Message Turncoat in a DM to get moderator attention

Users Online(? lurkers):
Posts: 10218
SC Wedding

I actually get away with my antics in real life about as well as I do here, but it's nice to see others feeling less pressured outside of a one on one scenario. It streamlines what I usually aim for with the addition of a larger group of participants. 

The lack of structure also makes for a system of trends instead of laws, and that's always remained fascinating when it comes to witnessing this place's politics. What exists here has been built upon it's own history and individual popularities. 

Posts: 2216
SC Wedding

I just wrote a long page about this and the forum somehow refreshed and I couldn't get it back.

Posts: 2829
SC Wedding

Weddings are a terrible situation. I'd gladly meet a few people from here, my paranoia isn't as severe as most think, but screw weddings. 

Posts: 10218
SC Wedding

But they have cake, alcohol, fancy dresses, and these days a fair deal of tradition tweaking to make it feel like it's their own. It doesn't even necessarily have to be a Christian wedding. 

Posts: 170
SC Wedding

I feel like IRL you'd have a shorter fuse than you have here so if something were to happen and say, you maim someone in an altercation with whatever you armed yourself with, isn't that premeditated assault/battery? You could be charged with first degree aggravated assault & battery. Is it really worth it?

 Anyhow, I don't think anyone here is enough of an asshole to start a fight at a wedding. I mean, theres cake and music and sometimes a dramatic entry of someone opposing the union of happy almost married people.

 

 

Posts: 3645
SC Wedding

Um... no.

Some of the trolls here have already threatened me with rape, physical violence and homicide. Death threats are taken very  seriously by normies.

Any violent response on my part to anybody who even raises a hand to me (whether that hand connects or not) will be viewed by the courts as an act of self defense, as long as I have the records of the person's threats.

And it's only premeditated if I have a specific person in mind.

Did you notice how I framed my statement?  "2 or  3."

2  or  3 signifies a maybe with an unspoken contingent.

 

IF.

IF 2 or 3 SC members who have been following me around this forum making threats were to meet me irl and get inside my personal space with a raised hand, I'd be justified in defending myself. As long as nobody dies.

Posts: 3645
SC Wedding

Oh... and first second and third level assaults are not classified like homicides are. There are no stiffer penalties for "premeditated" vs. spur-of-the moment altercations.

If I feel my safety may be compromised, it's within my rights to bring a legal weapon to a gathering. As long as I don't go around maiming random people for no good reason, and keep the violence down to self defense only.

The Canadian Criminal Code defines the levels of assault in terms of the severity of the injuries sustained. When the injuries are severe enough, the charge is amped up to aggravated assault. If the aggravated assault is severe enough, the Crown will often try to prove intent, to amp the charge up to attempted murder.

Assault is assault, tho. It either happened or it didn't.

 

I'm fairly certain that American laws are similar, but you can bet your ass I'd look up what constitutes self defense, the lines beteen felonies and misdemeanors as they apply to assault, and the places where American criminal laws overlap into civil law, which is a whole other animal that Canucks don't have to worry about in most criminal cases. I would most definitely do my homework and cover my ass legally if I were to meet with any of you in a different country.

Posts: 170
SC Wedding

I thought you said you'd maim them without provocation, and in meeting those 2 or 3 people wouldn't that mean there was some malicious thought in meeting them?  Isn't that like purposely putting yourself in danger?

Posts: 3645
SC Wedding

"I thought you said you'd maim them without provocation, and in meeting those 2 or 3 people wouldn't that mean there was some malicious thought in meeting them? "

Nope.

I said 2 or 3. Which signifies a maybe.

With a contingent.

If.

There's no malicious thought. Only an assessment of the likelihood that they would attack me first.

Without provocation means that I wouldn't wait for a raised hand (or weapon) to connect with my flesh before I start hitting back (which is what I normally do when I fight back against somebody who utters threats at me.)

 

"Isn't that like purposely putting yourself in danger?"

Um... any of you meeting with anybody who claims online to be a dangerous sociopath could be seen as putting yourselves in danger.

Maybe  their  reasons for meeting me  could also be construed or misconstrued as malicious.

But... I'm not the one who threatened rape, murder and excrement showers first.

I merely stated that I would defend myself.

IF.

IF 1 or 2 or 3 specific people who have regularly made online threats were to try to act on them.

This is within my rights.

Posts: 170
SC Wedding

Xena stated: source post

But... I'm not the one who threatened rape, murder and excrement showers first.

What the fuck 

This site contains NSFW material. To view and use this site, you must be 18+ years of age.