscious of any individual, thereby replicating the famous "I've got this song stuck in my head", except that this time it will be of your making, and the song will be of your own choosing. The ramifications of this discovery will get you a Nobel Prize in Fertility Analysis (it's only one they had left this year).

Unfortunately, while acting as Chair of the Nano-Ferto-Techno-Science Institute at Oxford University, you will fall in love with a student. She will teach you many things in the field of love and romance and frivolous things, and you will thereby diversify your sources of learning, and fuck her.

Toohotforyou: I would do you, but I'm afraid my gf will get jealous.


Edited, Jul 30th 2009 3:54pm by RedPhoenixxx
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#530 Jul 30 2009 at 8:01 AM Rating: Good
RedPhoenixxx wrote:


Toohotforyou: I would do you, but I'm afraid my gf will get jealous.


Its cool, she can join.
#531 Jul 30 2009 at 8:02 AM Rating: Good
Red wrote:
Unfortunately, while acting as Chair of the Nano-Ferto-Techno-Science Institute at Oxford University, you will fall in love with a student. She will teach you many things in the field of love and romance and frivolous things, and you will thereby diversify your sources of learning, and **** her.


Nothing quite like a happy ending.

You know, I think this is why I failed as a fortune teller. I kept telling people they were going to die horribly, or accidentally commit genocide.
#532 Jul 30 2009 at 8:13 AM Rating: Excellent
Toohotforyou wrote:
Its cool, she can join.


I can't wait for the virtual-sex feature to be added to the Zam network.

Quote:
You know, I think this is why I failed as a fortune teller. I kept telling people they were going to die horribly, or accidentally commit genocide.


Well, with that kind of attitude, maybe you should be an insurance salesman. Ask Varrus for tips. And then discard them.
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#533REDACTED, Posted: Jul 30 2009 at 8:18 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Mindel,
#534 Jul 30 2009 at 9:10 AM Rating: Good
publiusvarus wrote:
Raving racist professor was arrested for disorderly conduct because <shock> he was being disorderly. The nerve of the police.



According to MA law, no he wasn't.
#535REDACTED, Posted: Jul 30 2009 at 10:38 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Tulip,
#536 Jul 30 2009 at 10:52 AM Rating: Decent
publiusvarus wrote:
Tulip,

Quote:
According to MA law, no he wasn't.


According to the police dept yes he was.
So the police are allowed to enforce laws inaccurately?
#537 Jul 30 2009 at 10:53 AM Rating: Good
publiusvarus wrote:
Tulip,

Quote:
According to MA law, no he wasn't.


According to the police dept yes he was.

Remember civics class, dear. The legislature makes the laws, the judiciary interprets them, and the executive enforces them. In this case the legislature created a disorderly conduct law and the judiciary interpreted those laws to exclude the simple act of badmouthing a cop from the definition of the crime, so when the police officer (agent of the executive) arrested him, he was incorrect, which is why the charges were dropped. Smiley: schooled

Edited, Jul 30th 2009 2:53pm by Mindel
#538 Jul 30 2009 at 11:02 AM Rating: Decent
Mindel,

Quote:
Remember civics class, dear. The legislature makes the laws, the judiciary interprets them, and the executive enforces them.


That's so cute. Now in reality the legislature creates laws that are written in such a way as to be interpeted any which way. The Judiciary also makes laws and the executive branch interpret and enforce laws whatever way they like.


Quote:
In this case the legislature created a disorderly conduct law and the judiciary interpreted those laws to exclude the simple act of badmouthing a cop from the definition of the crime


How about harassing a cop and being a public nuisance? Gates did after all follow the cop outside as the cop was leaving.

Quote:
when the police officer (agent of the executive) arrested him, he was incorrect, which is why the charges were dropped.


The police officer was correct. And charges are dropped all the time simply because the state decides not to pursue them; it has nothing to do with guilt or innocence. In this case it was going to be less of hassle not to pursue this any further. This doesn't mean Gates was innocent of anything.

Thanks for playing.
#539 Jul 30 2009 at 11:11 AM Rating: Decent
publiusvarus wrote:

Thanks for playing.


When did you stop throwing direct insults and become somewhat witty? I'm a little scared atm.
#540 Jul 30 2009 at 11:18 AM Rating: Default
toot,

Quote:
When did you stop throwing direct insults and become somewhat witty?


4yrs 75 days 11hr 36..37..38 seconds ago

#541 Jul 30 2009 at 11:33 AM Rating: Good
publiusvarus wrote:
toot,

Quote:
When did you stop throwing direct insults and become somewhat witty?


4yrs 75 days 11hr 36..37..38 seconds ago



Good to know. Thanks for the update.... Carry-on.

Edited, Jul 30th 2009 3:33pm by toohotforu
#542 Jul 30 2009 at 12:06 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,359 posts
RedPhoenixxx wrote:
Goggy wrote:
It's not often I agree with Pensive.


Pensive is clever, and I agree with him more often than not, but I think he needs to go out a bit more. He's a bit like the guy in the Alchemist who spends all this time reading books. But then he meets the guy who gets all his views from the outside world, and they both realise that they need to diversify their sources of learning.

I think that's what will happen to Pensive. Except the guy will be a girl. And he will fuck her.[/i]


I appreciate both the sentiment and characterization, but I thought that the portrayal of Fatima in that book was possibly the most sexist thing I had read all year, in an otherwise decent allegory, so let's make it a bit more equal opportunity and say that she will fuck me.

Edited, Jul 30th 2009 4:08pm by Pensive
#543 Jul 31 2009 at 1:37 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,229 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
And charges are dropped all the time simply because the state decides not to pursue them; it has nothing to do with guilt or innocence. In this case it was going to be less of hassle not to pursue this any further. This doesn't mean Gates was innocent of anything.


Or perhaps charges are dropped all the time, much like the DPP here, because the police officer submitted a case that tip-toes around the edges of the offence for which Gates was charged and to bring a successful prosecution would required a jury of twelve hooded disciples?
#544 Jul 31 2009 at 7:00 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,909 posts
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
zepoodle wrote:
I thought that went without saying.

Edit: What I mean is that all cops do that. It's like, eighty percent of what cops do. Presumably, it was what Crowley tried first with Gates, but I guess it didn't work. That was what I meant when I said

Me wrote:
It just so happens that when Bob Random is telling Joe Cop to go @#%^ himself and he refuses to shut up, then the best possible option in regards to keeping the peace is to temporarily arrest Bob Random


If someone's dead set on starting a fight with a policeman and doesn't back down or react to mediation, then arrest is the last option. That's not entirely what I think happened here. The responsibility for the whole shebang here lies heavily with Crowley for overreacting to Gate's behaviour. The point I was getting across is that the cop certainly can't fight back in the situation. He's expected to be nice when other people are rude.


So why did he arrest him? Wouldn't have just climbing back into his police car and driving away kept the peace? Especially when it was decided that no law was broken?


If you read what I actually said: I don't think Crowley should have acted the way he did in that situation. He could quite easily have driven away and the peace would have been preserved. I think he overreacted. I don't know how many times I have to say it, but I think both parties share the blame here. Gates overreacted in arguing with the cop, and the cop overreacted in arresting Gates. It's a case of mutual overreaction.

Police don't arrest people as their first recourse when dealing with angry people. It's inefficient and troublesome. I was just trying to explain to Pensive that they can do so if they absolutely have to, and that this is part of a policeman's job and in no way violates a citizen's basic rights to free speech.

Edit: I've actually got six pints in me right now, so if anything I said made no sense, just shout out and I'll repeat it when I'm sober-er.


Edited, Jul 31st 2009 3:01pm by zepoodle
#545 Jul 31 2009 at 7:05 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,229 posts
zepoodle wrote:
Police don't arrest people as their first recourse when dealing with angry people. It's inefficient and troublesome.


Clearly you've never policed a football match.

zepoodle wrote:
Edit: I've actually got six pints in me right now, so if anything I said made no sense, just shout out and I'll repeat it when I'm sober-er.


6 pints of what? You know what happened to Mark Almond right?
#546 Jul 31 2009 at 7:38 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,909 posts
Goggy wrote:
Clearly you've never policed a football match.


I can't say I've ever policed anything. Keep this in mind.

Quote:
6 pints of what? You know what happened to Mark Almond right?


A-who with the what now?
#547 Jul 31 2009 at 7:53 AM Rating: Decent
When policing a football match, it's important to channel people into inescapable cul-de-sacs and then, when they're crammed in to breaking point, yell "who's up against teh wall now, yer commies?!"

When on traffic control, it's best to tazer anyone you stop, just in case. Besides, that tazer costs a lot of money, it'd be a shame if you never used it.

Basically, the goal of the average police officer is to brutalise as many people as possible. Police officers? All thugs, without a single exception. The average officer is as likely to lead a mounted charge on an old granny as help her across the road.
#548REDACTED, Posted: Aug 02 2009 at 10:10 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Hate to rehash this thread, but just saw this:
#549 Aug 02 2009 at 10:23 PM Rating: Decent
*****
10,359 posts
The man receives death threats, bomb threats, and accusations of being racist, as well as (purportedly) having had an amicable meeting with the sgt, good things to say about him, is planning to make a documentary about how "you can have two equally valid perceptions of the same event," and you choose to intuit that his motivations are nothing more than the intent to create publicity for a book?
#550 Aug 02 2009 at 11:43 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,909 posts
Every citizen, black or white, has the right to get annoyed when Varus sends them poorly worded death threats.
#551 Aug 03 2009 at 12:57 AM Rating: Decent
Heh. My rule of thumb:

Police officers have things that hurt me. Therefore, regardless of my rights in such a situation, never would I **** with one.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 284 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (284)