Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Antifa [Mod Warning on post #1 - updated 08/08/19]

Options
1…300301302303305

Comments

  • Options
    #9122
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,205 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    sabat wrote: »
    violence
    /ˈvʌɪəl(ə)ns/
    Learn to pronounce
    noun
    1.
    behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

    damaging property is not a violent crime in any jurisdiction i am aware of. only crimes against the person are considered violence. perhaps you can do a little better than a dictionary definition and point to something in new york law that says crimes against property are considered violent crime.


  • Options
    #9123
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,890 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    “It's also important to realize that while vandalism, on its own, is often considered a non-violent crime, it may be accompanied with other crimes or even escalate to more serious crimes. Crimes they may be related to vandalism include burglary, criminal trespass, or disturbing the peace.Apr 5, 2019”


  • Options
    #9124
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,426 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    what about damaging police cameras constitutes violence?

    What about damaging anything constitutes a worthwhile endeavour?

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #9125
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,205 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nullzero wrote: »
    What about damaging anything constitutes a worthwhile endeavour?

    was that supposed to be an answer or is it the stupid non-sequitur that it appears?


  • Options
    #9126
    mynamejeff
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,315 ✭✭✭mynamejeff


    Overheal wrote: »
    Police ‘have enough to do’ - so they use what, a dozen or more cops to arrest her by dragging her kicking and screaming into an unmarked van? Ridiculous excuse and entirely counterproductive

    policing expert now too ?

    any qualifications ?

    because you don't like the police and how they do their jobs does not make you right or even relevant


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9127
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,890 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    mynamejeff wrote: »
    policing expert now too ?

    any qualifications ?

    because you don't like the police and how they do their jobs does not make you right or even relevant
    Why don’t you ask ExMachina1000 this same question? They having claimed without authority the police “have enough to do.”

    Transparent bias is clouding your sense of logic here. Your ad hominem is logically invalid and what’s more applied inconsistently.

    Your claim that my background is irrelevant, is itself irrelevant: nothing I said is untrue. A waste of a dozen cops time to commit an ‘arrest’ that will cause more problems for NYPD than it purported to solve, by objective measure. Protests will escalate in New York in direct response to this fiasco. They shot themselves in the foot and you don’t need a criminal law degree to see it.


  • Options
    #9128
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,426 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    was that supposed to be an answer or is it the stupid non-sequitur that it appears?

    It's a simple question.

    When is damaging things worthwhile?

    You may want to work on your manners.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #9129
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,890 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    nullzero wrote: »
    It's a simple question.

    When is damaging things worthwhile?

    You may want to work on your manners.

    You’re nobody to lecture anyone on manners. Still questioning my state of mind? :rolleyes: Hypocrisy.


  • Options
    #9130
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,205 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nullzero wrote: »
    It's a simple question.

    When is damaging things worthwhile?

    You may want to work on your manners.

    what does that have to do with whether a crime is violent or not? and my manners are fine thanks. they just get stretched sometimes by posters who continually ask stupid questions.


  • Options
    #9131
    mynamejeff
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,315 ✭✭✭mynamejeff


    Overheal wrote: »
    Why don’t you ask ExMachina1000 this same question? They having claimed without authority the police “have enough to do.”

    Transparent bias is clouding your sense of logic here. Your ad hominem is logically invalid and what’s more applied inconsistently.

    lol so you have no qualification or expertise or infact what the policing situation is in the US right now , or at any stage in the past

    can you admit that ?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9132
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,426 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    Overheal wrote: »
    You’re nobody to lecture anyone on manners. Still questioning my state of mind? :rolleyes: Hypocrisy.

    Nice of you to weigh in and make this all about you.

    Incidentally, for anyone who hasn't been glued to our tiresome interactions, I questioned your state of mind after you said stabbing somebody with a 7 inch bladed knife was a reasonable form of self defence.

    In relation to the question I asked, do you have an opinion on destruction of property being a worthwhile endeavour or do you want to endlessly bring up arguments we have been asked to stop having?

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #9133
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,426 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    what does that have to do with whether a crime is violent or not? and my manners are fine thanks. they just get stretched sometimes by posters who continually ask stupid questions.

    I don't believe the issue here is violence, if you had taken the time to ask my opinion. Criminal damage is a crime also, which is what I wanted to discuss. You just wanted to badger somebody for using the term violence out of context.

    When you refer to a person and their opinions as stupid it doesn't equate to being mannerly.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #9134
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,890 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    mynamejeff wrote: »
    lol so you have no qualification or expertise or infact what the policing situation is in the US right now , or at any stage in the past

    can you admit that ?

    Of course. Does anyone here? Yet we are discussing it. You’re dredging for deflections because you don’t like the simple truth: NYPD royally fcuked up. Now NYPD is back in the national news cycle, the mayor is calling it a disaster, Congress is calling for answers and so are state and local authorities.

    Unless you are claiming to be a subject matter expert in law enforcement I’m entirely oblivious to what point you think you’ve scored here.

    https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2020/07/29/protester-nikki-stone-released-after-arrest-in-unmarked-van/


  • Options
    #9135
    mynamejeff
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,315 ✭✭✭mynamejeff


    Overheal wrote: »

    Your claim that my background is irrelevant, is itself irrelevant: nothing I said is untrue. A waste of a dozen cops time to commit an ‘arrest’ that will cause more problems for NYPD than it purported to solve, by objective measure. Protests will escalate in New York in direct response to this fiasco. They shot themselves in the foot and you don’t need a criminal law degree to see it.

    well obviously your background and qualifications are relevant if you think that the police are supposed to ignore crime because it might upset criminals to be arrested .
    its already been explained to you why this sort of arrest is made in these circumstances just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong


  • Options
    #9136
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,890 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    nullzero wrote: »
    Nice of you to weigh in and make this all about you.

    Incidentally, for anyone who hasn't been glued to our tiresome interactions, I questioned your state of mind after you said stabbing somebody with a 7 inch bladed knife was a reasonable form of self defence.

    In relation to the question I asked, do you have an opinion on destruction of property being a worthwhile endeavour or do you want to endlessly bring up arguments we have been asked to stop having?

    And there you go making it about me, as you complain about making it about me.

    You’re upset I’ve called out your hypocrisy for lecturing others on here about civility and mannerism while you double down on being uncivil and unmannerly yourself. We see you. That’s all.


  • Options
    #9137
    mynamejeff
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,315 ✭✭✭mynamejeff


    Overheal wrote: »
    Of course. Does anyone here? Yet we are discussing it. You’re dredging for deflections because you don’t like the simple truth: NYPD royally fcuked up. Now NYPD is back in the national news cycle, the mayor is calling it a disaster, Congress is calling for answers and so are state and local authorities.

    Unless you are claiming to be a subject matter expert in law enforcement I’m entirely oblivious to what point you think you’ve scored here.

    https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2020/07/29/protester-nikki-stone-released-after-arrest-in-unmarked-van/

    you might be surprised as to what qualifications posters have. again its been clearly and simply explained to you why and how these arrests took place the way they did. I can see why other posters refuse to engage with you and your " " activity "


  • Options
    #9138
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,205 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    sabat wrote: »
    What is closer to the truth: your "a woman was kidnapped for committing a non-violent crime" or my "a man was arrested for violent crime against property?"
    nullzero wrote: »
    I don't believe the issue here is violence, if you had taken the time to ask my opinion. Criminal damage is a crime also, which is what I wanted to discuss. You just wanted to badger somebody for using the term violence out of context.

    When you refer to a person and their opinions as stupid it doesn't equate to being mannerly.

    you really do struggle to follow a train of thought over a few posts dont you? to assist i have quoted the post i responded to. They were trying to make out that damaging property is a violent crime. they were talking bollix so i corrected them.


  • Options
    #9139
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    People trying to argue with the likes of Overheal should realise they're just wasting their time.. he's not an honest broker.. he's pushing an agenda..


  • Options
    #9140
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,426 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    Overheal wrote: »
    And there you go making it about me, as you complain about making it about me.

    You’re upset I’ve called out your hypocrisy for lecturing others on here about civility while you double down on being uncivil yourself. We see you. That’s all.

    You have on more than one occasion made reference to something you call "Overheal derangement syndrome" when other users take issue with your attitude. If that isn't the hallmark of a narcissist I don't know what is.

    I replied to another user and you decided to reply to my post citing a disagreement we had some days ago.

    You picked a fight with me here today, I didn't choose to interact with you.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #9141
    mynamejeff
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,315 ✭✭✭mynamejeff


    Overheal wrote: »
    And there you go making it about me, as you complain about making it about me.

    You’re upset I’ve called out your hypocrisy for lecturing others on here about civility and mannerism while you double down on being uncivil and unmannerly yourself. We see you. That’s all.

    well to be fair you are actively trolling , and have been reported as such

    Mod: Banned for persistent abuse/backseat modding.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9142
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,890 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    mynamejeff wrote: »
    you might be surprised as to what qualifications posters have. again its been clearly and simply explained to you why and how these arrests took place the way they did. I can see why other posters refuse to engage with you and your " " activity "

    So no you aren’t asserting any eminence of your own. As expected. So you have no point other than to gripe that I made one you didn’t like. Move along then if I’m so irrelevant thanks.


  • Options
    #9143
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,205 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    mynamejeff wrote: »
    you might be surprised as to what qualifications posters have. again its been clearly and simply explained to you why and how these arrests took place the way they did. I can see why other posters refuse to engage with you and your " " activity "

    how do others know "how and why" the arrests took place they way they did? do the people providing this explanation have the relevant qualifications?


  • Options
    #9144
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,426 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    you really do struggle to follow a train of thought over a few posts dont you? to assist i have quoted the post i responded to. They were trying to make out that damaging property is a violent crime. they were talking bollix so i corrected them.

    I agree it's not a violent crime. I said that in the post you just quoted. And you are accusing me of not being able to follow a train of thought.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #9145
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,890 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    People trying to argue with the likes of Overheal should realise they're just wasting their time.. he's not an honest broker.. he's pushing an agenda..

    What agenda is that? :


  • Options
    #9146
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,890 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    nullzero wrote: »
    You have on more than one occasion made reference to something you call "Overheal derangement syndrome" when other users take issue with your attitude. If that isn't the hallmark of a narcissist I don't know what is.

    I replied to another user and you decided to reply to my post citing a disagreement we had some days ago.

    You picked a fight with me here today, I didn't choose to interact with you.

    And there you continue, calling me a narcissist while purporting to be a beacon of civility and manners.

    Can’t make this up can you

    It’s simple: admit you aren’t an authority on civility and manners and focus on your discussion with ohnotgmail without having a big haughty lecture about manners at him. It’s entirely hypocritical of you.


  • Options
    #9147
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,426 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    Overheal wrote: »
    And there you continue, calling me a narcissist while purporting to be a beacon of civility and manners.

    Can’t make this up can you

    I replied to another user and you decided to wade in.

    Who is being uncivil here?

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #9148
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,205 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nullzero wrote: »
    I agree it's not a violent crime. I said that in the post you just quoted. And you are accusing me of not being able to follow a train of thought.

    again your reading comprehension is poor.
    You just wanted to badger somebody for using the term violence out of context.

    that did not take place. you imagined it. god knows how.


  • Options
    #9149
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,890 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    nullzero wrote: »
    I replied to another user and you decided to wade in.

    Who is being uncivil here?

    You were. Which is why I called you out on it! It’s not rocket surgery. Stick to the topic without pretending to be a moral authority on manners because you demonstrably are not.


  • Options
    #9150
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,426 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    Overheal wrote: »
    It’s simple: admit you aren’t an authority on civility and manners and focus on your discussion with ohnotgmail without having a big haughty lecture about manners at him. It’s entirely hypocritical of you.

    So of somebody calls me stupid I have to accept it?

    Like you said my discussion is with another user NOT you.

    Glazers Out!



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9151
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,205 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nullzero wrote: »
    So of somebody calls me stupid I have to accept it?

    Like you said my discussion is with another user NOT you.

    who has called you stupid?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement