Page 2 of 2

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 10:42 pm
by Dinsdale
Dude...

Please tell me you didn't just drop a "HA! You kicked my ass! That gives me BODE!!!!"


Nice fucking work, TerryinKChester.


OK... I'll type really slowly, for the benefit of any New Yorkers who might be reading...


OK, NYers... are you, in all seriousness, going to sit there and tell me there's no existing laws that deal with HANGING SPRAY PAINT ON A BUILDING YOU DON'T OWN?

Is that really what you're selling here?


I catch you tagging my shit, you better fucking HOPE there's a cop around. If I actually had any black neighbors (mexicans scared them off), and I caught you hanging a noose on their porch, I'd use it to drag you behind the bumper of my truck.


But anyhoo...

Doesn't it bother you that you legislators are exhibiting incompetence on so many different levels?

A) The legislation is VERY CLEARLY racist. It's not intended to target everyone with harsher penalties... while the language is veiled(rather freaking poorly), it's quite clear what ethnic group it targets. And yes, the word "targets" is quite appropriate. If this precedent is acceptable to you, you're a fucking idiot. How about when they come for you? Because once that ball starts rolling, history has proven over and over that it will gain speed.

And don't try to tell me that NY doesn't have a Constitutional Amendment that expressedly forbids such legislation... I'm pretty sure I could google it in about 4 seconds, if you like -- no one should even speak of laws that regulates behavior of one specific ethnic group, regardless whether the poorly-written laws name that specific ethnic group or not.

Do you favor enacting legislation for anyone who commits a crime while listening to hip-hop? How about extra penalties for anyone caught commiting crime while wearing a do-rag?

Those laws would actually be less ethnically-targetted than the bullshit NY is selling.


B) Does it bother you that the legislators are wasting valuable session time passing laws that already exist? Because I'll bet my last dollar and my bookmark to Google that they have laws against spray-painting ANYTHING on a building that doesn't belong to you. And of course, lost in this stupidity is the fact you're apparently free to display all the swastikas and nooses you like, so long as you own the building.


So, establishing that it's illegal to put graffitti on another person's building, and establishing you can paint whatever the fuck you like on the side of your own building was some novel freaking precedent in NY?

Really?

Or, is the precedent here that certain behaviors that are overwhelmingly peculiar to a certain ethnic group should be punished more harshly than similar behaviors frequently committed by members of different ethnic groups?

Where is most tagging done?

In "inner cities."

Memebers of which ethnic group are responsible for the majority of the tagging?

That would be young black males (with Honorable Mention going to Hispanics).


So, even though the illegal behavior is more more common among members of a certain athnic group, someone has the gall to suggest harsher penalties fo members of an ethnic group that are several times less likely to engage in such behavior to start with?

If I was an African American living in NY, I would find this extremely disturbing.


Geez... I am DAMN PROUD to be an American. And unlike most, I actually had/have a choice in the matter. And while I sit here celebrating every moment that I have the priviledge of being an American, the stupid fucks of NY are seceding from the USA, since their behavior is so radically unAmerican, NYers should be barred from travelling freely in the United States until they reestablish their American Values.


NY, your are a disgrace to this nation. Fuck, I'm glad your state issues aren't my problem (nor should they be, in a Free Republic). I can guarantee you they wouldn't let that racist crap last one minute around here, and whoever didn't laugh at the bill just spent theitr last session in Salem... and our bleeding heart politics are FUCKED UP. I'll thank my lucky starts they're not THAT fucked up. Fucked up enough that they want to put a Right to Pay Taxes in the state constitution, but not so fucked up as to propose state-sponsored racism.


And frankly, ANYONE who is on board with this needs to take a good long look at how badly the PC Police have brainwashed them.

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 11:28 pm
by BSmack
Dinsdale wrote:Dude...

Please tell me you didn't just drop a "HA! You kicked my ass! That gives me BODE!!!!"
No, he dropped a "You don't know what the fuck you're talking about!" blast on your ass.

All things considered, the NYS Legislature is about the worst Legislative body in the United States. Yea, they like to play the nanny state role. Tell me you knew? But of all the things they fuck up on a regular basis (and there are plenty), I'm not going to waste a lot of time or energy getting riled up over their attempt to get people to behave like human beings towards each other.

I'm just happy that when they passed this law they didn't throw in a tax to pay for stepped up enforcement. Better yet, were they truly intent on screwing we the taxpayers over, they would have called for the creation of a quasi public corporation to oversee enforcement of the new law to be headed by a panel of 9 commissioners paid a salary of 75,000 per year and staff commensurate to their "needs" to meet quarterly to review and assess progress of enforcement and to be funded via the issuance of taxpayer backed 30 year bonds.

Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:04 am
by Dinsdale
BSmack wrote: No, he dropped a "You don't know what the fuck you're talking about!" blast on your ass.

Yeah, but see...


His whole line of attack was based on the notion that I've ever made it any further than the first sentence or two of anything you write, since 88's article made no such statements.


I can't think of a more flawed assumption, since that will most likely NEVER happen. The first line of a BSmack post is about all you need to see where you're going with it, and trying to read the rest is like nails on a chalkboard.

VERY flawed assumption on his part, and basing "HA! I GOT OVER AND KICKED YOUR ASS" on an assumption so fundamentally flawed means he just cut his own testicles off with Occam's Razor.


No, seriously dude -- the post I'm responding to of yours is all you need as an explaination why if I even bother with you, it's only a really quick skim -- you really are that unentertaining and unintelligent... really.


KC Wannabe: HA! I KICKED YOUR ASS! BODE ME!!!!


BSmack: YEAH, HE JUST KICKED YOUR ASS!!!!"



Original shit. Oh, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't see you as the Town Crier of Asskickings -- you're only forthcoming with your reports if said KC Wannabe is declaring self-BODE over me or mvscal, and on the numerous occasions mvscal and I kick each others asses, you seem to remain mysteriously remiss in your duties as He Who Publicizes Asskickings... now why is that?


Does that give you a glimpse into why you're a fucking idiot? It sure should.

Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:13 am
by BSmack
And now Spinsdale will regale us with a double denial into a triple deflect that culminates in a combination double spin/non sequitur.

Bravo!

And he nails the landing!

Looks like you're racking up your self proclaimed "bode" for the day. What a pity nobody understands what the fuck your drug addled posts are supposed to mean.

Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 2:11 am
by Adelpiero
no, seriously guys, they are giving away licenses and shit in illinois for illegals

its a super fuckin scam, but noones biting to take it down!

Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 3:54 am
by Dinsdale
88 wrote:It is obviously intended to prohibit certain types of ethnic intimidation, but I always thought the First Amendment gave the Nazi's the right to display a swastika on public property and/or the KKK to display a noose and/or burn a cross.

Sorry to correct you on your own thoughts and education... but I will.

You're a lawyer, right?


You didn't "think" any such thing... you know it for fact.


I realize your wording was put in a form to promote discussion, a little "trolling" if you will...


But as a lawyer, I seriously doubt you're terribly unclear on the matter. I thought there'd been a precedent or two on this? (<--- form of a question... two can play that game)

Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 2:33 pm
by BSmack
Dins,

I'll just refer you to the unanimous majority opinion in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire.
There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting" words those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality.--- Frank Murphy

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/g ... 5&page=568
Now kindly STFU.

Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 3:19 pm
by Cuda
Dinsdale wrote: KC Wannabe: HA! I KICKED YOUR ASS! BODE ME!!!!


BSmack: YEAH, HE JUST KICKED YOUR ASS!!!!"
B-Monica jockriding?

_____ Say it Ain't So


_____ Please Say You Knew

(check at least one)

Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 9:01 pm
by LTS TRN 2
Okay, here's a major world-class criminal...
Image

And here's a noose....
Image


Let's Get Busy!!

WW