Stooping

**reason** · July 28th, 2005, 08:24 PM

Originally posted by Pi?a:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Captain Whizbang:
So my point still stands: Two dudes bumping uglies does not cause street violence. That others may want to attack the two dudes is a different issue. The violence is out of the control of the two dudes.

Not really. The fact that your two friends are not actually ?causing? street violence by your lights takes nothing away from the fact that others see it quite differently and will act on their perceptions not yours.

You keep confusing what motivates people with reality. People don?t act on reality. They act on their interpretation of reality.

To that vocal, oh so holy, minority your ugly bumping buddies (wouldn?t that hurt by the way?) are seen as just as much of a cause of street violence as the drug dealers. Really.

The ?logic? goes something like this. Taint natural. Degrades the family. The family is the kernel that holds this country together. Without the kernel everything goes to anarchy. Anarchy begets violence. Six degrees of separation and you have homo?s cause drive-bys. Seems nuts to you and me but not to the die hards who would take their bibles and thump your ugly into oblivion. To them it makes perfect sense and how could anyone not see it????

My point is: They think it makes sense. It doesn?t. We need to be careful about the validity of our own deeply held beliefs and always need to whip a little critical thinking on ?em just to be on the safe side lest we let our preconceptions and wishes skew our observations and conclusions.<hr /></blockquote>Everything you say is true. Just last winter a number of males walking alone in Northside were attacked, presumably because they were perceived as gay. I know at least others two who were assaulted outside bars (downtown and Newport).

The difference with this scenario is that the courts (and the general public) will side with the victim of the violence, not the perpetrator.

I'm sure we can find circumstances to the contrary, but by and large an unprovoked attack on someone who is gay or perceived to by gay will result in a conviction against the perpetrator. The gay person would not be blamed for someone assaulting him.

I'm rambling, but in a nutshell I'd say you're taking truth and trying to take it somewhere beyond where it needs to go.

[ July 28, 2005 05:26 PM: Message edited by: Captain Whizbang ]

**LanDroid** · July 28th, 2005, 09:32 PM

Originally posted by gae:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />In Pina's world we should allow the hookers and drug dealer roam because we wouldn't want to take away any of their rights, by gosh. And the homeowners who have to deal with occasional drive by? In Pina's world, they should just DEAL WITH IT!

That's correct, Cap'n. That *IS* the liberal agenda. Everyone has rights EXCEPT law abiding, tax paying citizens.
<hr /></blockquote>No, actually that would be the Ayn Rand Objectivist/Libertarian agenda. Top of that agenda is legalizing drugs and prostitution. They would also eliminate zoning laws and building codes. All this would make it impossible to stop drug dealers and pimps setting up a rock cocaine distribution house on one side of you and a whore house on the other, bookended by two different kinds of crack house. [img]graemlins/party.gif[/img]

**Piña** · July 29th, 2005, 03:06 AM

Originally posted by travelinman:
You just can't do it, can you?

What part of "already did" do you not understand?

I mean, I happen to know that you're stupid, intellectually lazy and unconcerned with anything except how you can get over on others but I really did think you could comprehend a simple statement.

You never cease to illustrate that no matter how deep you sink into the mire of dumb you can always count on trav being there looking up at ya.

**Piña** · July 29th, 2005, 03:12 AM

GS

Many good points. Gotta go for now, but will be back and address them.

ciao baby
Pi?a

**Gunslinger** · July 29th, 2005, 04:24 AM

Originally posted by Pi?a:
GS

Many good points. Gotta go for now, but will be back and address them.

ciao baby
Pi?a

Looking forward to continuing the debate.

Until later then...

**reason** · July 29th, 2005, 10:51 AM

I'd like to welcome the two latest stoopers, trav and gae, who stopped for for about a half an hour last night to keep an eye on the bros.

Overheard:

Hardcore Stooper: "What do you do for a living?"

trav: "I'm a drug dealer."

[ July 29, 2005 07:51 AM: Message edited by: Captain Whizbang ]

**travelinman** · July 29th, 2005, 12:50 PM

Originally posted by Captain Whizbang:
I'd like to welcome the two latest stoopers, trav and gae, who stopped for for about a half an hour last night to keep an eye on the bros.

Overheard:

Hardcore Stooper: "What do you do for a living?"

trav: "I'm a drug dealer."

[ July 29, 2005 07:51 AM: Message edited by: Captain Whizbang ]

Actually I?m a Really Cool Drug Dealer (RCDD).

**gae** · July 29th, 2005, 01:31 PM

You've got to admit, Cap'n, trav looks the part. Ask him to tell you about his experience at the Madrid airport.

We didn't have a name for it, but we've pretty much cleaned up our little corner. There was just something about trav going outside with his hair down, screaming "Get the F***" out of here that worked magic. The lib neighbors weren't too happy -- we've been told more than once that we need to "understand" and "make allowances". F*** that noise.

Pina, you are living in a dream world. We all know that, but I'm saying it again. Your idiotic contention that if the poor yoofs were just given a chance is tired liberal rhetoric. They HAVE a chance. The same chance that GS & jdf's kids do. The difference is that GS and jdf are making sure that their children take advantage of the opportunties. The morons who prowl this neighborhood, in their 6X tshirts with their pants belted around their thighs have been brought up to believe that someone else owes them something. And it's people like you and the poverty pimps who prepetuate that notion.

Cap'n, I'm glad you're on the white kids in the Hummer. Think they might have been heading for Jerome, by chance? Nah. Just because EVERYONE knows what goes on there, that statement is surely a misconception on my part.

Lan, there is nothing Ayn Rand about being thorougly pissed off that the non-contributors have more "rights" than the contributors.

And, Pina, let me say again that you are an idiot.

**travelinman** · July 29th, 2005, 01:46 PM

And if all my methods accomplish is to move the crime to another neighborhood that?s enough for me. It will clean up my area and increase my property value.

Tell you what pinhead, give me your address and I?ll front a few of those misunderstood young adults bus money and they can live with you.

Why don?t you put your socialist BS where your mouth is?

**LanDroid** · July 30th, 2005, 12:01 AM

"Lan, there is nothing Ayn Rand about being thorougly pissed off that the non-contributors have more "rights" than the contributors."

Ayn Rand would disagree that drug dealers and prostitutes are "non-contributors". They are participating in profitable economic activities that should be legal!

Thread: Stooping

Thread Tools

Display

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions