Assholes making trouble in Oregon

[Hutch Starskey]

what the fk does citing yourself mean? Can you teach me your language?

JC.....your entire argument has been reduced to awkward belligerence. You have nothing to add to this topic.

If ever you feel the desire to discuss the assholes in oregon, feel free to join us.

I am you stupid fk, I'm telling you you have no idea he had a gun. you can assume until your ass falls off. You don't. You can say whatever you want but you can't say that. if you do, then you must retract every other statement about threat in any other thread in this forum. Ok?

No, JC....you're throwing a tantrum.

When you want to discuss the topic, join us. Until then, curse to your heart's content.

hahahahahahahaahah yeah sherlock

Do these people seem sane to you? A simple yes or no will do.

That ole boy could do with a spell up at the nervous hospital.

 

[Skylar]

Holyfuckingshit!

It's on video. He didn't stumble. He walked for about 15; away from the road block and towards the trees; and then reached for his gun. Unlike everyone else who walked directly to the road block and never lowered their hands until they were restrained.

funny stuff sherlock. I guess you missed the fact that he was running and a dude walked out of the woods from the direction he was running and he stopped and from that point you have no fking idea what he was doing. But you keep telling yourself you have a crystal ball and cards to tell fortunes and shit.

Your brain is tricking your eyes and your fingers kid...... Take a shower and come back it might wake you up.

He is not that bright to start with. Kind of like one of those plug in nightlights. A shower won't make much difference or improvement.

only you would know.

Lots of folks who see and read your postings know it. What do you think, your dysfunctional analytical skills are hidden?

I'm still giggling at the 'if the government isn't in the building for 24 hours, the building is abandoned under the law' nonsense he offered us.

That's some fine quality pseudo-legal batshit.

 

[jc456]

No, it isn't that simple tarzan. It is only a threat if you agree the other cop shootings were a threat. Period, you can't have it both ways double standard dude. Until you agree, then your argument is shit.

You've admitted that the Lavoy shooting was clean. Now you're trying to backpedal and give us caveats and exceptions.

Nope. When Lavoy ran a blockade, led cops on a high speed chase, resisted arrest and reached for his gun......the police were justified in shooting him.

You've already admitted as much.

no I didn't, I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

You admitted that Lavoy's shooting was justified. Then backpedals, giving us 'its only a threat if' caveats and exceptions.

There are no 'ifs'. There is what is. Lavoy refused to surrender to police executing a lawful warrant for arrest. He lead them on a high speed chase. He ran a police blockade. He resisted arrest. He reached for his gun. And they shot him.

As they should have.

You can't backpedal your way out of it now.

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

sure I can, I did it. It was easy. didn't cause me any pain either. the funny thing, they are all the same thing except for color of skin. And yet it seems the color of the skin determines justification in your eyes. funny how that works.

 

[jc456]

JC.....your entire argument has been reduced to awkward belligerence. You have nothing to add to this topic.

If ever you feel the desire to discuss the assholes in oregon, feel free to join us.

I am you stupid fk, I'm telling you you have no idea he had a gun. you can assume until your ass falls off. You don't. You can say whatever you want but you can't say that. if you do, then you must retract every other statement about threat in any other thread in this forum. Ok?

No, JC....you're throwing a tantrum.

When you want to discuss the topic, join us. Until then, curse to your heart's content.

hahahahahahahaahah yeah sherlock

Do these people seem sane to you? A simple yes or no will do.

That ole boy could do with a spell up at the nervous hospital.

the bed is all yours pup.

 

[Carla_Danger]

You've admitted that the Lavoy shooting was clean. Now you're trying to backpedal and give us caveats and exceptions.

Nope. When Lavoy ran a blockade, led cops on a high speed chase, resisted arrest and reached for his gun......the police were justified in shooting him.

You've already admitted as much.

no I didn't, I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

You admitted that Lavoy's shooting was justified. Then backpedals, giving us 'its only a threat if' caveats and exceptions.

There are no 'ifs'. There is what is. Lavoy refused to surrender to police executing a lawful warrant for arrest. He lead them on a high speed chase. He ran a police blockade. He resisted arrest. He reached for his gun. And they shot him.

As they should have.

You can't backpedal your way out of it now.

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

sure I can, I did it. It was easy. didn't cause me any pain either. the funny thing, they are all the same thing except for color of skin. And yet it seems the color of the skin determines justification in your eyes. funny how that works.

No they're not. They're not the same at all. You are engaging in false comparison fallacies.

And you never answered my question. Do these people seem sane to you? A simple yes or no will do.

 

[jc456]

You've admitted that the Lavoy shooting was clean. Now you're trying to backpedal and give us caveats and exceptions.

Nope. When Lavoy ran a blockade, led cops on a high speed chase, resisted arrest and reached for his gun......the police were justified in shooting him.

You've already admitted as much.

no I didn't, I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

You admitted that Lavoy's shooting was justified. Then backpedals, giving us 'its only a threat if' caveats and exceptions.

There are no 'ifs'. There is what is. Lavoy refused to surrender to police executing a lawful warrant for arrest. He lead them on a high speed chase. He ran a police blockade. He resisted arrest. He reached for his gun. And they shot him.

As they should have.

You can't backpedal your way out of it now.

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

That's it exactly. JC is desperate to talk about anything but these assholes making trouble in Oregon.

And is throwing a tantrum when we won't let him change the topic.

hahahahahaahahahaha a typical losers post. skylar the loser, there you go what a ring that has.

 

[Camp]

no I didn't, I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

You admitted that Lavoy's shooting was justified. Then backpedals, giving us 'its only a threat if' caveats and exceptions.

There are no 'ifs'. There is what is. Lavoy refused to surrender to police executing a lawful warrant for arrest. He lead them on a high speed chase. He ran a police blockade. He resisted arrest. He reached for his gun. And they shot him.

As they should have.

You can't backpedal your way out of it now.

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

That's it exactly. JC is desperate to talk about anything but these assholes making trouble in Oregon.

And is throwing a tantrum when we won't let him change the topic.

hahahahahaahahahaha a typical losers post. skylar the loser, there you go what a ring that has.

Go take one of your pills. If you are confused about which one, just take one of each.

 

[jc456]

no I didn't, I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

You admitted that Lavoy's shooting was justified. Then backpedals, giving us 'its only a threat if' caveats and exceptions.

There are no 'ifs'. There is what is. Lavoy refused to surrender to police executing a lawful warrant for arrest. He lead them on a high speed chase. He ran a police blockade. He resisted arrest. He reached for his gun. And they shot him.

As they should have.

You can't backpedal your way out of it now.

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

sure I can, I did it. It was easy. didn't cause me any pain either. the funny thing, they are all the same thing except for color of skin. And yet it seems the color of the skin determines justification in your eyes. funny how that works.

No they're not. They're not the same at all. You are engaging in false comparison fallacies.

And you never answered my question. Do these people seem sane to you? A simple yes or no will do.

sure they are.

I don't profile.

 

[jc456]

You've admitted that the Lavoy shooting was clean. Now you're trying to backpedal and give us caveats and exceptions.

Nope. When Lavoy ran a blockade, led cops on a high speed chase, resisted arrest and reached for his gun......the police were justified in shooting him.

You've already admitted as much.

no I didn't, I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

You admitted that Lavoy's shooting was justified. Then backpedals, giving us 'its only a threat if' caveats and exceptions.

There are no 'ifs'. There is what is. Lavoy refused to surrender to police executing a lawful warrant for arrest. He lead them on a high speed chase. He ran a police blockade. He resisted arrest. He reached for his gun. And they shot him.

As they should have.

You can't backpedal your way out of it now.

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

He suffers from benghazism. It is a right wing idiot affliction of just popping off something dopey when a thoughtful response is not available.

I suffer from the enjoyment of winning daily in here. I enjoy the shit out of kicking the asses of stupid folk who act like libturds like you. Losers who love to root for a person responsible for killing four americans in Benghazi. Losers. everyone of you.

 

[jc456]

funny stuff sherlock. I guess you missed the fact that he was running and a dude walked out of the woods from the direction he was running and he stopped and from that point you have no fking idea what he was doing. But you keep telling yourself you have a crystal ball and cards to tell fortunes and shit.

Your brain is tricking your eyes and your fingers kid...... Take a shower and come back it might wake you up.

He is not that bright to start with. Kind of like one of those plug in nightlights. A shower won't make much difference or improvement.

only you would know.

Lots of folks who see and read your postings know it. What do you think, your dysfunctional analytical skills are hidden?

I'm still giggling at the 'if the government isn't in the building for 24 hours, the building is abandoned under the law' nonsense he offered us.

That's some fine quality pseudo-legal batshit.

i thought you were giggling cause of your fingers.

 

[bodecea]

no I didn't, I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

You admitted that Lavoy's shooting was justified. Then backpedals, giving us 'its only a threat if' caveats and exceptions.

There are no 'ifs'. There is what is. Lavoy refused to surrender to police executing a lawful warrant for arrest. He lead them on a high speed chase. He ran a police blockade. He resisted arrest. He reached for his gun. And they shot him.

As they should have.

You can't backpedal your way out of it now.

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

That's it exactly. JC is desperate to talk about anything but these assholes making trouble in Oregon.

And is throwing a tantrum when we won't let him change the topic.

hahahahahaahahahaha a typical losers post. skylar the loser, there you go what a ring that has.

I see you are in need of some attention.

 

[Carla_Danger]

no I didn't, I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

You admitted that Lavoy's shooting was justified. Then backpedals, giving us 'its only a threat if' caveats and exceptions.

There are no 'ifs'. There is what is. Lavoy refused to surrender to police executing a lawful warrant for arrest. He lead them on a high speed chase. He ran a police blockade. He resisted arrest. He reached for his gun. And they shot him.

As they should have.

You can't backpedal your way out of it now.

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

He suffers from benghazism. It is a right wing idiot affliction of just popping off something dopey when a thoughtful response is not available.

I suffer from the enjoyment of winning daily in here. I enjoy the shit out of kicking the asses of stupid folk who act like libturds like you. Losers who love to root for a person responsible for killing four americans in Benghazi. Losers. everyone of you.

Changing the subject again, you big dummy?

What did you win, a free vacation tomorrow at the Turd Sanctuary?

 

[bodecea]

no I didn't, I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

You admitted that Lavoy's shooting was justified. Then backpedals, giving us 'its only a threat if' caveats and exceptions.

There are no 'ifs'. There is what is. Lavoy refused to surrender to police executing a lawful warrant for arrest. He lead them on a high speed chase. He ran a police blockade. He resisted arrest. He reached for his gun. And they shot him.

As they should have.

You can't backpedal your way out of it now.

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

He suffers from benghazism. It is a right wing idiot affliction of just popping off something dopey when a thoughtful response is not available.

I suffer from the enjoyment of winning daily in here. I enjoy the shit out of kicking the asses of stupid folk who act like libturds like you. Losers who love to root for a person responsible for killing four americans in Benghazi. Losers. everyone of you.

I can see the attention you get and the victories you declare on an anonymous message board are very precious to you.

 

[Carla_Danger]

You admitted that Lavoy's shooting was justified. Then backpedals, giving us 'its only a threat if' caveats and exceptions.

There are no 'ifs'. There is what is. Lavoy refused to surrender to police executing a lawful warrant for arrest. He lead them on a high speed chase. He ran a police blockade. He resisted arrest. He reached for his gun. And they shot him.

As they should have.

You can't backpedal your way out of it now.

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

sure I can, I did it. It was easy. didn't cause me any pain either. the funny thing, they are all the same thing except for color of skin. And yet it seems the color of the skin determines justification in your eyes. funny how that works.

No they're not. They're not the same at all. You are engaging in false comparison fallacies.

And you never answered my question. Do these people seem sane to you? A simple yes or no will do.

sure they are.

I don't profile.

Why don't you show your support and go join them?

 

[jc456]

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

sure I can, I did it. It was easy. didn't cause me any pain either. the funny thing, they are all the same thing except for color of skin. And yet it seems the color of the skin determines justification in your eyes. funny how that works.

No they're not. They're not the same at all. You are engaging in false comparison fallacies.

And you never answered my question. Do these people seem sane to you? A simple yes or no will do.

sure they are.

I don't profile.

Why don't you show your support and go join them?

who?

 

[jc456]

You admitted that Lavoy's shooting was justified. Then backpedals, giving us 'its only a threat if' caveats and exceptions.

There are no 'ifs'. There is what is. Lavoy refused to surrender to police executing a lawful warrant for arrest. He lead them on a high speed chase. He ran a police blockade. He resisted arrest. He reached for his gun. And they shot him.

As they should have.

You can't backpedal your way out of it now.

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

He suffers from benghazism. It is a right wing idiot affliction of just popping off something dopey when a thoughtful response is not available.

I suffer from the enjoyment of winning daily in here. I enjoy the shit out of kicking the asses of stupid folk who act like libturds like you. Losers who love to root for a person responsible for killing four americans in Benghazi. Losers. everyone of you.

I can see the attention you get and the victories you declare on an anonymous message board are very precious to you.

no different than anyone else on here. Why else would you be here?

 

[Camp]

no I didn't, I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

You admitted that Lavoy's shooting was justified. Then backpedals, giving us 'its only a threat if' caveats and exceptions.

There are no 'ifs'. There is what is. Lavoy refused to surrender to police executing a lawful warrant for arrest. He lead them on a high speed chase. He ran a police blockade. He resisted arrest. He reached for his gun. And they shot him.

As they should have.

You can't backpedal your way out of it now.

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

He suffers from benghazism. It is a right wing idiot affliction of just popping off something dopey when a thoughtful response is not available.

I suffer from the enjoyment of winning daily in here. I enjoy the shit out of kicking the asses of stupid folk who act like libturds like you. Losers who love to root for a person responsible for killing four americans in Benghazi. Losers. everyone of you.

Does somebody give you a prize when you tell them you "won" in "here"? See, I was right about the benghazism. You just confirmed you are afflicted with it. Now do as you were told and go take those pills.

 

[jc456]

You admitted that Lavoy's shooting was justified. Then backpedals, giving us 'its only a threat if' caveats and exceptions.

There are no 'ifs'. There is what is. Lavoy refused to surrender to police executing a lawful warrant for arrest. He lead them on a high speed chase. He ran a police blockade. He resisted arrest. He reached for his gun. And they shot him.

As they should have.

You can't backpedal your way out of it now.

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

He suffers from benghazism. It is a right wing idiot affliction of just popping off something dopey when a thoughtful response is not available.

I suffer from the enjoyment of winning daily in here. I enjoy the shit out of kicking the asses of stupid folk who act like libturds like you. Losers who love to root for a person responsible for killing four americans in Benghazi. Losers. everyone of you.

Changing the subject again, you big dummy?

What did you win, a free vacation tomorrow at the Turd Sanctuary?

I thought you won that one yesterday and the day before.

 

[bodecea]

I said there is no difference between this shooting and the other cop incidents in Ferguson, Chicago and Ohio. You disagreed with me, so obviously you don't feel any were justified. Or not, or are you still playing the double standards game. which is it?

Come now double standards you going with it being justified or not? can't answer cause it traps you.

You can't just throw out Ferguson, Chicago, and Ohio. What a lame argument. It's not really an argument at all, it's just you trying to change the subject.

He suffers from benghazism. It is a right wing idiot affliction of just popping off something dopey when a thoughtful response is not available.

I suffer from the enjoyment of winning daily in here. I enjoy the shit out of kicking the asses of stupid folk who act like libturds like you. Losers who love to root for a person responsible for killing four americans in Benghazi. Losers. everyone of you.

I can see the attention you get and the victories you declare on an anonymous message board are very precious to you.

no different than anyone else on here. Why else would you be here?

Give this guy a break, guys.....can't you see how needy he is?

 

[Skylar]

So can we agree about two things?

First, that the Lavoy shooting was justified.

Two, JC is just trying to change the topic.