Disclaimer

link to said incident.... I need some fresh drama for the afternoon, even if it is to rehash old stuff. This thread was rather anticlimactic -- needs more hookers and blow (or meth)

I'd be disappointed if it was the OOPP above.

All I have in this world is my word and my balls. If I committed to the TL, I would've had the TL, but as a few others have already noted -- I learned all my lessons from the Hard Knock Academy pretty early in life, which is why I trust people as far as I can throw them. I am a proponent of internet vigilantism and the 'outing' of people as long as it's truthful. Though truth is muddled in with perceptions, so there are two sides to every story. Maybe the other guy would have a legit excuse as judged by the court of public opinion? Regardless, I do trust that when multiple people come to this site and recommend a product or service or have stories about how a company or individual has burned them, that it's probably the truth. Not an absolute, but probably. Therefore, for the sake of the integrity of the site, we need to know the entire story, the players on both sides, and have it settled on our forum. If anything, it'll be a record of history in dealings with the OP or the accused. Maybe the decision will be that both parties were at fault and are too stupid to deal with? They're not malicious, or liars, just dumb and irresponsible -- who knows. But, we need both sides, out in the open, to make that kind of judgment call.

public reaction: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-f_DPrSEOEo

Well now you need to out them... you're doing a disservice to all other members' on here if the person turns around and burns another one of us. Don't let this fiscal rapist get away with violating your wallet by having it go unnoticed.

Its 2012, so I hope the special effects are at least better than the moon film they made in 1969. If its just the same footage with the red-balance turned up, I'm going to be pissed.

Because I'm a CeeLo fan and like the hook...song starts at 2:04 mark http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iB9nFiJChDo

Silly Porter, you always are

Don't all the :leghump:'s volunteer at once...

If the cops actions were unnecessary... then I suppose even bothering to write a ticket was unnecessary? The driver def. escalated the situation unnecessarily, but when you're a "F"-list celebrity by proxy, you don't have to play by the rules.

Highways are scary on two wheels, so I suggest trying it with just one until you're comfortable. :wheeliezx10:

The issue has been cleared up by the man himself. Relax, Everyone: Mitt Romney Paid ‘A Lot of Taxes’ Every Year http://gawker.com/5931840/relax-everyone-mitt-romney-paid-a-lot-of-taxes-every-year Romney is quoted to have said: So, the article sums it up

Or everyone could just buy Hayabusas and go drag racing with me? $7 every Wednesday. And my bike is 100% stock save for the aftermarket Delkevic exhaust that adds maybe 1hp. You can run shinkos, no warmers, and the whole system is setup to handicap the slower vs. faster riders. #ProblemsSolved

I'd want some kind of weight break too. Fattest guy in the series = max weight. All others need to add ballast to the bike or wear lead riding vests to equalize power-to-weight.

Sv-spec series or CBR250rr... little more expensive upfront, but low running costs.

Does sound fun and cheap, but you lost me at the point where the bikes were carbureted

I'd be happy to get off the scat porn, but you brought it up. I'm not here to judge what you're in or not. I'm a live and let live kinda guy. But, I still don't understand YOUR argument, because YOU'RE personalizing it. I've never claimed it's a slippery slope argument (logical fallacy), it's not. I get it. It still doesn't make it an acceptable law. There's never been an argument from people on here about it being a douche-thing to do when Westboro does things like that -- mostly because people on here have some common sense of morality, ethics, and decency... but we aren't *everyone* and there are some things that keep a tyrannical government in check. It has really doesn't have anything to do with "protecting the innocent", but more to do with the legal right for the common man to protest what they feel are wrongs or injustices, including funerals. Additionally, a funeral to YOU is a solemn, private affair. To someone else, it could be a celebration of a life, a time to party. Who are YOU to judge how a funeral should be conducted and what it should and should not be? You also make the presumption that just because someone is or was a federal employee in the military that they are of no sin and don't deserve the be picketed... If some ex-military guy raped your child, and you retaliated by murdering him before the trial, you think that guy deserves to be buried in a solemn private affair? A child rapist, just because he was former military? You wouldn't expect your wife or family to bring attention to your plight? I dont' think you'll be able to say, with an honest straight face, that you'd be ok with protecting the rights of the child rapists' family -- who may or may not be just as bad, ethically, as the rapist for supporting him. Yea, that's a hypothetical, but I posted the link earlier that shows exactly why a group of people should have a legal right to picket at a military funeral. That's NOT hypothetical. It's all a matter of perspective, and when your only perspective is from YOUR own, that's when we have issues. There are actions that "negatively affect" me everyday, but I'm sure the same can be said of me that affect others' if you'd ask them. Again, highly subjective.

That kinda sorta belongs in the free speech at funerals thread. "We shouldn't be disrespecting authorities"

^----- I see what you did there.

Are you and the girl fatties? You might like Melt. I've never been, but I've heard it's full of delicious buttery greasy heart-attack inducing sammiches. Assuming you can get in.

I still think it's funny some people in this thread want to legislate morality, ethics, and decency. You want that 'scat porn' billboard up on your private property then I always have the option of moving, right? Or, lets get the gov't to step in and ban scat. No negatives can come from banning scat billboards, right? Don't like the way someone smells? Then we can have the gov't mandate the amount of times people shower so as not to offend my olefactory senses. "I'm not making you shower, I'm just asking the gov't to make you shower when you're around ME between the hours of 8AM and 5PM" This has much less to do with being an intellectual heavyweight as it does debating the subjectivity of ethics and morals and contrasting them with an equitable compromise within our society that doesn't turn one section of the populace into uptight hypocrites. It's going to be a very tough road to plow if you want to start adding more subjectivity to the legal system.

It was brought to my attention this happened in San Antonio recently as well... http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/state&id=8750941 Even if you hate dogs (or all animals), the amount of time and training of these animals comes at a considerable expense that the taxpayers bear only to be careless with their care.

Ohio police dog dies after left in hot patrol car Read more: http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/state/ohio-police-dog-dies-after-left-in-hot-patrol-car#ixzz22VIzhLtP

But that's exactly what you're being an advocate of in this thread. Legislating morality and stifling freedom because you don't like what others' have to say. Reconcile that one?

Good question -- what negative's could possibly happen? How about this? http://www.popehat.com/2012/08/02/congress-delivers-blow-to-survivors-of-my-lai-massacre/ Keep f*(kin' that chicken.