Harry's recent "incident"
 

Harry recently described an incident where he ended up being injured
in the course of protecting someone else from violence. Momentarily
suspending any possible disbelief in the facts as stated, a number of
troubling questions are raised in my mind.

Could the situation have been better handled without resorting to
physical violence? Let's assume that Harry was armed with a legal
concealed carry hand gun. Could he have legally pulled the gun and
ordered the alleged perpatrator to cease and desist? In the Florida
concealed carry course that I attended we were taught to never pull
your weapon unless you intend to use it. Otherwise you could possibly
be charged with brandishing and threatening. You are also
specifically taught to never fire a warning shot, and to never try and
effect an arrest. A person who fired a warning shot in Florida is
still in jail for that crime even though he had been threatened and
had no priors.

Another possible strategy is to order the person to stop, relying on
your physical presence and force of personality to carry the day.
Harry apparently tried to do that and was assaulted in return. What
to do next? Assault them back and risk escalation and/or injury?
Invoke self defense and shoot? Both are problematic.

So what's a person to do in Harry's situation? Tough call I think.
For discussion purposes let's leave personalities and political
leanings out of this. And yes, I know that will be difficult.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 10:15:41 PM UTC-5, Wayne. B wrote:

So what's a person to do in Harry's situation? Tough call I think.
For discussion purposes let's leave personalities and political
leanings out of this. And yes, I know that will be difficult.

I'm sure we all wished that krause had gotten the beating he so rightly deserves.
krause is a liar, anyway, and not to be taken as truthful about anything.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/4/2014 11:11 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 22:15:16 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

Harry recently described an incident where he ended up being injured
in the course of protecting someone else from violence. Momentarily
suspending any possible disbelief in the facts as stated, a number of
troubling questions are raised in my mind.

Could the situation have been better handled without resorting to
physical violence? Let's assume that Harry was armed with a legal
concealed carry hand gun. Could he have legally pulled the gun and
ordered the alleged perpatrator to cease and desist? In the Florida
concealed carry course that I attended we were taught to never pull
your weapon unless you intend to use it. Otherwise you could possibly
be charged with brandishing and threatening. You are also
specifically taught to never fire a warning shot, and to never try and
effect an arrest. A person who fired a warning shot in Florida is
still in jail for that crime even though he had been threatened and
had no priors.

Another possible strategy is to order the person to stop, relying on
your physical presence and force of personality to carry the day.
Harry apparently tried to do that and was assaulted in return. What
to do next? Assault them back and risk escalation and/or injury?
Invoke self defense and shoot? Both are problematic.

So what's a person to do in Harry's situation? Tough call I think.
For discussion purposes let's leave personalities and political
leanings out of this. And yes, I know that will be difficult.

A lawyer would tell you to call the cops.
I understand the instinct to just run over and sucker punch the guy
like Harry says he did but that is fraught with complications.
If you are lucky the guy lets you get away with it
He could turn around and have you arrested for assault and battery.
Abused spouses still tend to stand by their man and you could end up
with her testifying against you. ("We were just talking and this crazy
man attacked my husband")
Worst case, the other guy is an MMA fighter and he kicks your ass or
he just has a gun and pokes a hole in your chest claiming you attacked
him.

This is certainly a time when you should start with talking at a safe
enough distance so he can't sucker punch you.



First, according to Harry's account, he did *not* "run over and sucker
punch the guy". Harry said that when he saw the guy physically abusing
the woman and child, he ordered him to "stop". The guy took a swing at
Harry and missed. Harry returned fire, breaking his wrist in the process.

I think he did exactly the right thing under the circumstances. He
didn't attack the guy initially but had the right to swing back in
self-defense.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/5/2014 3:52 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/4/2014 11:11 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 22:15:16 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

Harry recently described an incident where he ended up being injured
in the course of protecting someone else from violence. Momentarily
suspending any possible disbelief in the facts as stated, a number of
troubling questions are raised in my mind.

Could the situation have been better handled without resorting to
physical violence? Let's assume that Harry was armed with a legal
concealed carry hand gun. Could he have legally pulled the gun and
ordered the alleged perpatrator to cease and desist? In the Florida
concealed carry course that I attended we were taught to never pull
your weapon unless you intend to use it. Otherwise you could possibly
be charged with brandishing and threatening. You are also
specifically taught to never fire a warning shot, and to never try and
effect an arrest. A person who fired a warning shot in Florida is
still in jail for that crime even though he had been threatened and
had no priors.

Another possible strategy is to order the person to stop, relying on
your physical presence and force of personality to carry the day.
Harry apparently tried to do that and was assaulted in return. What
to do next? Assault them back and risk escalation and/or injury?
Invoke self defense and shoot? Both are problematic.

So what's a person to do in Harry's situation? Tough call I think.
For discussion purposes let's leave personalities and political
leanings out of this. And yes, I know that will be difficult.

A lawyer would tell you to call the cops.
I understand the instinct to just run over and sucker punch the guy
like Harry says he did but that is fraught with complications.
If you are lucky the guy lets you get away with it
He could turn around and have you arrested for assault and battery.
Abused spouses still tend to stand by their man and you could end up
with her testifying against you. ("We were just talking and this crazy
man attacked my husband")
Worst case, the other guy is an MMA fighter and he kicks your ass or
he just has a gun and pokes a hole in your chest claiming you attacked
him.

This is certainly a time when you should start with talking at a safe
enough distance so he can't sucker punch you.



First, according to Harry's account, he did *not* "run over and sucker
punch the guy". Harry said that when he saw the guy physically abusing
the woman and child, he ordered him to "stop". The guy took a swing at
Harry and missed. Harry returned fire, breaking his wrist in the process.

I think he did exactly the right thing under the circumstances. He
didn't attack the guy initially but had the right to swing back in
self-defense.



harry Krause, "The new George Zimmerman" '-)

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 22:15:16 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

Harry recently described an incident where he ended up being injured
in the course of protecting someone else from violence. Momentarily
suspending any possible disbelief in the facts as stated, a number of
troubling questions are raised in my mind.

Could the situation have been better handled without resorting to
physical violence? Let's assume that Harry was armed with a legal
concealed carry hand gun. Could he have legally pulled the gun and
ordered the alleged perpatrator to cease and desist? In the Florida
concealed carry course that I attended we were taught to never pull
your weapon unless you intend to use it. Otherwise you could possibly
be charged with brandishing and threatening. You are also
specifically taught to never fire a warning shot, and to never try and
effect an arrest. A person who fired a warning shot in Florida is
still in jail for that crime even though he had been threatened and
had no priors.

Another possible strategy is to order the person to stop, relying on
your physical presence and force of personality to carry the day.
Harry apparently tried to do that and was assaulted in return. What
to do next? Assault them back and risk escalation and/or injury?
Invoke self defense and shoot? Both are problematic.

So what's a person to do in Harry's situation? Tough call I think.
For discussion purposes let's leave personalities and political
leanings out of this. And yes, I know that will be difficult.

Pull out cell phone and call cops. If the situation occurred as
described, Harry was very, very lucky the guy didn't pull a gun on him
- or just beat the **** out of him. Must have been a real small guy.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 22:15:16 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

Harry recently described an incident where he ended up being injured
in the course of protecting someone else from violence. Momentarily
suspending any possible disbelief in the facts as stated, a number of
troubling questions are raised in my mind.

Could the situation have been better handled without resorting to
physical violence? Let's assume that Harry was armed with a legal
concealed carry hand gun. Could he have legally pulled the gun and
ordered the alleged perpatrator to cease and desist? In the Florida
concealed carry course that I attended we were taught to never pull
your weapon unless you intend to use it. Otherwise you could possibly
be charged with brandishing and threatening. You are also
specifically taught to never fire a warning shot, and to never try and
effect an arrest. A person who fired a warning shot in Florida is
still in jail for that crime even though he had been threatened and
had no priors.

Another possible strategy is to order the person to stop, relying on
your physical presence and force of personality to carry the day.
Harry apparently tried to do that and was assaulted in return. What
to do next? Assault them back and risk escalation and/or injury?
Invoke self defense and shoot? Both are problematic.

So what's a person to do in Harry's situation? Tough call I think.
For discussion purposes let's leave personalities and political
leanings out of this. And yes, I know that will be difficult.


I think he did exactly the right thing. Certainly didn't warrant
pulling a gun on the guy.

What Harry did is what most guys would do, I think. Someone takes a
swing at you, your immediate and instinctive reaction is to swing back.
Someone gives you a shove, you shove back. I don't see anything
controversial or even unusual. He should feel good that he stopped the
physical abuse of the woman and kid.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/5/2014 3:52 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/4/2014 11:11 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 22:15:16 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

Harry recently described an incident where he ended up being injured
in the course of protecting someone else from violence. Momentarily
suspending any possible disbelief in the facts as stated, a number of
troubling questions are raised in my mind.

Could the situation have been better handled without resorting to
physical violence? Let's assume that Harry was armed with a legal
concealed carry hand gun. Could he have legally pulled the gun and
ordered the alleged perpatrator to cease and desist? In the Florida
concealed carry course that I attended we were taught to never pull
your weapon unless you intend to use it. Otherwise you could possibly
be charged with brandishing and threatening. You are also
specifically taught to never fire a warning shot, and to never try and
effect an arrest. A person who fired a warning shot in Florida is
still in jail for that crime even though he had been threatened and
had no priors.

Another possible strategy is to order the person to stop, relying on
your physical presence and force of personality to carry the day.
Harry apparently tried to do that and was assaulted in return. What
to do next? Assault them back and risk escalation and/or injury?
Invoke self defense and shoot? Both are problematic.

So what's a person to do in Harry's situation? Tough call I think.
For discussion purposes let's leave personalities and political
leanings out of this. And yes, I know that will be difficult.

A lawyer would tell you to call the cops.
I understand the instinct to just run over and sucker punch the guy
like Harry says he did but that is fraught with complications.
If you are lucky the guy lets you get away with it
He could turn around and have you arrested for assault and battery.
Abused spouses still tend to stand by their man and you could end up
with her testifying against you. ("We were just talking and this crazy
man attacked my husband")
Worst case, the other guy is an MMA fighter and he kicks your ass or
he just has a gun and pokes a hole in your chest claiming you attacked
him.

This is certainly a time when you should start with talking at a safe
enough distance so he can't sucker punch you.



First, according to Harry's account, he did *not* "run over and sucker
punch the guy". Harry said that when he saw the guy physically abusing
the woman and child, he ordered him to "stop". The guy took a swing at
Harry and missed. Harry returned fire, breaking his wrist in the process.

I think he did exactly the right thing under the circumstances. He
didn't attack the guy initially but had the right to swing back in
self-defense.



.... in this hypothetical case... lol. Really though, I doubt this is
anywhere near what really happened to harry krause....

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/5/2014 7:55 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 22:15:16 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

Harry recently described an incident where he ended up being injured
in the course of protecting someone else from violence. Momentarily
suspending any possible disbelief in the facts as stated, a number of
troubling questions are raised in my mind.

Could the situation have been better handled without resorting to
physical violence? Let's assume that Harry was armed with a legal
concealed carry hand gun. Could he have legally pulled the gun and
ordered the alleged perpatrator to cease and desist? In the Florida
concealed carry course that I attended we were taught to never pull
your weapon unless you intend to use it. Otherwise you could possibly
be charged with brandishing and threatening. You are also
specifically taught to never fire a warning shot, and to never try and
effect an arrest. A person who fired a warning shot in Florida is
still in jail for that crime even though he had been threatened and
had no priors.

Another possible strategy is to order the person to stop, relying on
your physical presence and force of personality to carry the day.
Harry apparently tried to do that and was assaulted in return. What
to do next? Assault them back and risk escalation and/or injury?
Invoke self defense and shoot? Both are problematic.

So what's a person to do in Harry's situation? Tough call I think.
For discussion purposes let's leave personalities and political
leanings out of this. And yes, I know that will be difficult.


I think he did exactly the right thing. Certainly didn't warrant
pulling a gun on the guy.

What Harry did is what most guys would do, I think. Someone takes a
swing at you, your immediate and instinctive reaction is to swing back.
Someone gives you a shove, you shove back. I don't see anything
controversial or even unusual. He should feel good that he stopped the
physical abuse of the woman and kid.




Oh my God....

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/5/14 7:29 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 22:15:16 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

Harry recently described an incident where he ended up being injured
in the course of protecting someone else from violence. Momentarily
suspending any possible disbelief in the facts as stated, a number of
troubling questions are raised in my mind.

Could the situation have been better handled without resorting to
physical violence? Let's assume that Harry was armed with a legal
concealed carry hand gun. Could he have legally pulled the gun and
ordered the alleged perpatrator to cease and desist? In the Florida
concealed carry course that I attended we were taught to never pull
your weapon unless you intend to use it. Otherwise you could possibly
be charged with brandishing and threatening. You are also
specifically taught to never fire a warning shot, and to never try and
effect an arrest. A person who fired a warning shot in Florida is
still in jail for that crime even though he had been threatened and
had no priors.

Another possible strategy is to order the person to stop, relying on
your physical presence and force of personality to carry the day.
Harry apparently tried to do that and was assaulted in return. What
to do next? Assault them back and risk escalation and/or injury?
Invoke self defense and shoot? Both are problematic.

So what's a person to do in Harry's situation? Tough call I think.
For discussion purposes let's leave personalities and political
leanings out of this. And yes, I know that will be difficult.

Pull out cell phone and call cops. If the situation occurred as
described, Harry was very, very lucky the guy didn't pull a gun on him
- or just beat the **** out of him. Must have been a real small guy.



six footer but skinny and stupid, like you...he let a guy twice his age
drop him.

--
“There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the
economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.” -
Norman Mailer

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 10:34:27 AM UTC-5, F*O*A*D wrote:

six footer but skinny and stupid, like you...he let a guy twice his age
drop him.


Sure, krause....sure.

Most likely krause got bumped into at the Starbucks, spilling his Mocha Latte, and krause verbally berated him.

Besides, krause isn't smart enough to cure the pustules on his fat, greasy, old body.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/5/14 11:57 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 03:52:58 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/4/2014 11:11 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 22:15:16 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

Harry recently described an incident where he ended up being injured
in the course of protecting someone else from violence. Momentarily
suspending any possible disbelief in the facts as stated, a number of
troubling questions are raised in my mind.

Could the situation have been better handled without resorting to
physical violence? Let's assume that Harry was armed with a legal
concealed carry hand gun. Could he have legally pulled the gun and
ordered the alleged perpatrator to cease and desist? In the Florida
concealed carry course that I attended we were taught to never pull
your weapon unless you intend to use it. Otherwise you could possibly
be charged with brandishing and threatening. You are also
specifically taught to never fire a warning shot, and to never try and
effect an arrest. A person who fired a warning shot in Florida is
still in jail for that crime even though he had been threatened and
had no priors.

Another possible strategy is to order the person to stop, relying on
your physical presence and force of personality to carry the day.
Harry apparently tried to do that and was assaulted in return. What
to do next? Assault them back and risk escalation and/or injury?
Invoke self defense and shoot? Both are problematic.

So what's a person to do in Harry's situation? Tough call I think.
For discussion purposes let's leave personalities and political
leanings out of this. And yes, I know that will be difficult.

A lawyer would tell you to call the cops.
I understand the instinct to just run over and sucker punch the guy
like Harry says he did but that is fraught with complications.
If you are lucky the guy lets you get away with it
He could turn around and have you arrested for assault and battery.
Abused spouses still tend to stand by their man and you could end up
with her testifying against you. ("We were just talking and this crazy
man attacked my husband")
Worst case, the other guy is an MMA fighter and he kicks your ass or
he just has a gun and pokes a hole in your chest claiming you attacked
him.

This is certainly a time when you should start with talking at a safe
enough distance so he can't sucker punch you.



First, according to Harry's account, he did *not* "run over and sucker
punch the guy". Harry said that when he saw the guy physically abusing
the woman and child, he ordered him to "stop". The guy took a swing at
Harry and missed. Harry returned fire, breaking his wrist in the process.

I think he did exactly the right thing under the circumstances. He
didn't attack the guy initially but had the right to swing back in
self-defense.


That is what Zimmerman said


Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

--
“There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the
economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.” -
Norman Mailer

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 11:57 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 03:52:58 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/4/2014 11:11 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 22:15:16 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

Harry recently described an incident where he ended up being injured
in the course of protecting someone else from violence. Momentarily
suspending any possible disbelief in the facts as stated, a number of
troubling questions are raised in my mind.

Could the situation have been better handled without resorting to
physical violence? Let's assume that Harry was armed with a legal
concealed carry hand gun. Could he have legally pulled the gun and
ordered the alleged perpatrator to cease and desist? In the Florida
concealed carry course that I attended we were taught to never pull
your weapon unless you intend to use it. Otherwise you could possibly
be charged with brandishing and threatening. You are also
specifically taught to never fire a warning shot, and to never try and
effect an arrest. A person who fired a warning shot in Florida is
still in jail for that crime even though he had been threatened and
had no priors.

Another possible strategy is to order the person to stop, relying on
your physical presence and force of personality to carry the day.
Harry apparently tried to do that and was assaulted in return. What
to do next? Assault them back and risk escalation and/or injury?
Invoke self defense and shoot? Both are problematic.

So what's a person to do in Harry's situation? Tough call I think.
For discussion purposes let's leave personalities and political
leanings out of this. And yes, I know that will be difficult.

A lawyer would tell you to call the cops.
I understand the instinct to just run over and sucker punch the guy
like Harry says he did but that is fraught with complications.
If you are lucky the guy lets you get away with it
He could turn around and have you arrested for assault and battery.
Abused spouses still tend to stand by their man and you could end up
with her testifying against you. ("We were just talking and this crazy
man attacked my husband")
Worst case, the other guy is an MMA fighter and he kicks your ass or
he just has a gun and pokes a hole in your chest claiming you attacked
him.

This is certainly a time when you should start with talking at a safe
enough distance so he can't sucker punch you.



First, according to Harry's account, he did *not* "run over and sucker
punch the guy". Harry said that when he saw the guy physically abusing
the woman and child, he ordered him to "stop". The guy took a swing at
Harry and missed. Harry returned fire, breaking his wrist in the process.

I think he did exactly the right thing under the circumstances. He
didn't attack the guy initially but had the right to swing back in
self-defense.


That is what Zimmerman said


Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Bad day, huh Harry?

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 2:19:07 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Bad day, huh Harry?

It's been a bad few days since he fell down the basement stairs.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

wrote:
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 2:19:07 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Bad day, huh Harry?

It's been a bad few days since he fell down the basement stairs.

Drunk and fat.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

Poco Loco wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 11:57 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 03:52:58 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/4/2014 11:11 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 22:15:16 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

Harry recently described an incident where he ended up being injured
in the course of protecting someone else from violence. Momentarily
suspending any possible disbelief in the facts as stated, a number of
troubling questions are raised in my mind.

Could the situation have been better handled without resorting to
physical violence? Let's assume that Harry was armed with a legal
concealed carry hand gun. Could he have legally pulled the gun and
ordered the alleged perpatrator to cease and desist? In the Florida
concealed carry course that I attended we were taught to never pull
your weapon unless you intend to use it. Otherwise you could possibly
be charged with brandishing and threatening. You are also
specifically taught to never fire a warning shot, and to never try and
effect an arrest. A person who fired a warning shot in Florida is
still in jail for that crime even though he had been threatened and
had no priors.

Another possible strategy is to order the person to stop, relying on
your physical presence and force of personality to carry the day.
Harry apparently tried to do that and was assaulted in return. What
to do next? Assault them back and risk escalation and/or injury?
Invoke self defense and shoot? Both are problematic.

So what's a person to do in Harry's situation? Tough call I think.
For discussion purposes let's leave personalities and political
leanings out of this. And yes, I know that will be difficult.

A lawyer would tell you to call the cops.
I understand the instinct to just run over and sucker punch the guy
like Harry says he did but that is fraught with complications.
If you are lucky the guy lets you get away with it
He could turn around and have you arrested for assault and battery.
Abused spouses still tend to stand by their man and you could end up
with her testifying against you. ("We were just talking and this crazy
man attacked my husband")
Worst case, the other guy is an MMA fighter and he kicks your ass or
he just has a gun and pokes a hole in your chest claiming you attacked
him.

This is certainly a time when you should start with talking at a safe
enough distance so he can't sucker punch you.



First, according to Harry's account, he did *not* "run over and sucker
punch the guy". Harry said that when he saw the guy physically abusing
the woman and child, he ordered him to "stop". The guy took a swing at
Harry and missed. Harry returned fire, breaking his wrist in the process.

I think he did exactly the right thing under the circumstances. He
didn't attack the guy initially but had the right to swing back in
self-defense.


That is what Zimmerman said


Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Bad day, huh Harry?

Not for me, dirtbag.
--
Posted from my iPhone

Harry's recent "incident"
 

Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 2:19:07 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Bad day, huh Harry?

It's been a bad few days since he fell down the basement stairs.

Drunk and fat.


-- is that why you fell off the roof?
Posted from my iPhone

Harry's recent "incident"
 

F.O.A.D. wrote:
Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 2:19:07 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Bad day, huh Harry?

It's been a bad few days since he fell down the basement stairs.

Drunk and fat.


-- is that why you fell off the roof?
Posted from my iPhone

We are referring to you. How drunk were you?

Harry's recent "incident"
 

Califbill wrote:
F.O.A.D. wrote:
Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 2:19:07 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Bad day, huh Harry?

It's been a bad few days since he fell down the basement stairs.

Drunk and fat.


-- is that why you fell off the roof?
Posted from my iPhone

We are .referring to you. How drunk were you?

I don't drink...never have. So far this year I've gone through half a six
pack of beer maybe four beers and a couple of margaritas. Don't like the
taste of booze very much. Don't like cocked up spicy barbecue either.
Unlike you I don't fall off roofs.
--
Posted from my iPhone

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/5/2014 5:05 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
Califbill wrote:
F.O.A.D. wrote:
Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 2:19:07 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Bad day, huh Harry?

It's been a bad few days since he fell down the basement stairs.

Drunk and fat.


-- is that why you fell off the roof?
Posted from my iPhone

We are .referring to you. How drunk were you?

I don't drink...never have. So far this year I've gone through half a six
pack of beer maybe four beers and a couple of margaritas. Don't like the
taste of booze very much. Don't like cocked up spicy barbecue either.
Unlike you I don't fall off roofs.


Unlike him you're scared to go on a roof.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 5 Nov 2014 22:05:18 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

I don't drink...never have. So far this afternoon I've gone through half a six
pack of beer maybe four beers and a couple of margaritas. Don't like the
taste of booze very much.

===

Uh huh.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/5/14 9:31 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On 5 Nov 2014 22:05:18 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

I don't drink...never have. So far this year I've gone through half a six
pack of beer maybe four beers and a couple of margaritas. Don't like the
taste of booze very much.

===

Uh huh.


Projecting your alcoholism, eh?

--
“There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the
economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.” -
Norman Mailer

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 22:18:37 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 9:31 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On 5 Nov 2014 22:05:18 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

I don't drink...never have. So far this year I've gone through half a six
pack of beer maybe four beers and a couple of margaritas. Don't like the
taste of booze very much.

===

Uh huh.


Projecting your alcoholism, eh?

===

Projecting your inner asshat? What's this "eh" stuff, eh?

Did you convert to Canadian or is that where you dodged the draft, eh?

Harry's recent "incident"
 

F.O.A.D. wrote:
Califbill wrote:
F.O.A.D. wrote:
Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 2:19:07 PM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Bad day, huh Harry?

It's been a bad few days since he fell down the basement stairs.

Drunk and fat.


-- is that why you fell off the roof?
Posted from my iPhone

We are .referring to you. How drunk were you?

I don't drink...never have. So far this year I've gone through half a six
pack of beer maybe four beers and a couple of margaritas. Don't like the
taste of booze very much. Don't like cocked up spicy barbecue either.
Unlike you I don't fall off roofs.

Because you hire anything requiring work done. Drugs? Why you were in a
brawl?

Harry's recent "incident"
 

Wayne.B wrote:
On 5 Nov 2014 22:05:18 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

I don't drink...never have. So far this afternoon I've gone through half a six
pack of beer maybe four beers and a couple of margaritas. Don't like the
taste of booze very much.

===

Uh huh.

Drugs.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/6/14 12:19 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 11:57 AM, wrote:

That is what Zimmerman said


Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Are you really saying the only way you could deal with this was to get
in a fist fight?
How would you have dealt with it if this guy was not such an easy guy
to beat up?



I realize I don't have the frontline combat experience of you and some
of the other right-wingers here, so perhaps I should've waited for the
guy to really beat the crap out of that woman. I was not intending to
trade punches with the fellow. I simply walked over to where they were
and asked him to stop. He responded by taking a swing at me and he
missed. My reflexes took over and I hit him as hard as i could. End of
fight. I don't know whether he was easy to beat up or not... I landed a
Lucky punch.

Perhaps you would've stood your ground and shot him. You seem trigger-happy.


--
“There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the
economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.” -
Norman Mailer

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/5/2014 9:31 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On 5 Nov 2014 22:05:18 GMT, F.O.A.D. wrote:

I don't drink...never have. So far this afternoon I've gone through half a six
pack of beer maybe four beers and a couple of margaritas. Don't like the
taste of booze very much.

===

Uh huh.


Right! I'll bet he finds excuses to go to Washington more often, now
that one of his vices is legal there.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/6/2014 12:19 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 11:57 AM, wrote:

That is what Zimmerman said


Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Are you really saying the only way you could deal with this was to get
in a fist fight?
How would you have dealt with it if this guy was not such an easy guy
to beat up?


Turns out it's not easy for him to beat anyone up anymore, without
shattering his own bones. He's just going to have to revert to his old
trick of breaking others bones, ramming them with his truck bumper.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/6/2014 6:53 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
I landed a Lucky punch.

Remember that when you report for your MRI.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/6/14 10:48 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 06:53:33 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/6/14 12:19 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 11:57 AM, wrote:

That is what Zimmerman said


Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Are you really saying the only way you could deal with this was to get
in a fist fight?
How would you have dealt with it if this guy was not such an easy guy
to beat up?



I realize I don't have the frontline combat experience of you and some
of the other right-wingers here, so perhaps I should've waited for the
guy to really beat the crap out of that woman. I was not intending to
trade punches with the fellow. I simply walked over to where they were
and asked him to stop. He responded by taking a swing at me and he
missed. My reflexes took over and I hit him as hard as i could. End of
fight. I don't know whether he was easy to beat up or not... I landed a
Lucky punch.


My point and the same thing I said about Zimmerman is you should have
never got close enough to him to allow him to take a swing at you. It
is basic self defense 101. If you were going to try to talk this guy
down, you can do it from 10 feet away, 20 is better.
If your intent was to get in a fight from the beginning, then you
should just go hit the guy. In the end you are not on much firmer
ground is you just provoked the fight

Perhaps you would've stood your ground and shot him. You seem trigger-happy.

All I ever said about this is you could have been shot, other than to
point out that if your "lucky punch" turned out to be fatal, you have
as good a chance of going to jail as if you shot him.

I know a guy who did 7 years in Maryland for a "lucky punch" in what
most people would say was a more justifiable situation (attempting to
remove an unwelcome person from his home)

I hope you get better soon.



Thanks. I had and have no concerns about being prosecuted for coming to
the aid of a woman and child being physically abused in a parking lot by
a bully. Nor am I interested in playing "what if" about it.

--
“There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the
economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.” -
Norman Mailer

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/6/2014 10:48 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 06:53:33 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/6/14 12:19 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 11:57 AM, wrote:

That is what Zimmerman said


Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Are you really saying the only way you could deal with this was to get
in a fist fight?
How would you have dealt with it if this guy was not such an easy guy
to beat up?



I realize I don't have the frontline combat experience of you and some
of the other right-wingers here, so perhaps I should've waited for the
guy to really beat the crap out of that woman. I was not intending to
trade punches with the fellow. I simply walked over to where they were
and asked him to stop. He responded by taking a swing at me and he
missed. My reflexes took over and I hit him as hard as i could. End of
fight. I don't know whether he was easy to beat up or not... I landed a
Lucky punch.


My point and the same thing I said about Zimmerman is you should have
never got close enough to him to allow him to take a swing at you. It
is basic self defense 101. If you were going to try to talk this guy
down, you can do it from 10 feet away, 20 is better.
If your intent was to get in a fight from the beginning, then you
should just go hit the guy. In the end you are not on much firmer
ground is you just provoked the fight

Perhaps you would've stood your ground and shot him. You seem trigger-happy.

All I ever said about this is you could have been shot, other than to
point out that if your "lucky punch" turned out to be fatal, you have
as good a chance of going to jail as if you shot him.

I know a guy who did 7 years in Maryland for a "lucky punch" in what
most people would say was a more justifiable situation (attempting to
remove an unwelcome person from his home)

I hope you get better soon.



Your depth of knowledge is beyond amazing Greg. Now you are an expert
on the proper manner in which to come to the aid of a woman and child
being physically abused by a guy.

"Excuse me sir, (from 20 feet away) not to interrupt, but would you mind
refraining from slapping them around? I have an iPhone here and I know
how to use it."

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/6/14 11:39 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/6/2014 10:48 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 06:53:33 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/6/14 12:19 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 11:57 AM, wrote:

That is what Zimmerman said


Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right
wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few
others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Are you really saying the only way you could deal with this was to get
in a fist fight?
How would you have dealt with it if this guy was not such an easy guy
to beat up?



I realize I don't have the frontline combat experience of you and some
of the other right-wingers here, so perhaps I should've waited for the
guy to really beat the crap out of that woman. I was not intending to
trade punches with the fellow. I simply walked over to where they were
and asked him to stop. He responded by taking a swing at me and he
missed. My reflexes took over and I hit him as hard as i could. End of
fight. I don't know whether he was easy to beat up or not... I landed a
Lucky punch.


My point and the same thing I said about Zimmerman is you should have
never got close enough to him to allow him to take a swing at you. It
is basic self defense 101. If you were going to try to talk this guy
down, you can do it from 10 feet away, 20 is better.
If your intent was to get in a fight from the beginning, then you
should just go hit the guy. In the end you are not on much firmer
ground is you just provoked the fight

Perhaps you would've stood your ground and shot him. You seem
trigger-happy.

All I ever said about this is you could have been shot, other than to
point out that if your "lucky punch" turned out to be fatal, you have
as good a chance of going to jail as if you shot him.

I know a guy who did 7 years in Maryland for a "lucky punch" in what
most people would say was a more justifiable situation (attempting to
remove an unwelcome person from his home)

I hope you get better soon.



Your depth of knowledge is beyond amazing Greg. Now you are an expert
on the proper manner in which to come to the aid of a woman and child
being physically abused by a guy.

"Excuse me sir, (from 20 feet away) not to interrupt, but would you mind
refraining from slapping them around? I have an iPhone here and I know
how to use it."




Not being a military trained combat warrior like Greg, Herring, FlaGrim,
et al, I'm not afraid to play my hand. As I have long suspected, they
are heavily armed...pussies.

--
“There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the
economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.” -
Norman Mailer

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On Thursday, November 6, 2014 11:39:26 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:


Your depth of knowledge is beyond amazing Greg. Now you are an expert
on the proper manner in which to come to the aid of a woman and child
being physically abused by a guy.

"Excuse me sir, (from 20 feet away) not to interrupt, but would you mind
refraining from slapping them around? I have an iPhone here and I know
how to use it."

Having a bad day, luddite? You're kind of being a condescending asshole.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 11:39:26 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Your depth of knowledge is beyond amazing Greg. Now you are an expert
on the proper manner in which to come to the aid of a woman and child
being physically abused by a guy.

"Excuse me sir, (from 20 feet away) not to interrupt, but would you mind
refraining from slapping them around? I have an iPhone here and I know
how to use it."

===

Whistle Time out, unnecessary roughness, 15 yard penalty and loss
of down.

All kidding aside I think there are some interesting and valid
discussion points here that should be encouraged, not discouraged.

No need to emulate Harry just because he got his wrist out of joint.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/6/2014 12:06 PM, wrote:
On Thursday, November 6, 2014 11:39:26 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:


Your depth of knowledge is beyond amazing Greg. Now you are an expert
on the proper manner in which to come to the aid of a woman and child
being physically abused by a guy.

"Excuse me sir, (from 20 feet away) not to interrupt, but would you mind
refraining from slapping them around? I have an iPhone here and I know
how to use it."

Having a bad day, luddite? You're kind of being a condescending asshole.



So what? Just trying to adopt the culture of the newsgroup.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/6/2014 12:27 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 11:39:26 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/6/2014 10:48 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 06:53:33 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/6/14 12:19 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 11:57 AM, wrote:

That is what Zimmerman said


Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Are you really saying the only way you could deal with this was to get
in a fist fight?
How would you have dealt with it if this guy was not such an easy guy
to beat up?



I realize I don't have the frontline combat experience of you and some
of the other right-wingers here, so perhaps I should've waited for the
guy to really beat the crap out of that woman. I was not intending to
trade punches with the fellow. I simply walked over to where they were
and asked him to stop. He responded by taking a swing at me and he
missed. My reflexes took over and I hit him as hard as i could. End of
fight. I don't know whether he was easy to beat up or not... I landed a
Lucky punch.


My point and the same thing I said about Zimmerman is you should have
never got close enough to him to allow him to take a swing at you. It
is basic self defense 101. If you were going to try to talk this guy
down, you can do it from 10 feet away, 20 is better.
If your intent was to get in a fight from the beginning, then you
should just go hit the guy. In the end you are not on much firmer
ground is you just provoked the fight

Perhaps you would've stood your ground and shot him. You seem trigger-happy.

All I ever said about this is you could have been shot, other than to
point out that if your "lucky punch" turned out to be fatal, you have
as good a chance of going to jail as if you shot him.

I know a guy who did 7 years in Maryland for a "lucky punch" in what
most people would say was a more justifiable situation (attempting to
remove an unwelcome person from his home)

I hope you get better soon.



Your depth of knowledge is beyond amazing Greg. Now you are an expert
on the proper manner in which to come to the aid of a woman and child
being physically abused by a guy.

"Excuse me sir, (from 20 feet away) not to interrupt, but would you mind
refraining from slapping them around? I have an iPhone here and I know
how to use it."



I have been involved with these things more times than I like to think
about and I know a lot of cops. Women tend to stand by their man, no
matter what a weasel he is.

As for the self defense issue. I have taken the course several times
and they all emphasize, distance is your friend.
If you do not want to end up in a fist fight or a scramble on the
ground, keep some distance.
If you want to fight, just give them your best shot right away and be
prepared to face the consequences.
Just don't be surprised if the woman you "rescued" testifies against
you. She is still going to go home and sleep with the weasel about 90%
of the time. (just look at all of those football players and the women
they beat the **** out of)
This "Don Quixote" stuff is great in the movies but don't count on
Dulcinea taking your side when it is all over.


Yup. We've become a nation governed by political correctness and self
concerns. Let the ones being battered fend for themselves.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/6/14 12:34 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 11:53:59 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

Not being a military trained combat warrior like Greg, Herring, FlaGrim,
et al, I'm not afraid to play my hand.

This is not military combat it is urban warfare and I have had more
than my share of getting in the middle of wife/girlfriend spats with
their abusive partner. It is usually an unrewarding encounter because
they seldom change anything. I have been in physical encounters but
simply talking it out works out better for everyone involved.


As I have long suspected, they
are heavily armed...pussies.

You seem to be more heavily armed than anyone else here.



Ahh, but I am not a heavily armed *pussy*, like most of you righties.

--
“There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the
economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.” -
Norman Mailer

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/6/14 12:44 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/6/2014 12:27 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 11:39:26 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/6/2014 10:48 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 06:53:33 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/6/14 12:19 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 11:57 AM, wrote:

That is what Zimmerman said


Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right
wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you
are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few
others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Are you really saying the only way you could deal with this was to
get
in a fist fight?
How would you have dealt with it if this guy was not such an easy guy
to beat up?



I realize I don't have the frontline combat experience of you and
some
of the other right-wingers here, so perhaps I should've waited for the
guy to really beat the crap out of that woman. I was not intending to
trade punches with the fellow. I simply walked over to where they were
and asked him to stop. He responded by taking a swing at me and he
missed. My reflexes took over and I hit him as hard as i could. End of
fight. I don't know whether he was easy to beat up or not... I
landed a
Lucky punch.


My point and the same thing I said about Zimmerman is you should have
never got close enough to him to allow him to take a swing at you. It
is basic self defense 101. If you were going to try to talk this guy
down, you can do it from 10 feet away, 20 is better.
If your intent was to get in a fight from the beginning, then you
should just go hit the guy. In the end you are not on much firmer
ground is you just provoked the fight

Perhaps you would've stood your ground and shot him. You seem
trigger-happy.

All I ever said about this is you could have been shot, other than to
point out that if your "lucky punch" turned out to be fatal, you have
as good a chance of going to jail as if you shot him.

I know a guy who did 7 years in Maryland for a "lucky punch" in what
most people would say was a more justifiable situation (attempting to
remove an unwelcome person from his home)

I hope you get better soon.



Your depth of knowledge is beyond amazing Greg. Now you are an expert
on the proper manner in which to come to the aid of a woman and child
being physically abused by a guy.

"Excuse me sir, (from 20 feet away) not to interrupt, but would you mind
refraining from slapping them around? I have an iPhone here and I know
how to use it."



I have been involved with these things more times than I like to think
about and I know a lot of cops. Women tend to stand by their man, no
matter what a weasel he is.

As for the self defense issue. I have taken the course several times
and they all emphasize, distance is your friend.
If you do not want to end up in a fist fight or a scramble on the
ground, keep some distance.
If you want to fight, just give them your best shot right away and be
prepared to face the consequences.
Just don't be surprised if the woman you "rescued" testifies against
you. She is still going to go home and sleep with the weasel about 90%
of the time. (just look at all of those football players and the women
they beat the **** out of)
This "Don Quixote" stuff is great in the movies but don't count on
Dulcinea taking your side when it is all over.


Yup. We've become a nation governed by political correctness and self
concerns. Let the ones being battered fend for themselves.




It's the Republi-Corp way.

--
“There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the
economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.” -
Norman Mailer

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/6/2014 12:34 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 11:53:59 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

Not being a military trained combat warrior like Greg, Herring, FlaGrim,
et al, I'm not afraid to play my hand.

This is not military combat it is urban warfare and I have had more
than my share of getting in the middle of wife/girlfriend spats with
their abusive partner. It is usually an unrewarding encounter because
they seldom change anything. I have been in physical encounters but
simply talking it out works out better for everyone involved.


As I have long suspected, they
are heavily armed...pussies.

You seem to be more heavily armed than anyone else here.




Greg, no offense, but you seem to think you are the only person on the
planet who has any experience with violence, police, lawyers, lawsuits
or domestic spats.

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On 11/6/2014 11:53 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 11/6/14 11:39 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/6/2014 10:48 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 06:53:33 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/6/14 12:19 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 11:57 AM, wrote:

That is what Zimmerman said


Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right
wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few
others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Are you really saying the only way you could deal with this was to get
in a fist fight?
How would you have dealt with it if this guy was not such an easy guy
to beat up?



I realize I don't have the frontline combat experience of you and some
of the other right-wingers here, so perhaps I should've waited for the
guy to really beat the crap out of that woman. I was not intending to
trade punches with the fellow. I simply walked over to where they were
and asked him to stop. He responded by taking a swing at me and he
missed. My reflexes took over and I hit him as hard as i could. End of
fight. I don't know whether he was easy to beat up or not... I landed a
Lucky punch.


My point and the same thing I said about Zimmerman is you should have
never got close enough to him to allow him to take a swing at you. It
is basic self defense 101. If you were going to try to talk this guy
down, you can do it from 10 feet away, 20 is better.
If your intent was to get in a fight from the beginning, then you
should just go hit the guy. In the end you are not on much firmer
ground is you just provoked the fight

Perhaps you would've stood your ground and shot him. You seem
trigger-happy.

All I ever said about this is you could have been shot, other than to
point out that if your "lucky punch" turned out to be fatal, you have
as good a chance of going to jail as if you shot him.

I know a guy who did 7 years in Maryland for a "lucky punch" in what
most people would say was a more justifiable situation (attempting to
remove an unwelcome person from his home)

I hope you get better soon.



Your depth of knowledge is beyond amazing Greg. Now you are an expert
on the proper manner in which to come to the aid of a woman and child
being physically abused by a guy.

"Excuse me sir, (from 20 feet away) not to interrupt, but would you mind
refraining from slapping them around? I have an iPhone here and I know
how to use it."




Not being a military trained combat warrior like Greg, Herring, FlaGrim,
et al, I'm not afraid to play my hand. As I have long suspected, they
are heavily armed...pussies.


Hows your "hand" feel today. I'll bey you wished you'd used
your vocabulary to assault the guy instead of your mighty fist. ;-)

Harry's recent "incident"
 

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 11:01:59 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/6/14 10:48 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 06:53:33 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/6/14 12:19 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:33:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 11/5/14 11:57 AM, wrote:

That is what Zimmerman said


Gee, Greg, I used to think you were one of the few bright right wingers
in this sea of conservative stupidity, but now I am realizing you are
just as dimwitted as flajim, psychoscotty, herring, and a few others in
that crowd of intellectually disableds.

Are you really saying the only way you could deal with this was to get
in a fist fight?
How would you have dealt with it if this guy was not such an easy guy
to beat up?



I realize I don't have the frontline combat experience of you and some
of the other right-wingers here, so perhaps I should've waited for the
guy to really beat the crap out of that woman. I was not intending to
trade punches with the fellow. I simply walked over to where they were
and asked him to stop. He responded by taking a swing at me and he
missed. My reflexes took over and I hit him as hard as i could. End of
fight. I don't know whether he was easy to beat up or not... I landed a
Lucky punch.


My point and the same thing I said about Zimmerman is you should have
never got close enough to him to allow him to take a swing at you. It
is basic self defense 101. If you were going to try to talk this guy
down, you can do it from 10 feet away, 20 is better.
If your intent was to get in a fight from the beginning, then you
should just go hit the guy. In the end you are not on much firmer
ground is you just provoked the fight

Perhaps you would've stood your ground and shot him. You seem trigger-happy.

All I ever said about this is you could have been shot, other than to
point out that if your "lucky punch" turned out to be fatal, you have
as good a chance of going to jail as if you shot him.

I know a guy who did 7 years in Maryland for a "lucky punch" in what
most people would say was a more justifiable situation (attempting to
remove an unwelcome person from his home)

I hope you get better soon.



Thanks. I had and have no concerns about being prosecuted for coming to
the aid of a woman and child being physically abused in a parking lot by
a bully. Nor am I interested in playing "what if" about it.

Maybe you should have just kept the whole 'incident' to yourself?
There would be no 'what if's' then, would there. Of course, the old
narcissism would suffer immensely, eh?