What's new
By:
Filters

Protesters bring guns and mobs to Colorado Springs.

Just...just quit while you're ahead man. :laughing:
 
woods said:
Just...just quit while you're ahead man. :laughing:
Click to expand...

If a group is coming to my location and they have proven to be very aggressive...I won't wait to take an aggressive defensive position after they arrive.
 
Thumping said:
How do you know? How long does it take to throw up a sand bag? How do you know the items were not already in place? How do you know so much about shit you were not involved in or there? How do you know he wasn't just using the optics looking for issues?

Tell me....you seem to know it all. So you should not have any problems answering them.
Click to expand...

Seriously? :laughing: You're better at arguing on the internet than this. I've seen it.
 
Thumping said:
You're avoiding the questions. I've seen you do that too:flipoff2:
Click to expand...

Go back and read what you wrote again. I think we both know I don't need to answer those questions because you're just grasping at straws.

Example: basic common sense tells people that you don't "use the optics" on your rifle to "look for issues" in a crowded public area.
 
Harry Johnson said:
Go back and read what you wrote again. I think we both know I don't need to answer those questions because you're just grasping at straws.

Example: basic common sense tells people that you don't "use the optics" on your rifle to "look for issues" in a crowded public area.
Click to expand...

You might want to inform leo and even the military of that...

I use mine scanning while hunting. The difference?
 
Thumping said:
You might want to inform leo and even the military of that...

I use mine scanning while hunting. The difference?
Click to expand...

If you can't see why it's ok for LEOs to do this in public and not the average citizen, this discussion isn't going to go anywhere.

If you can't see the difference between using your optics to look around while hunting vs during in a crowded public area, this discussion isn't going to go anywhere.

Also if both of the above are true, I'm glad I don't live anywhere near you, because you're a scary person.
 
Harry Johnson said:
If you can't see why it's ok for LEOs to do this in public and not the average citizen, this discussion isn't going to go anywhere.

If you can't see the difference between using your optics to look around while hunting vs during in a crowded public area, this discussion isn't going to go anywhere.

Also if both of the above are true, I'm glad I don't live anywhere near you, because you're a scary person.
Click to expand...

Whatever makes you feel safe buddy...:laughing:
 
Thumping said:
And how do you know he is taking aim? How do you know he's not using the optics and scanning looking for possible issues?
Click to expand...

Are you really that fucking stupid? If any LEO would have seen him behind the scope "scanning" the crowd they would have easily been able to articulate why they put several rounds through that fat bloated watermelon perched on his shoulders.
As an example
"Your honor, as I approched the vehicle I saw an individual perched on top of it with a rifle on a bipod and the individual nested in behind it in a shooting position". "He was aimed in on the crowd with his hand on the grip and his finger near the trigger". "Being that the suspect was aimed in at the crowd and had nobody threatening with immediate harm I was fearful for the crowds safety and fired my weapon several times at his head to prevent him from shooting into the crowd". "Also your honor being a gunowner myself I know that one of the most sacrosanct rules of firearms is to never point your weapon at anything you dont intend to shoot, so it is my belief that individual fully intended to shoot".
 
Thumping said:
Swat doesn't do just that?

All I'm saying is you and mike are making alot of assumptions that you don't know about.
Click to expand...

Huge difference between an authorized police force and some redneck moron trying to impress his budweiser butt buddies.
 
I thought troll for sure. :confused:
 
Thumping said:
Can you say he wasn't? Can you say he was not looking out for someone that was?

Again...look at their past. They don't seem to be above targeting and assaulting people.

But I guess you were there or you can see more from a picture than I can.
Click to expand...

You make good points. Here's what the article says:

According to the report, a woman monitoring the protests through social media called Weatherford police and said she was concerned about a photo she saw of a man with a sniper rifle on a pickup truck. A Weatherford detective reported he looked at the photo and observed a “... man is set up on a cab of a pickup truck in a position similar to a ready sniper.”

A Weatherford police sergeant was able to identify the man in the photo as Napoli, who lives in Aledo. In surveillance footage, Napoli was seen shouldering the rifle and looking through the scope. He appeared to be reading small signs on a billboard, which was near the Confederate statue where several people were standing, the arrest warrant says. He was set up near the Cotten Bratton Furniture Store, which is about 340 feet from the Parker County Courthouse.


So basically they are investigating whether he was actually targeting people. Texans need to get on this and force the Prosecution to prove that he was aiming at people, because if he wasn't there is no case.

This is also another instance where a guy is arrested because of mob pressure, and now his life is disrupted even though there is no clear evidence that he broke any laws.

This is a problem, and the simps arguing against you in this thread are the root of that problem. Why are they so eager to throw freedoms away? That Boomer virtue-signalling shit is a cancer.
 
woods said:
the guy on the truck aiming at the crowd with a loaded rifle
Click to expand...

You don't have any proof of that he was. You're the one that has to provide evidence.

Just because you don't like some guy with a sniper rifle on a truck, doesn't mean he was targeting people. Your 'optics' nonsense has no legal meaning. You don't like it? Too bad, prove it's a crime. :shaking:
 
Thefishguy77 said:
The difference is experienced gun owner SHOULD know you never point a gun at something you dont intend to destroy. That faggot was there just to look cool to his cousin wife.
Click to expand...

How do you know? The information provided indicates the police don't even know what he was sighting.

You leaped to quite a conclusion, and one that was biased against a gun owner who, from all available evidence, was not breaking the Law.

Why are you so eager to hang your own?

I'll postulate why: You are scared. You are fearful of getting you guns removed, so you are ready to sacrifice anyone less than you in something called a Purity Spiral.

Because you are not a forward-thinker, you don't understand what that means. Let me explain it to you.

If you defend the right of this man, and make the Authorities have a better burden of proof before making arrests, you provide a Buffer Zone for you.

Instead, what you are doing is making yourself the bottom tier of acceptable conduct. Instead of being in the Middle of the Pack, safe in the herd, you just made yourself the basement of what is acceptable conduct.

That means you are next.

You need to think about that. And so does everyone else virtue-signalling in this thread.
 
Harry Johnson said:
If you can't see why it's ok for LEOs to do this in public and not the average citizen, this discussion isn't going to go anywhere.

If you can't see the difference between using your optics to look around while hunting vs during in a crowded public area, this discussion isn't going to go anywhere.

Also if both of the above are true, I'm glad I don't live anywhere near you, because you're a scary person.
Click to expand...

Your safe conduct standard is not the issue.

This is yet another instance of a firearm owner having their life ruined over something that is not demonstrably a crime.

It doesn't matter what you THINK about bringing and setting up a sniper rifle near a crowd. What matters is the LAW. And in Texas, if he is not targeting individuals, he is not breaking a law.

There is no way you should be arguing otherwise.

You guys are providing a series of perfect examples of why the Left stomps all over the Right in the culture war.

STAND UP FOR YOUR OWN you fucking sellouts :shaking:

Goddamn you guys are cancer.
 
evernoob said:
How do you know? The information provided indicates the police don't even know what he was sighting.

You leaped to quite a conclusion, and one that was biased against a gun owner who, from all available evidence, was not breaking the Law.

Why are you so eager to hang your own?

I'll postulate why: You are scared. You are fearful of getting you guns removed, so you are ready to sacrifice anyone less than you in something called a Purity Spiral.

Because you are not a forward-thinker, you don't understand what that means. Let me explain it to you.

If you defend the right of this man, and make the Authorities have a better burden of proof before making arrests, you provide a Buffer Zone for you.

Instead, what you are doing is making yourself the bottom tier of acceptable conduct. Instead of being in the Middle of the Pack, safe in the herd, you just made yourself the basement of what is acceptable conduct.

That means you are next.

You need to think about that. And so does everyone else virtue-signalling in this thread.
Click to expand...

I jumped to quite the conclusion? The picture shows a man with a rifle on top of his truck in the city. I know your not a firearms owner. But surely you’re not implying that BillyBob has so much money that he bought his own town so he can target practice down the street?

There is virtually no way you can say that is a self defense situation. Self defense is a reaction to an immediate threat. He took the time to setup a shooting position on his truck. Depending on state laws that alone may be against the law. Shooting from or off of a rig is illegal in many states, without certain handicapped laws for those with disabilities. Pointing a weapon in the direction of a person not immediately threatening you is brandishing with the intent to intimidate in most states if not all. And saying “I didn't have the crosshairs on them” is not going to hold up in court.
 
Last edited:
evernoob said:
Your safe conduct standard is not the issue.

This is yet another instance of a firearm owner having their life ruined over something that is not demonstrably a crime.

It doesn't matter what you THINK about bringing and setting up a sniper rifle near a crowd. What matters is the LAW. And in Texas, if he is not targeting individuals, he is not breaking a law.

There is no way you should be arguing otherwise.

You guys are providing a series of perfect examples of why the Left stomps all over the Right in the culture war.

STAND UP FOR YOUR OWN you fucking sellouts :shaking:

Goddamn you guys are cancer.
Click to expand...

The dude set up a shooting position downtown and aimed a rifle while a large crowd was gathered. I'm not accusing the guy of being a terrorist or an active shooter, just being unsafe and dumb. And yeah, there are laws against it, that's why he was "charged with disorderly conduct/displaying a weapon"(per the article) and the police were able to arrest him.
 
Now I cant see the chamber but it looks like some spet of AR variety, but even if a simple bolt gun unless its unloaded I believe its highly illegal in CO.

https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/csp/colorado-gun-laws/

edit: And my own are humans as thats my race. And I wouldn’t piss on you if you were on fire so apparently I am consistent in not standing up to my own. :flipoff2::usa:

815195EF-030F-4397-A902-2ED4EB51005F.png
 
Last edited:
woods said:
I thought troll for sure. :confused:
Click to expand...

Thefishguy77 said:
I jumped to quite the conclusion? The picture shows a man with a rifle on top of his truck in the city. I know your not a firearms owner. But surely you’re not implying that BillyBob has so much money that he bought his own town so he can target practice down the street?

There is virtually no way you can say that is a self defense situation. Self defense is a reaction to an immediate threat. He took the time to setup a shooting position on his truck. Depending on state laws that alone may be against the law. Shooting from or off of a rig is illegal in many states, without certain handicapped laws for those with disabilities. Pointing a weapon in the direction of a person not immediately threatening you is brandishing with the intent to intimidate in most states if not all. And saying “I didn't have the crosshairs on them” is not going to hold up in court.
Click to expand...

Harry Johnson said:
The dude set up a shooting position downtown and aimed a rifle while a large crowd was gathered. I'm not accusing the guy of being a terrorist or an active shooter, just being unsafe and dumb. And yeah, there are laws against it, that's why he was "charged with disorderly conduct/displaying a weapon"(per the article) and the police were able to arrest him.
Click to expand...

Let me use a visual to help you guys understand what's going on:

A) What should be the standard
B) What IS the standard

gYx906g.jpg


A) FIREARMS
This is what Conservatives and Moderates should be fighting for in a legal sense. You don't like the Texas truck sniper, but he is exercising his Rights. This places YOU in the middle of the road. Your conduct is good, but there are many laws and regulations. A Federal Judge with a CCW permit is the gold-standard of behavior with firearms: He knows every law and regulation, has money, IS AN ACTUAL LAWYER, has all kinds of friends, and he will never be arrested, even by the FBI.

Texas truck sniper might get arrest. Hell, maybe he SHOULD get arrest. BUT YOU SHOULD BE FIGHTING FOR HIM TO NOT BE ARRESTED! And we'll see why below.

If Texas truck sniper is the bottom of behavior, then YOU ARE SAFE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PACK.

The Left doesn't want this obviously.

As you can see the Vegas Shooter is not on either A) or B), he is off the bottom of the chart. Literally the worst possible behavior with a firearm, he belongs on nobody's radar of acceptable firearm behavior.

A) SOCIAL JUSTICE

You can see the ACLU Lawyer is analogous to the Federal Judge. He knows every rule and law, he fights for Social Justice in the Courtroom. Nobody will arrest him because it would be seen as Fascism and there is a huge backlash possible. He knows a bunch of Judges from UMich Law School. He worked his way up in the Community Legal Center. Nobody will fuck with this cat: his behavior is impeccable. You don't like him, but he's untouchable.

BLM protester: It's a total pain in the ass, but a protester blocking up your street is legal until the cops tell them to move. It might take 20 minutes, you are late for work. They even spit on your car. This is strictly illegal, but no one is going to arrest them for it. 20 minutes later the cops show up and move them along. This is shitty behavior, but it is legal.

Karen the Whore is in the middle. Her husband works in Finance, and he votes Trump. She got a degree in English, had several black lovers before settling down with her Provider white husband, popped out 2 kids, and votes Biden. She was on the MIllion Mom March. She screeches and polices Language. You have to be careful what you say around her. She is not an ACLU lawyer, but she is middle of the pack, held up by Hollywood as what every white housewife/career broad should be.

B) FIREARMS
This is what the Left wants, and this is what you are arguing for. To cut EVERYONE below your standards off from legal behavior. To make YOURSELF the minimum standard of gun ownership.

Now you are at the bottom of the list. This is what the Left wants.

You are next.

B) SOCIAL JUSTICE
Just look at this shit. Wayyyyyyyyy down at the bottom, where the Vegas Shooter is on Firearms, are Bill Ayers and Susan Rosenberg. CONVICTED TERRORISTS. SUSAN ROSENBERG KILLED TWO COPS AT LEAST.

Bill Ayers was hired by a University to set the curricula of Public Schoools in the US. The SJW Marxism you see now? Bill Ayers. He then retired ON PUBLIC PENSION, to a cushy Think Tank job.

Susan Rosenberg gets a pardon from a President, then sits on a non-profit WHICH FUNDS BLM.



YOU ARE DOING THE LEFT'S WORK WHEN YOU DON'T DEFEND THE FRINGE MEMBERS OF YOUR SOCIAL GROUP.

THE LEFT DEFENDS THEIR FRINGE MEMBERS, AND THE LEFT WINS.
 
Last edited:
evernoob said:
Let me use a visual to help you guys understand what's going on:

gYx906g.jpg


A) FIREARMS
This is what Conservatives and Moderates should be fighting for in a legal sense. You don't like the Texas truck sniper, but he is exercising his Rights. This places YOU in the middle of the road. Your conduct is good, but there are many laws and regulations. A Federal Judge with a CCW permit is the gold-standard of behavior with firearms: He knows every law and regulation, has money, IS AN ACTUAL LAWYER, has all kinds of friends, and he will never be arrested, even by the FBI.

Texas truck sniper might get arrest. Hell, maybe he SHOULD get arrest. BUT YOU SHOULD BE FIGHTING FOR HIM TO NOT BE ARRESTED! And we'll see why below.

If Texas truck sniper is the bottom of behavior, then YOU ARE SAFE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PACK.

The Left doesn't want this obviously.

As you can see the Vegas Shooter is not on either A) or B), he is off the bottom of the chart. Literally the worst possible behavior with a firearm, he belongs on nobody's radar of acceptable firearm behavior.

A) SOCIAL JUSTICE

You can see the ACLU Lawyer is analogous to the Federal Judge. He knows every rule and law, he fights for Social Justice in the Courtroom. Nobody will arrest him because it would be seen as Fascism and there is a huge backlash possible. He knows a bunch of Judges from UMich Law School. He worked his way up in the Community Legal Center. Nobody will fuck with this cat: his behavior is impeccable. You don't like him, but he's untouchable.

BLM protester: It's a total pain in the ass, but a protester blocking up your street is legal until the cops tell them to move. It might take 20 minutes, you are late for work. They even spit on your car. This is strictly illegal, but no one is going to arrest them for it. 20 minutes later the cops show up and move them along. This is shitty behavior, but it is legal.

Karen the Whore is in the middle. Her husband works in Finance, and he votes Trump. She got a degree in English, had several black lovers before settling down with her Provider white husband, popped out 2 kids, and votes Biden. She was on the MIllion Mom March. She screeches and polices Language. You have to be careful what you say around her. She is not an ACLU lawyer, but she is middle of the pack, held up by Hollywood as what every white housewife/career broad should be.

B) FIREARMS
This is what the Left wants, and this is what you are arguing for. To cut EVERYONE below your standards off from legal behavior. To make YOURSELF the norm of gun ownership.

Now you are at the bottom of the list. This is what the Left wants.

You are next.

B) SOCIAL JUSTICE
Just look at this shit. Wayyyyyyyyy down at the bottom, where the Vegas Shooter is on Firearms, are Bill Ayers and Susan Rosenberg. CONVICTED TERRORISTS. SUSAN ROSENBERG KILLED TWO COPS AT LEAST.

Bill Ayers was hired by a University to set the curricula of Public Schoools in the US. The SJW Marxism you see now? Bill Ayers. He then retired ON PUBLIC PENSION, to a cushy Think Tank job.

Susan Rosenberg gets a pardon from a President, then sits on a non-profit WHICH FUNDS BLM.



YOU ARE DOING THE LEFT'S WORK WHEN YOU DON'T DEFEND THE FRINGE MEMBERS OF YOUR SOCIAL GROUP.

THE LEFT DEFENDS THEIR FRINGE MEMBERS, AND THE LEFT WINS.
Click to expand...

Cite your source and one of the many voices dont count.
 
Right, wrong, legal or not. This just proves that when push come to shove, the rioters will be slaughtered.


If there were other armed folks near the protesters, someone providing overwatch is a very good idea.





Screen Shot 2020-08-04 at 4.44.29 PM.jpg



The difference is experienced gun owner SHOULD know you never point a gun at something you dont intend to destroy.
Click to expand...

That's a nice saying, but in a war, and that's exactly what the protesters want, that is just not always the case.
 
Well the bottom line still is it ain't over until the fat judge sings, and none of the opinions expressed above carry any weight in that court. And isn't Texas where they make big hunting platforms on vehicles anyway?
 
Last edited:
montrose818 said:
Who gives a fuck who he was pointing at? He is BLM and that makes him a friend.
Click to expand...

You mean anti-BLM, right? Those fucktards are no friends of mine.



I have zero problem with that guy on his roof with a gun. All you gun owners crying like little kunts over this are pathetic. The Noob and Thumping are making great points and you tards should be backing them up on this...... Mention bumpstock ban and you fuckwits loose your minds and post 1000 word essays on why that fucked with your rights, but see nothing wrong with this story. :shaking:


Wow
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh