Liberals to RIOT if 2004 = 2000

Pastabagel.com ^ | september 28, 2004 | Pastabagel

[Without Barbarians]

Have any of you been over to the lib blogs recently? They're getting wound up of kerry's suckiness, so they are discussing rioting, if the election is close again. Check out any of the comments on http://atrios.blogspot.com for example.

This is a funny piece about it: Liberals are Not Entitled to Their Rage

Liberals lunacy is matched only by their idiocy.

[Slings and Arrows]

If there's an anti-Bush riot in my area of South Carolina (pause for big laffs), I'll sic my Bulldog on 'em:

[melkor]

ahem..... god bless texas..
we can kill you to protect ourselves, kill you to protect others, kill you to protect our property, and kill you to protect others property. We can kill you if you want to rob us, we can kill you if you want to rob someone else, we can kill you if you want to rape us, we can kill you if you want to rape someone else.

Lets see them come riot down my street.. I'll have to watch for cross fire from the neighbors.

---

§ 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person
in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is
justified in using force against another when and to the degree the
actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to
prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful
interference with the property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible,
movable property by another is justified in using force against the
other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force
is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the
property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit
after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no
claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using
force, threat, or fraud against the actor.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.
§ 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of
force is justified when the use of force is justified by this
chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or
serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as
long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension
that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the
use of deadly force.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.
§ 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A
person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.31;
(2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation
would not have retreated; and
(3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect himself against the other's use or
attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or
(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual
assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.
(b) The requirement imposed by Subsection (a)(2) does not
apply to an actor who uses force against a person who is at the time
of the use of force committing an offense of unlawful entry in the
habitation of the actor.

§ 9.33. DEFENSE OF THIRD PERSON. A person is justified
in using force or deadly force against another to protect a third
person if:
(1) under the circumstances as the actor reasonably
believes them to be, the actor would be justified under Section 9.31
or 9.32 in using force or deadly force to protect himself against
the unlawful force or unlawful deadly force he reasonably believes
to be threatening the third person he seeks to protect; and
(2) the actor reasonably believes that his
intervention is immediately necessary to protect the third person.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.
§ 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON'S PROPERTY. A person
is justified in using force or deadly force against another to
protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if,
under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the
actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force
or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful
interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or
criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection
of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third
person's land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he
uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent,
or child, resides with the actor, or is under the actor's care.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.

[bmwcyle]

OK, please do it on my street. I need the target practice.

[DaveMSmith]

The key to the article is the democrat primaries: they had a choice to select a serious candidate. Instead, they allowed their party to be hijacked resulting in an unelectable nominee who lied to win.

The democrat party needs a housecleaning. The democrat party needs leadership. If they don't step up, I don't see any other result than the disintegration of the DNC.

[ninenot]

Well stated. Seconded. All in favor?

How many rounds of 9mm and/or .30-06 are required, sir? I shall procure them immediately and join you enthusiastically at the front.

[melkor]

7.62x51 and 45 please...

[melkor]

cheeper than dirt is having a $1.97 sale on 20rd mags for my h&k :) might be time to invest $50

[TeleStraightShooter]

7.62x51 and 45 please...

And 7.62x54r, but that caliber does my internet handle a disservice.
The tools that employ the 7.62x51 are much more reliable.

It appears I have some surplus rounds from my Y2K dump;
just as Y2K, I suspect It will be largely undisturbed following the event.

[melkor]

I switched from 5.56 to 7.62x51 after y2k and had a hell of a time at the range gettin rid of the 5.56

[ninenot]

Fussy so-and-so.

YOU bring the .45 and 7.62/51

Personally, I prefer the controllable 9mm and US .30-06 ammo, Euroweenie....

[GSWarrior]

When the polls started showing Kerry lagging these folks got their panties in a bunch and started bashing Gallup and pooh-poohing pollsters. These are just polls mind you.

They can't even deal with the reality that he is currently trailing in polls. What will they do if Kerry loses the election?

[meadsjn]

You'll never get your limit over there. Better let me have half your tags.

[exile]

Let em riot. I just hope the cops use live ammo on them when they do.

[Noumenon]

30.06? You sound like a Garand man. My NM Garand will surely see some duty in the times to come. Patton called it the finest battle rifle ever made. I'm inclined to agree, given the time and the context.

But my stg58 FAL easily and consistently breaks plastic gallon milk jugs at 400 yards in my hands over iron sights. Always a pleasure to shoot, even if it does get smokin' hot after 80 rounds or so.

As to the number of rounds required, it's as many as you can hump to your area of operation. I've no doubt that it'll be a target-rich environment. Why, de-varminting the local universities and newspaper offices could take the better part of a day. Let's all take turns calling the shots in order to let our barrels cool.

[meadsjn]

I too prefer to negotiate via AT&T, but sometimes the customer demands a more up-close and personal dialogue. Usually, I don't mind accommodating them, but I do abhor the group hugs.

The liberal impulse is to go after the softer targets; property, children, elderly, women, the disarmed, then the out-numbered. Among each of those groups, they will likely find some surprizes.

[ninenot]

Actually, my .30-06 is a re-barreled German Mauser "Mountain Troops" gun which was brought back after WWII.

Shoots very well; .75" groups at 100 yards. But since my eyeballs no longer cooperate, I use a scope.

[bert]

Target rich enviroment......

[Ramonan]

Two Thoughts:
1. This is like one cure I have heard of for a headache. You go out, get a hammer, put your finger on a counter top, and hit it real hard with the hammer. You will not feel the headache any more.
2. I went to the Rodney King Riots as a law enforcement officer. Where is the benefit of burning all the businesses close to you?
How much of a remodeling or reconstruction loan are you going to get for your home?

[Lazamataz]

Liberals to RIOT if 2004 = 2000

I will not be satisfied until Bush wins, in 2004, by exactly one electoral vote.

And that state should be won by exactly 12 votes.

And it should go to the Supreme Court.

I'm living to see the liberals frothing at the mouth.

[Ramonan]

Two Thoughts:
1. This is like one cure I have heard of for a headache. You go out, get a hammer, put your finger on a counter top, and hit it real hard with the hammer. You will not feel the headache any more.
2. I went to the Rodney King Riots as a law enforcement officer. Where is the benefit of burning all the businesses close to you?
How much of a remodeling or reconstruction loan are you going to get for your home?