If you are waiting in line, to buy a pack of skittles, and you flee out the door because you see a person with a rifle slung over their shoulder, or a holstered firearms, you will be the one to have committed a crime.

And you would be the one prosecuted for it.

His posts are becoming more and more erratic, strange and disconnected from any kind of reality.

He eats in Restaurants with concealed carriers all around him with guns with no problem, but totally freaks out and gets paranoid at the mere idea of the same people open carrying and considers it grounds for justifiable petty theft.

Hope he never goes to Arizona or any other Open Carry states. He'll either starve or get thrown in the pokey for felony dine and dash.

IMNSHO, a clear case of advanced Hoplophobia Extremis.

And they say WE live in fear...

Nice.

I don't understand why you keep bringing that up? it has no bearing whatsoever on this conversation about theft. Why you keep bringing up old posts, on unrelated topics. Maybe you should speak to a trusted family member, or pray with your pastor about it.

You have been harboring these very strong emotions for a long while now. They can end up doing you harm, they can lead to hypertension, and possibly a stroke.

You are, in the op...

He already got at least 2 "Vacations" for calling people Zimmerman supporters.

Now, with the amnesty from Skinner during the primaries, he knows even with the 6+ hides he already has now, he can get away with it and won't be thrown out again for a while.

So he's like an ill behaved child that found out he can say something naughty and get away with it.

Now he's going to keep repeating it to get the online attention he so desperately wants.

Must be pretty lonely and angst ridden out there in the real world for the gun control keyboard warriors.

I guess I'll have to start eating Starburst instead.

You are suggesting that the word is used in "gun culture" to connote racism. That's a bizarre claim, since I see the word used far more in anti-gun culture. My take is that the word is used by everyone for its overtones of childlike innocence.

I look forward to your explanation of exactly how you interpret the use of the word "skittles" in Post #1.

Last edited Sun May 8, 2016, 06:52 AM - Edit history (1)

that's not a threat, it's a statement that the law makes it a felony to drive 35 mph over the speed limit.

No one can force you to commit a felony.

Besides, running out on a diner check would only be a class 3 or 4 misdemeanor, not a felony

But I can understand either approach.

Heck, Don Knotts made a very successful career out of pretending to be clueless and "less than brave" for decades.

Or possibly, English might not be your native language and you struggle to grasp meanings in context.

But if you truly feel threatened by posts here, you need to 1. alert on the post or go to ATA or 2. let Skinner know how fearful you are.

Or 3. do what the other whiny gun control fans do and put everyone that you disagree with on ignore. The equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears online and going "LA LA LA" really loud.

In the meantime, we don't need another frequent vacationing weasel with more than 6+ hides under the amnesty to tell us what DU is and isn't.

Hell, you can't even stay on Discussionist without getting booted and that takes some real, prime idiocy to get kicked off of.

In an open carry jurisdiction, "the guy with the gun" would be committing no crime. The guy who bolted from the store w/o paying for the merchandise in their possession would be committing a crime. This isn't remotely in question...it's the law.

Don't get me wrong: open carry is idiotic in the large majority of situations. But your assessment of the legalities involved is flat out false.

The only reason you're allowed to post at all, is Skinner's amnesty for people with 5 or more hides.

Those of us with a mind open to the facts followed the trial, listened to the testimony of the witnesses and recognized that the prosecution failed to prove it's case. The same prosecution that chose not to take the case to a Grand Jury because they knew a Grand Jury would review the facts and fail to indict.

If supporting due process, the facts and the right to a fair trial makes you a bad person in your eyes, I could care less.

Do you realize that no one really cares what you do when you see an open-carried AR-15?

Do you realize that no one is bullying anyone into doing anything?

Do you realize that people are just making fun of you when they ask you why you would run away?

Do you realize ...

I read his posts not for anything substantial, but because it's some of the funniest shit online. Well played, Stoney, well played

I had no idea....

...that indicates that those two people "support" Zimmerman.

But for some reason, his visits are very brief...

His visits remind me of a late night bout of flatulence in bedroom.

The night air can be so fresh, and crisp, than a foul stench, starts wiffling in, just a small hint at first, then gets overpowering, then just as suddenly as it happened, dissipates into the night air. Leaving laughter in it's wake.

my dogs? Sounds like my dogs.

I can tell who is who by their smell.

Yeah, kind of like these posts.

I think Zimmerman was a rampant asshole. However, he acted within the law and in reasonable fear of his life. When someone is pounding one's head into the pavement, there is a very real possibility that one will end up dead or drooling in a wheelchair for the rest of one's life. In such a case, deadly force is justified.

People have alternative narratives that ignore the laws and their application in this case. I prefer a legal system that adheres to statute and precedent. Obviously you don't.

You may be in love with your buzzwords, but they bear no relation to reality.

You are so proud of stiffing it to the low wage server that you would deny payment for services rendered. I bet you would still want your public paycheck if when it is legal in your state, a person legally conceal carries and you let your irrational fear win and run and refuse to do your job.

Still being censored?

...to avoidance, deterrence, and deescalation." That's some wise advice. IMHO, you've spent your time here in this group becoming the embodiment of the antithesis of this advice.

If it's anything but Colt, LWRC, and FN you don't have anything to worry about. All those others jam easily and you'd be safe...

How many time in your life have you seen someone open carry an AR??? Once? Never? Fewer than zero?

...at least, not for a first offense -- it's theft, but so small that neither the police nor prosecutors would be bothered with it. If it becomes a habit, though, you most likely will. It becomes a pattern of behavior.

Heck, even the restaurant probably won't bother pressing charges -- again, it's not worth their time. It is still theft to run out on the bill, and pretty reprehensible, but you'd probably get away with it. And, again, unless it becomes a habit.

I'm pretty sure you'll be invited not to return, though. People will only let you get away with stealing from them to a point.

I'm not sure what would happen if it came out that someone was advocating running out on the bill before they did it themselves. That could very well change things significantly. And if it were also someone in some way known in the community -- say, a teacher, for instance -- it could well have other consequences. That sort of behavior gets heard about rather rapidly, in my experience...

So, no, even with the small chances of legal consequences, I still wouldn't recommend such poor behavior. It's still theft, even if you get away from it, and it's just... well... pretty small, no matter what sort of nonsensical rhetoric you try to hide it behind.

...tell you what....

Take that crap down from my essay on Open Carry and I will come to your defense.

From Opencarry.org, the leading website and resource on the legal open carry of holstered handguns:

http://www.opencarry.org/long-gun-oc/

It's rude to slam a post with all that stuff the way you did.

I would never do that to you.

I was then challenged, by somebody ready to call me a liar.

It's happened many times in the past here.

This is not the first time that the memory of Andrea Farrington has been disrespected right here in this forum.

Some folks here get a kick out of disrespecting dead Iowans. Fuck that shit.

How many times have I been called a liar right here in this forum for simply mentioning the murder of Andrea Farrington?

The ammosexuals here in this forum have repeatedly attempted to cover up news of her cold-blooded murder at the hands of an OPEN CARRY AMMOSEXUAL.

They repeatedly discount the life of Andrea Farrington, attempting to make her into a non-person, as if she never existed.

That's because they don't care.

The just don't care about Iowans.

If you don't want proof offered when the lives of Iowans are disrespected and discounted as if they never existed, then you might want to tell folks here to stop disrespecting gun victims here in Iowa.

Tell them to stop pretending like they never existed and like the lives of Iowans don't matter.

They do.

Tell them to stop accusing folks who remember the victims of making their lives up.

Seriously.

He's shown nothing to indicate he is remotely qualified to provide legal advice when it comes to criminal law.


Anyone who is serious about understanding criminal law in their state should consult with a lawyer who specializes in criminal defense, not some alleged calculus professor at a university.