Your opinion? - Page 3
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 41

Thread: Your opinion?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Living rent free in Bluesstringer's head apparently
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    Hmm...So have you learned anything about the Embody case that you'd care to "admit" to?
    I learned everything I needed to learn about the Embody case from talking to Leonard Embody when he showed up posting as Kwikrnu all over the net a few years back. Last I heard he has been banned from TFL/THR/ DU/ ARF.com/GRM and just about every other gun forum out there. The guy is a barking moonbat who goes out of his way to push confrontations and then (hopefully) get a fat settlement in a lawsuit. I believe the only thing he’s succeeded in is becoming a prohibited person
    The finest Vodka is a razor Matthew, it leaves no ragged edges.

  2.   
  3. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,415
    Quote Originally Posted by Cypher View Post
    I learned everything I needed to learn about the Embody case from talking to Leonard Embody when he showed up posting as Kwikrnu all over the net a few years back.
    So like I said, you couldn't be bothered to look into the case he's currently involved in. Got it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypher View Post
    Last I heard he has been banned from TFL/THR/ DU/ ARF.com/GRM and just about every other gun forum out there. The guy is a barking moonbat who goes out of his way to push confrontations and then (hopefully) get a fat settlement in a lawsuit. I believe the only thing he’s succeeded in is becoming a prohibited person
    A "prohibited person" has such a Stalinistic ring to it, doesn't it though?

    Just to summarize my take on your post, and you're welcome to correct me if I've got this wrong, but you wander the interwebs deciding whose internet personae are worthy of allowance to exist, or deserving of prohibition, on forums you join just minutes or hours before, and don't care at all that certain municipalities, counties or states consistently violate Leonard Embody's rights to the point of having to pay "fat settlements" (so you imply with nothing to back it up), and then present yourself as a 2nd Amendment proponent?

    Thanks for proving my point for at least the second time in just this thread. With "allies" in the struggle for 2A and constitutional restoration like you, who needs the Bradys?

    And for the record, the state that you seem to be perfectly fine with the prospect of Mr. Embody being railroaded by, Tennessee, instituted a state-wide forced blood-sample DUI check-point program just this weekend. So now, in the "Volunteer State" you can be forced on the word of a cop who stopped you for no probable cause to be strapped down on a gurney, have your head held in an MMA-style "neck-crank" position, and "give" your blood to the state. If you like that Mr. Embody is currently being railroaded by TN's "justice system," you must freakin' love that the 4th and 5th Amendments started being trashed across the whole state this weekend. The 5th says we can't be forced to testify against ourselves, but apparently, our blood can be.

    This video is from a couple of months back, while the program was not yet a state-wide endeavor. This depicts what was implemented state-wide in TN just 72 hours or so ago. Yay Stalinism!!!



    Whether you're accurate or not in describing Leonard Embody as a "barking moonbat," he is a citizen under the protection of the Constitution of the United States of America. You quite obviously haven't learned all you "need to know" about him or his case(s). Of course, to judge him fairly, you would first have to know about, understand, and support the Constitution, and you seem wholly incapable of any of those three requirements.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  4. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Living rent free in Bluesstringer's head apparently
    Posts
    148
    As I pointed out I've actually interacted with him have you?
    The finest Vodka is a razor Matthew, it leaves no ragged edges.

  5. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,415
    Quote Originally Posted by Cypher View Post
    As I pointed out I've actually interacted with him have you?
    Yes, but that has nothing to do with anything. I'm speaking of weighty, significant issues concerning constitutional rights, and you're engaging in the minutiae of internet personality conflicts. Like all other antis, you ignore the documentation of government abuses of authority in favor of obfuscating over the mundane trivialities of forum-speak. Alinsky would be proud of you.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  6. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    The Lowcountry of South Carolina
    Posts
    2,039
    Wow, I started this to get some opinions. I posted my initial take on the video, but have since reconsidered. I think that the time of the video being made has a bearing on this, but does not make or break it. I am neither a badge fluffer or an anti-cop, and since cops are for the most part human, their individual actions determine how I look at them. I do think that the guy in the video could have been more articulate, and I think the cop's attitude threw him off because it wasn't what he was expecting.
    -
    Blues has made some good points, and I can see the value of what they are doing, I'm still not completely sold on their method. Granted, it might be unreasonable considering their goal to just have the video ready when they are just going about their daily business armed and hoping to eventually be confronted. That said, if they are acting "suspicious" by just wandering around armed they are probably polluting the "control" element of their experiment a little. If the cops are called for a "suspicious armed person" they will react differently than if they just happen upon an armed guy and strike up a conversation. This in itself is more likely to provoke an unhappy confrontation with the cops, so I was initially wondering if that was their goal. When he seemed surprised by the cops reaction it bolstered my opinion on this. Were the guys with him were also armed? Was he just the one with a long gun? The cop didn't seem interested in his companions.
    -
    I think a better method, considering todays technology, would be for him to go it alone with some type of recording device and just activate it if and when a confrontation happens. It would allow a more realistic reaction, and the cop might not be as much on the defensive by being outnumbered. You might also weed out some of the power-trippin' cops that react differently "one on one - my word against yours"
    Chief

  7. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Pasco, Washington, United States
    Posts
    6,271
    Quote Originally Posted by whodat2710 View Post
    Wow, I started this to get some opinions. I posted my initial take on the video, but have since reconsidered. I think that the time of the video being made has a bearing on this, but does not make or break it. I am neither a badge fluffer or an anti-cop, and since cops are for the most part human, their individual actions determine how I look at them. I do think that the guy in the video could have been more articulate, and I think the cop's attitude threw him off because it wasn't what he was expecting.
    -
    Blues has made some good points, and I can see the value of what they are doing, I'm still not completely sold on their method. Granted, it might be unreasonable considering their goal to just have the video ready when they are just going about their daily business armed and hoping to eventually be confronted. That said, if they are acting "suspicious" by just wandering around armed they are probably polluting the "control" element of their experiment a little. If the cops are called for a "suspicious armed person" they will react differently than if they just happen upon an armed guy and strike up a conversation. This in itself is more likely to provoke an unhappy confrontation with the cops, so I was initially wondering if that was their goal. When he seemed surprised by the cops reaction it bolstered my opinion on this. Were the guys with him were also armed? Was he just the one with a long gun? The cop didn't seem interested in his companions.
    -
    I think a better method, considering todays technology, would be for him to go it alone with some type of recording device and just activate it if and when a confrontation happens. It would allow a more realistic reaction, and the cop might not be as much on the defensive by being outnumbered. You might also weed out some of the power-trippin' cops that react differently "one on one - my word against yours"
    There is a reason he isn't as articulate as people always wish he were.

    I believe he normally does so these solo. At least according to his other videos.

    Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
    “One of the illusions of life is that the present hour is not the critical, decisive one.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

  8. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,415
    Quote Originally Posted by whodat2710 View Post
    Wow, I started this to get some opinions. I posted my initial take on the video, but have since reconsidered. I think that the time of the video being made has a bearing on this, but does not make or break it. I am neither a badge fluffer or an anti-cop, and since cops are for the most part human, their individual actions determine how I look at them. I do think that the guy in the video could have been more articulate, and I think the cop's attitude threw him off because it wasn't what he was expecting.
    -
    Blues has made some good points, and I can see the value of what they are doing, I'm still not completely sold on their method. Granted, it might be unreasonable considering their goal to just have the video ready when they are just going about their daily business armed and hoping to eventually be confronted. That said, if they are acting "suspicious" by just wandering around armed they are probably polluting the "control" element of their experiment a little. If the cops are called for a "suspicious armed person" they will react differently than if they just happen upon an armed guy and strike up a conversation. This in itself is more likely to provoke an unhappy confrontation with the cops, so I was initially wondering if that was their goal. When he seemed surprised by the cops reaction it bolstered my opinion on this. Were the guys with him were also armed? Was he just the one with a long gun? The cop didn't seem interested in his companions.
    -
    I think a better method, considering todays technology, would be for him to go it alone with some type of recording device and just activate it if and when a confrontation happens. It would allow a more realistic reaction, and the cop might not be as much on the defensive by being outnumbered. You might also weed out some of the power-trippin' cops that react differently "one on one - my word against yours"
    As Firefighterchen stated, there is a reason he isn't always wholly articulate. He has explained before, but doesn't use the fact that he has a speech impediment as a crutch or excuse for any inadequacies or details of an encounter that he could've handled better had he not been adversely affected by his impediment. In one of his videos several months ago he got more comments on his annoying voice than he did on the details of the encounter the video was about. He tried to explain the speech impediment thing in the Comments section, and I can't recall if he went as far as making a video to explain it or not, but he either did that or added a full explanation to one or two of the Descriptions for the videos that were getting the most comments about his voice. Well....wait....I'm going to get this right. I'll finish this after I've found what I'm vaguely remembering.....

    Ahh, here it is. It's a post of mine in a thread that was started by a now-banned troll (~Otis~) after a very contentious 150+ posts (up to that point - it went on for quite awhile after that too). As now, more than a year later, Firefighterchen and I vociferously stood up for Warren's rights, as did Bikenut and maybe one or two others, against an onslaught of criticisms, even rising to the level of outright attacks on him, including one that wished the cops would've just shot him! Here's the post:

    I followed the YouTube channel link from one of the vids that Firefighterchen posted and found the following video on Markedguardian's channel. It was posted the day before ~Otis~ posted the LiveLeaks rip-off of Markedguardian's monetized YouTube channel. I'm not saying ~Otis~ ripped him off, but LiveLeaks did, unless they have permission to use his copyrighted video, which is a possibility I suppose, but anyway....

    This vid was made for one purpose: To explain his reasons for doing what we see in the OP vid. It's kind of long and typically disjointed, but it's unrehearsed, off the top of his head as he's walking through the streets of downtown Medford carrying his Beretta sidearm and M&P 15 rifle, and his soliloquy is firmly rooted in high constitutional ideals and urgings for anyone following his lead to always be polite and peaceful. During the narration, he actually apologizes to his audience for his speech impediment! Here's a guy who is taking flack from fellow gun-owners all over the world wide internets for getting out there and actually doing something to educate the public about gun rights, when he could probably be sitting at home collecting some disability checks because of whatever deformation or illness that caused his impediment. Oh, and he also said something about "working all the time" in relation to why he hasn't replied to some of his commenters, so that's what makes me think he's not collecting aid for his impediment.

    Anyway, here ya go. I think it's pertinent to answering the criticisms of his voice, and think further that someone unaware of his impediment could perceive the sound as being indicative of an attitude rather than an impediment. I guess you be the judge. For some of you, that won't be any different than how you've already participated in this thread.



    In my next post, I said, "And here's a great example of how a stop should go, and could have gone if the wannabe tyrants in the OP vid had approached him the same way:" and posted the following video. All you need to watch is about 40 seconds of this video to find out that he's not trying to cause trouble at all, and is perfectly amenable to having a chat with LEOs on the side of the road as long as his rights are respected and protected.

    Bottom line, I find it appalling how quick many "pro-2A" gun owners are to negatively judge activists who are doing the best they can to educate the public about gun rights. I don't always agree with what Warren says, but I don't question for a second that his heart is in the right place. Nor do I question that he has put his ass on the line for all of our benefits on many, many occasions. I will never understand the knee-jerk jump to criticism of his much-needed work, or anyone else's who confront tyrants when it can (and often does) cost them big-time.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  9. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Living rent free in Bluesstringer's head apparently
    Posts
    148
    SO basically the guy goes out looking to stir the pot and film the result. Got it
    The finest Vodka is a razor Matthew, it leaves no ragged edges.

  10. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    An Alternate Reality, I Assure You...
    Posts
    5,115
    Quote Originally Posted by Cypher View Post
    SO basically the guy goes out looking to stir the pot and film the result. Got it
    By "stir the pot", you mean exercising his rights? Got it.

    How about this: The next time you feel the urge to speak out against your government, don't. You wouldn't want to "stir the pot" now, would you?
    Quote Originally Posted by Deanimator View Post
    [*]Don't be afraid to use sarcasm, mockery and humiliation. They don't respect you. There's no need to pretend you respect them.
    Operation Veterans Relief: http://www.opvr.org/home.html

  11. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Living rent free in Bluesstringer's head apparently
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnerbob View Post
    By "stir the pot", you mean exercising his rights? Got it.
    By stirring the pot I mean sticking your package in a mouse trap and complianing when it hurts
    The finest Vodka is a razor Matthew, it leaves no ragged edges.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast