Belligerent Posts

[Aries]

There is no need to be paranoid. This is real, is really happening and there is very very little you can do to stop it or deny it.

I think his point is that you can avoid helping them prosecute you by restraining yourself from posting online that if anyone ever sets foot on your property, suggests you get vaccinated, or insults your dog that you can't wait to blow their ******* head off. Just seems like common sense not to drop those little gems around everywhere, as the possibility exists that you may someday have to do that.

 

[diggler1833]

The short answer is "yes". If the DA is looking to advance his or her career, and you look to be a slam dunk because you were involved in a questionable shooting...expect that everything you've posted previously will be used against you.

Heaven forbid you shared five years ago what could be twisted into a racially inflammatory meme today...and had to defend yourself against a "minority". Not only will the DA go after you in a liberal town, but CNN, MSNBC etc... are going to put you on blast at the national level.

Now, if it were an undeniable, uber clear-cut case of self defense in a conservative area...I don't think you'd have to worry about it as much, if at all. But why run that risk?

The question is: " How keyboard commando do you want to be?" Nobody is going to question your ability to defend your family if you fail to jump in every conversation and remind the interwebs that you have a boomstick and are looking for a reason to use it.

 

[Aku]

I think his point is that you can avoid helping them prosecute you by restraining yourself from posting online that if anyone ever sets foot on your property, suggests you get vaccinated, or insults your dog that you can't wait to blow their ******* head off. Just seems like common sense not to drop those little gems around everywhere, as the possibility exists that you may someday have to do that.

I respect the point being made. Anything you say, "can and will be used against you". That is not optional.
However, there is a basic problem with this, is that it creates a chilling effect on speech.

 

[HFS]

I think his point is that you can avoid helping them prosecute you by restraining yourself from posting online that if anyone ever sets foot on your property, suggests you get vaccinated, or insults your dog that you can't wait to blow their ******* head off. Just seems like common sense not to drop those little gems around everywhere, as the possibility exists that you may someday have to do that.

Bad things can happen to anybody and even in good neighborhoods too.
I agree with what you wrote but would just add, try to improve your chance of not winding up in court by not hanging around with people that somebody (you, law enforcement, your peaceful neighbor) might be forced to shoot one day.

 

[jakeman]

Bad things can happen to anybody and even in good neighborhoods too.
I agree with what you wrote but would just add, try to improve your chance of not winding up in court by not hanging around with people that somebody (you, law enforcement, your peaceful neighbor) might be forced to shoot one day.

Sounds reasonable.

 

[Aries]

I respect the point being made. Anything you say, "can and will be used against you". That is not optional.
However, there is a basic problem with this, is that it creates a chilling effect on speech.

Not really. Using good judgment about what you say in public is not the same as someone else restricting what you are allowed to say. People SHOULD always try to exercise good judgment... I believe that is what the OP, and what I'm trying to suggest.

 

[ricco]

It isn't just what you post anywhere on the interwebs it can also be what you looked at, a gun site, yeah you're a gun nut. A knife site, yeah you're a knife nut. A performance car site, yeah you're a reckless driver. A wine site, yeah you're a drunk. Having a Gadsden Flag, yeah you're a right wing nut job. If you have any religious items in your home, yeah you're religious nut. Yes, a prosecutor will use anything and everything to get a conviction. If a prosecutor can get an uneducated jury to buy off on it, why wouldn't it be used. If memory serves I believe it was the Chauvin trial where the prosecutor went back to his grade school days to try to prove he was a bully. The prosecutor in the Kim Potter trial mentioned "hollow point" ammunition, in the Rittenhouse trial the prosecutor talked about FMJ ammunition. I remember reading about one trial where where the defendants DVD collection was used to try to convince the jury of his violent tendencies, so you might want to get rid of your "Die Hard" dvd.

So there it is .............

 

[turkeyrun]

I'm getting old enough that I care less and less ... **** them. Whoever thought it was smart to attack me and cause me to fear I was about to incur great bodily injury and/or death, and the damned prosecutor trying to make a name for him/her/it-self trying to send a poor little old lady to jail for exercising her fundamental right to protect herself (and her grumpy old husband).

Don't "help" that poor, little, old lady clear a jam, on the range and grab her rifle.

 

[joegrizzy]

almost like we could probably come up with something better than our archaic "justice" system but no one will ever try because that would take effort. and might take people who are paid very well and knock them down a notch. can't have that looooool

 

[joegrizzy]

also: the trick is to post enough "schizo" stuff that your posts aren't deemed to be worth anything.

it's like how politicians work: they claim to be for or against any policy at any given time, so when you try to nail them down on any one statement they can say "well what about that time when i said the opposite?!"