Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
61,523
1,709
Punta Gorda FL
I have zero idea
Just like when you tried to call me a liar for talking about the fact that battlefield .22's are covered by assault weapons bans, you continue to have no clue.

Your brilliant idea to apply the Bill of Rights only to 18th century technology was already tried. It won in the Massachusetts Supreme Court and then lost unanimously at SCOTUS.

All of which has been discussed for years, but you protect your information bubble well and, as usual, have zero idea.
 

d'ranger

Super Anarchist
29,015
4,183
Just like when you tried to call me a liar for talking about the fact that battlefield .22's are covered by assault weapons bans, you continue to have no clue.

Your brilliant idea to apply the Bill of Rights only to 18th century technology was already tried. It won in the Massachusetts Supreme Court and then lost unanimously at SCOTUS.

All of which has been discussed for years, but you protect your information bubble well and, as usual, have zero idea.
Wait a minute, hold your horses there fella - what happened to that humiliating defeat for my plan you were just talking about? And poor befuddled me asked wtf plan was that since I am not like you with the amazing and incredible memory and complete and authentic repository of all things posted in SA? it's fall back time to your butthurt feelings about Dogballs?

TIA for helping me with the details of when I lost at SCOTUS for my plan since I don't remember that nor the Mass court. But then I don't remember writing any of this to you or mentioning you except for once again to just fuck off weasel.

I did reply to Burning Man, but then you do have a habit of being a slimy word twisting gossiping bitch. If I ever do run across Caetano's body I will see it gets a decent burial. Oh, and be sure and let our friend know what I said since I stand behind and in front of everything I write or say. You could try it if you weren't a spineless little bitch.
 

d'ranger

Super Anarchist
29,015
4,183
Thanks Mike - it made me realize that I neglected to congratulate Tommynoballs on his efforts to end a friendship I had with someone I met here on SA - it's a feat worthy of Mitch daBitch McConnell's effort to pack the SCOTUS. It took years of reading, research and following my every post to finally achieve his goal. My hat's off in recognition of the typical lubertararian who since he can't have it his way does his best to fuck if up for almost everyone else.

Thesaurus Tom has now earned my eternal scorn and derision. I know he must just be so proud while stroking his battlefield dogballs, or his wifes.
 

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
61,523
1,709
Punta Gorda FL
Wait a minute, hold your horses there fella - what happened to that humiliating defeat for my plan you were just talking about? And poor befuddled me asked wtf plan was that
Your idea to protect musket ownership was the plan you so suddenly forgot.

I already said what happened to it. Your brilliant idea to apply the Bill of Rights only to 18th century technology was already tried. It won in the Massachusetts Supreme Court and then lost unanimously at SCOTUS.

If publicly calling the attention of someone I respect to your lies might end your friendship with that person, maybe you should reconsider the lies. I don't see anything sneaky about making a public post under my own name. If it exposed something you would rather hide from your friend, that's your problem. You created it. You own it.
 

d'ranger

Super Anarchist
29,015
4,183
Your idea to protect musket ownership was the plan you so suddenly forgot.

I already said what happened to it. Your brilliant idea to apply the Bill of Rights only to 18th century technology was already tried. It won in the Massachusetts Supreme Court and then lost unanimously at SCOTUS.

If publicly calling the attention of someone I respect to your lies might end your friendship with that person, maybe you should reconsider the lies. I don't see anything sneaky about making a public post under my own name. If it exposed something you would rather hide from your friend, that's your problem. You created it. You own it.
So the musket comment was in reference to the imo overreach of the SC and was tongue in cheek, you know, humor which is another feature you lack.

I don't lie so your continued allegations that I do makes you a liar in addition to a creepy sneaky pathetic excuse for a human being. I explained what happened, and the issue is that someone else posted something they didn't want known here. i have no problem, if someone decides they don't like me then they were never really my friend to start with. So once again, just fuck off because you have no credibility with me and have repeatedly shown yourself to be far from forthright and honest.
 

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
61,523
1,709
Punta Gorda FL
So the musket comment was in reference to the imo overreach of the SC and was tongue in cheek, you know, humor which is another feature you lack.
When you make a point that has won in a state supreme court and is generally consistent with your views, it's not at all obvious that you're joking.

Massachusetts wasn't joking when they brought your idea to the US Supreme Court and it seems to have more than a little support from other posters around here. Completely missing is anyone from the TeamD/gungrabby side saying that Massachusetts went too far.

If you were the first to say that, it would be more obvious that you were joking. But you won't. No one will. So it will continue to seem like you support the idea that you "jokingly" put forth.
 

hasher

Super Anarchist
6,515
1,049
Insanity
The personal arsenals

Atlanta Police say they have arrested a 36-year-old man suspected of shooting two downtown Subway sandwich workers, killing one and wounding the other. The incident allegedly occurred over an argument about the amount of mayonnaise put on a sandwich.

The shooting happened about 6:30 p.m. on June 26 at the Subway shop at 74 Northside Drive, next to a Circle K convenience store. The site is just two blocks south of Mercedes-Benz Stadium.

A 26-year-old woman who worked at Subway was killed. A 24-year-old woman and also a Subway employee was shot and is in critical condition, according to police. The wounded woman’s 5-year-old child was in the restaurant when the shooting occurred, according to police. The victim’s names have not been released.

Deputy Chief Charles Hampton Jr. said at a June 27 press conference the suspect, an Atlanta man, was arrested last night. The arrest was made without incident near the Subway shop, he said. The suspect’s name is not being released as the investigation continues.

“This was a very tragic situation that did not have to occur,” Hampton said. “What we know is that the suspect came inside the restaurant, ordered a sandwich and there was something wrong with the sandwich that made him so upset that he decided to take out his anger on two of the employees here.”

Hampton said the “senseless” incident occurred when an armed person decided to resolve a conflict with violence rather than walking away or ordering another sandwich. The child who witnessed the shooting is also traumatized, Hampton said. The act of violence not only resulted in the fatal shooting of one woman and injuring another, but will have “residual effects” on all families affected by the shooting, he said.

The argument was over the amount of mayonnaise on a sandwich, Hampton said in response to a reporter’s question, but the focus should be on the gun violence.

“So yes, it’s [about] a sandwich,” he said. “It frustrates me that we had an individual with a firearm, who decided that … was the answer to resolve a conflict over a sandwich.

“And now we have families who are devastated, and even his family,” Hampton said.

Seems to be keeping everyone safe and sound.
 

pusslicker

Super Anarchist
1,885
734
Paris
The personal arsenals

Atlanta Police say they have arrested a 36-year-old man suspected of shooting two downtown Subway sandwich workers, killing one and wounding the other. The incident allegedly occurred over an argument about the amount of mayonnaise put on a sandwich.

The shooting happened about 6:30 p.m. on June 26 at the Subway shop at 74 Northside Drive, next to a Circle K convenience store. The site is just two blocks south of Mercedes-Benz Stadium.

A 26-year-old woman who worked at Subway was killed. A 24-year-old woman and also a Subway employee was shot and is in critical condition, according to police. The wounded woman’s 5-year-old child was in the restaurant when the shooting occurred, according to police. The victim’s names have not been released.

Deputy Chief Charles Hampton Jr. said at a June 27 press conference the suspect, an Atlanta man, was arrested last night. The arrest was made without incident near the Subway shop, he said. The suspect’s name is not being released as the investigation continues.

“This was a very tragic situation that did not have to occur,” Hampton said. “What we know is that the suspect came inside the restaurant, ordered a sandwich and there was something wrong with the sandwich that made him so upset that he decided to take out his anger on two of the employees here.”

Hampton said the “senseless” incident occurred when an armed person decided to resolve a conflict with violence rather than walking away or ordering another sandwich. The child who witnessed the shooting is also traumatized, Hampton said. The act of violence not only resulted in the fatal shooting of one woman and injuring another, but will have “residual effects” on all families affected by the shooting, he said.

The argument was over the amount of mayonnaise on a sandwich, Hampton said in response to a reporter’s question, but the focus should be on the gun violence.

“So yes, it’s [about] a sandwich,” he said. “It frustrates me that we had an individual with a firearm, who decided that … was the answer to resolve a conflict over a sandwich.

“And now we have families who are devastated, and even his family,” Hampton said.

Seems to be keeping everyone safe and sound.
Mayonnaise? Yuck. To me this is standing your own ground. Hopefully Georgia has such a law.
 

Zonker

Super Anarchist
9,255
5,178
Canada
Analysis: U.S. mass shooting insurance rates jump as incidents rise June 29 (Reuters) - The cost of buying insurance protection against mass shootings has spiked more than 10% in the United States this year following a string of deadly events, insurers said....Active shooter insurance typically covers victim lawsuits, building repairs, legal fees, medical expenses and trauma counselling."

Who knew that "Mass Shooting Insurance" even existed as an insurance product? Want to bet there is not a market for it other than the US?
 

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
61,523
1,709
Punta Gorda FL

Yes, and a bored Canadian would take weeks and weeks to get such a message to so many Americans.

The thing is, we've recognized that the first amendment, fourth amendment, and others were meant to apply to new tech as it comes along and the same has always been true of the second.

Well, not quite always. There was a brief period in Massachusetts during which the Bill of Rights was thought inapplicable to modern technology, but the Supreme Court quickly corrected the problem in the topic case.

That won't stop advocates here from (sometimes "jokingly" or possibly just ignorantly) pushing for a nonsensical interpretation of our Bill of Rights that would NEVER be tolerated if applied to any of the rights that people want to protect. It's only applied by morons to a right they want to undermine instead of repealing.
 

Cal20sailor

Super Anarchist
12,376
3,106
Detroit
Yes, and a bored Canadian would take weeks and weeks to get such a message to so many Americans.

The thing is, we've recognized that the first amendment, fourth amendment, and others were meant to apply to new tech as it comes along and the same has always been true of the second.

Well, not quite always. There was a brief period in Massachusetts during which the Bill of Rights was thought inapplicable to modern technology, but the Supreme Court quickly corrected the problem in the topic case.

That won't stop advocates here from (sometimes "jokingly" or possibly just ignorantly) pushing for a nonsensical interpretation of our Bill of Rights that would NEVER be tolerated if applied to any of the rights that people want to protect. It's only applied by morons to a right they want to undermine instead of repealing.
The 'we've' caught my eye. Were you on the SCOTUS at the time? Dementia is cruel.
 

Marty Gingras

Mid-range Anarchist
There was a brief period in Massachusetts during which the Bill of Rights was thought inapplicable to modern technology, but the Supreme Court quickly corrected the problem in the topic case...

1657119253003.png
 
Last edited:

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
61,523
1,709
Punta Gorda FL
The 'we've' caught my eye. Were you on the SCOTUS at the time? Dementia is cruel.
I was talking about and for the public in general.

Maybe you're an exception? Do you think that the first amendment and the fourth apply to modern technology?

I've never seen anyone say that any other part of the constitution should be stuck in the 18th century. And even those who say it about the second amendment sometimes almost plausibly claim to have been "joking" about the idea.
 

Marty Gingras

Mid-range Anarchist
Not sure of the point of this image.

Do you think the Bill of Rights does or does not apply to post 18th century technology? And how does the pic relate to whatever your point might be, once you articulate it?
You've got something worthwhile to bring to the conversation, but you also have a shtick that is unethical and ineffective. I'm simply going to post a gory picture in reply when you behave that way. You know, feedback.
 

Cal20sailor

Super Anarchist
12,376
3,106
Detroit
I was talking about and for the public in general.

Maybe you're an exception? Do you think that the first amendment and the fourth apply to modern technology?

I've never seen anyone say that any other part of the constitution should be stuck in the 18th century. And even those who say it about the second amendment sometimes almost plausibly claim to have been "joking" about the idea.
You are an idiot.

Maybe the word 'they'. Don't overthink it.
 
Last edited:

Olsonist

Disgusting Liberal Elitist
28,677
3,790
New Oak City
Yes, Tom is an idiot.

Next, the Court examines whether the right to obtain an abortion is rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition ...
 

Steam Flyer

Sophisticated Yet Humble
42,241
8,582
Eastern NC
Yes, Tom is an idiot.

Next, the Court examines whether the right to obtain an abortion is rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition ...

Tom is never wrong.
And the Court examines the "right" to obtain an abortion in the Nation's history and tradition, because the Court's job is to like you know explain traditions and culture and history to the Nation, not fiddle about with laws and legal exactitude... oh wait
 

Raz'r

Super Anarchist
60,843
4,930
De Nile
Not sure of the point of this image.

Do you think the Bill of Rights does or does not apply to post 18th century technology? And how does the pic relate to whatever your point might be, once you articulate it?
Why would the 2nd apply to electric doodads? A firearm, or “arm” is pretty clearly defined.

Missiles? Not arms
Tanks? Nope
Artillery? Hmm, not sure.
Electric doodads? Certainly not an arm. Batt powered sex toys have more in common technologically with a taser than a firearm does.
 
Top