Ex Marine Tosses Occupy Heckler from Congressmen's swearing in

[The T]

If you and your fellow scum just stayed in your tents butt-fucking each other all day and not bothering conservatives, then you would not be shown to be a pussy for the world being dragged around.

The Marine showed restraint that I would've had a hardtime doing....I might've somehow stepped on his head when I walked back to the event.

But what on earth would that have accomplished? You beat the crap out of him. You end up going to prison for over a year. He becomes a hero for his cause. He goes on the talk show circuit promoting his screwed up values and you get anally raped in prison. How has that fixed a thing?

Beat them in the arena of ideas...that's all. Have a stronger case, and be convincing.

 

[Avatar4321]

Is Infidel man enough to apologize for wrongly calling me a liar?

or do I have to grab him by the digital collar and drag him to the Romper Room?

Are you going to man up about being wrong about assault?

At Common Law, an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.

Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.

The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim.

Intent is an essential element of assault. In tort law, it can be specific intent—if the assailant intends to cause the apprehension of harmful or offensive contact in the victim—or general intent—if he or she intends to do the act that causes such apprehension. In addition, the intent element is satisfied if it is substantially certain, to a reasonable person, that the act will cause the result. A defendant who holds a gun to a victim's head possesses the requisite intent, since it is substantially certain that this act will produce an apprehension in the victim. In all cases, intent to kill or harm is irrelevant.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=4409432

so no apology is necessary from me, how about from you?

"In all cases, intent to kill or harm is irrelevant."

I am waiting for your admission of being wrong.

At common law? Most of the laws are statutory now. based on the common law, but not common law.

Not to mention the statutes very state by state and depending on whether we are talking criminal charges or tort law.

 

[Salt Jones]

I don't protest and I don't believe in nonviolence so you won't see me wasting my time at an OWS rally. I'd rather be at the range honing my skills and preparing.

OWS doesnt believe in non-violence either.

I see no vests or sacrifice.

 

[Dr.House]

Is Infidel man enough to apologize for wrongly calling me a liar?

or do I have to grab him by the digital collar and drag him to the Romper Room?

Are you going to man up about being wrong about assault?

At Common Law, an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.

Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.

The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim.

Intent is an essential element of assault. In tort law, it can be specific intent—if the assailant intends to cause the apprehension of harmful or offensive contact in the victim—or general intent—if he or she intends to do the act that causes such apprehension. In addition, the intent element is satisfied if it is substantially certain, to a reasonable person, that the act will cause the result. A defendant who holds a gun to a victim's head possesses the requisite intent, since it is substantially certain that this act will produce an apprehension in the victim. In all cases, intent to kill or harm is irrelevant.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=4409432

so no apology is necessary from me, how about from you?

"In all cases, intent to kill or harm is irrelevant."

I am waiting for your admission of being wrong.

assault is not simple assault...

So you're not going to apologize?

Figured as much....

 

[Avatar4321]

I love threads like this. It shows the US right wing loon underlying mindset. And the peanut gallery on here who fit into that category applauding...

It really shows the left wing stupidity.

Telling more lies, traitor?

Wouldnt he have had to tell a first one first?

 

[The T]

Is Infidel man enough to apologize for wrongly calling me a liar?

or do I have to grab him by the digital collar and drag him to the Romper Room?

Are you going to man up about being wrong about assault?

At Common Law, an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.

Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.

The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim.

Intent is an essential element of assault. In tort law, it can be specific intent—if the assailant intends to cause the apprehension of harmful or offensive contact in the victim—or general intent—if he or she intends to do the act that causes such apprehension. In addition, the intent element is satisfied if it is substantially certain, to a reasonable person, that the act will cause the result. A defendant who holds a gun to a victim's head possesses the requisite intent, since it is substantially certain that this act will produce an apprehension in the victim. In all cases, intent to kill or harm is irrelevant.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=4409432

so no apology is necessary from me, how about from you?

"In all cases, intent to kill or harm is irrelevant."

I am waiting for your admission of being wrong.

So. The OWS maggot has a court case...NEXT.

 

[Salt Jones]

The police already have you on their "pick up first" list.

You would be sitting in jail with your fellow left-wing scum before you could rob your local grocery store.

If you and your fellow scum just stayed in your tents butt-fucking each other all day and not bothering conservatives, then you would not be shown to be a pussy for the world being dragged around.

The Marine showed restraint that I would've had a hardtime doing....I might've somehow stepped on his had when I walked back to the event.

I don't protest and I don't believe in nonviolence so you won't see me wasting my time at an OWS rally. I'd rather be at the range honing my skills and preparing.

Really? Why would I rob a store? No need.

 

[occupied]

Sorry, not all of us are familiar with your psychotic drugs to try to stabilize you.

You're a typical shithead that needs your head bashed in.

I'm for peace and stability, don't get in my zone. So if you show at an event to stir up trouble, expect it to be returned.

The point is assholes like you try to use the law in your favor. You spit on people, throw stuff at them, shout them down but then run like a little girl to the police if the people react.

You're the asshole at the sports event spilling beer on others, talking shit, blocking people's view of the game, etc but then expect the security to protect you from other fans that don't like you.

Sometimes the police and security look the other way and let scum like you get what you deserve....so the advice is leave us alone if you want your head in one piece.

Good lord dude, get some decaf and some Thorazine.

Kind of surprised to come across someone who fits the negative stereotypes so well. Are you for real?

 

[Avatar4321]

Beat them in the arena of ideas...that's all. Have a stronger case, and be convincing.

Exactly. And beat them by converting them, not insulting them. If we have the correct ideas, and I believe conservatives do more often than not, we should be converting them to sound principles not attacking and insulting them. Violence, whether physical or verbal, will not win this debate. We should be seeking reconciliation and showing a higher path.

There is time for the use of force. but thats not in debating our fellow citizens. That's when we need to defend our families, faith, friends, freedom, etc.

 

[Dr Grump]

I have never seen a more pathetic collection of responses from the board lefties as on this thread.

Whaaa, he should file a lawsuit!

Whaaa, Marines are jerks!

Whaaa, it's his first amendment right!

Whaaa, rightwingers interrupt too!

It's like that piece of shit law professor protesting the care packages for troops. You just want some Marine to come along, grab him by his puny liberal neck, and throw him up against a brick wall so hard every rib in his ribcage breaks.

Of course, no Marine would do that. Probably what they'd do is say, 'Well, he's got his right to speak."

Which kind of shows you who's better.

The guy who tried to interrupt the swearing in was a douche.

So was the guy who kicked him out.

The right-wing underlying mindset - use violence to sort out your problems. There is a reason most US right-wing loons love the military and their pea shooters....

Another misuse of the word violence. There was no violence here. Tossing someone out of a building isn't violent. Violence requires an intent to harm.

Ok, force then.....shrug...

By the way, if you don't think that dragging somebody on their butt by their shirt against their will isn't violence, I have a bridge to sell you in Alaska....

 

[uscitizen]

Are you going to man up about being wrong about assault?

At Common Law, an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.

Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.

The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim.

Intent is an essential element of assault. In tort law, it can be specific intent—if the assailant intends to cause the apprehension of harmful or offensive contact in the victim—or general intent—if he or she intends to do the act that causes such apprehension. In addition, the intent element is satisfied if it is substantially certain, to a reasonable person, that the act will cause the result. A defendant who holds a gun to a victim's head possesses the requisite intent, since it is substantially certain that this act will produce an apprehension in the victim. In all cases, intent to kill or harm is irrelevant.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=4409432

so no apology is necessary from me, how about from you?

"In all cases, intent to kill or harm is irrelevant."

I am waiting for your admission of being wrong.

At common law? Most of the laws are statutory now. based on the common law, but not common law.

Not to mention the statutes very state by state and depending on whether we are talking criminal charges or tort law.

From the linked article above:
"Statutory definitions of assault in the various jurisdictions throughout the United States are not substantially different from the common-law definition."

Keep on diggin there bub. Upi really should not be coming to Houses aid on this matter.
Not good for your image on here.

I done whooped two asses on this thread and I kinda like you. Lets keep it that way?

 

[GoneBezerk]

Every now and then one of them needs their head bashed in and the police will look the other way.

Hell in other countries the police would beat the living shit out of these scumbags. In Germany the police would beat you until their arms hurt from beating you from what I saw on idiots like these people.

If you and your fellow scum just stayed in your tents butt-fucking each other all day and not bothering conservatives, then you would not be shown to be a pussy for the world being dragged around.

The Marine showed restraint that I would've had a hardtime doing....I might've somehow stepped on his head when I walked back to the event.

But what on earth would that have accomplished? You beat the crap out of him. You end up going to prison for over a year. He becomes a hero for his cause. He goes on the talk show circuit promoting his screwed up values and you get anally raped in prison. How has that fixed a thing?

Beat them in the arena of ideas...that's all. Have a stronger case, and be convincing.

 

[Avatar4321]

The police already have you on their "pick up first" list.

You would be sitting in jail with your fellow left-wing scum before you could rob your local grocery store.

I don't protest and I don't believe in nonviolence so you won't see me wasting my time at an OWS rally. I'd rather be at the range honing my skills and preparing.

Really? Why would I rob a store? No need.

And yet, that's all OWS is about. Robbery. heck, that's all progressivism is about.

 

[The Infidel]

Yeah. I called no one a liar. Quite the opposite. I said you weren't a liar.

Nothing pathalogical about reality.

Who cares really....?

I dont.

There is NO comparison here, and uscitizen knows it!

He is doing nothing but deflecting to be clever, and clever he is'nt.... just simply silly.

He already conceded by the deflection, so I dont mind the conversation. give him his "win" to satisfy his pride. Not really going to matter.

I did.... he ignored me.

See post below \/

post 240

OK... you win.

Happy?

 

[Salt Jones]

It really shows the left wing stupidity.

Telling more lies, traitor?

Wouldnt he have had to tell a first one first?

Read post #242.

 

[The Infidel]

And as long as you are btinging up semantics, telling someone "you lie" IS calling them a liar.

good for you!

Look everybody.... he's a clever boy

You and house sharing a bottle tonight?

Nope... you really have no honor do you?

 

[Salt Jones]

You would be gone in the first 10 minutes.

You left-wing anarchists talk a lot of shit but in the end you would be wiped out by us. The police will raise the bar of violence on you each day until you go away....but if you ever cause chaos across the country, then hell will come down on you.

Just watch the The Unforgiven where Clint Eastwood threatens the town before he leaves....

No these pieces of shit need to be taught a lesson they will never forget.

They are the ones that shoutdown conservatives at events, attack the police, ruin businesses....but then run to the police when someone beats the shit out of them for being scum of all scum.

Like I said, the police should give normal Americans 24 hours to clean up these scum without law recourse. It will change the mentality and bravery of these scumbags to repeat their bullshit.

Should I have the right to shot to defend during the without law recourse.

Movie quotes? Really? Do you socks match and when do you get your meds?

 

[Avatar4321]

Every now and then one of them needs their head bashed in and the police will look the other way.

Hell in other countries the police would beat the living shit out of these scumbags. In Germany the police would beat you until their arms hurt from beating you from what I saw on idiots like these people.

Which is why I am Eternally grateful that I live in the United States. A nation that, for now, believes in Due Process, liberty, and obeying the laws of the land.

 

[uscitizen]

good for you!

Look everybody.... he's a clever boy

You and house sharing a bottle tonight?

Nope... you really have no honor do you?

what has Honor do to with being correct?

 

[GoneBezerk]

"Do you socks....."

Uh, quit with the monkey talk, monkey.

You would be gone in the first 10 minutes.

You left-wing anarchists talk a lot of shit but in the end you would be wiped out by us. The police will raise the bar of violence on you each day until you go away....but if you ever cause chaos across the country, then hell will come down on you.

Just watch the The Unforgiven where Clint Eastwood threatens the town before he leaves....

Should I have the right to shot to defend during the without law recourse.

Movie quotes? Really? Do you socks match and when do you get your meds?