I know you are kidding but you can be arrested for making your hand into the shape of a gun and pointing it at someone. I believe they call it an assertive action.

Doesn't make it right but ****

Scavs, you know I likewise believe in karma, I agree with your assessment of the crime, guns are a "big deal", saw first hand what they do in the Army...no problem with the conviction. Let's see what Plex gets, hopefully it will be just...IF he is convicted...right now he's still innocent under our laws.
My problem is you are stating a personal belief as a fact...yes, I agree with your belief but please call it that! If you want to live in a society with respect for the law, then the process is important...regardless whether one agrees with the results.

In better days....my dad had a car just like that one!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7raVF...eature=related

Oh will you stop acting like no one can state an opinion here?

That's a fucl<in' jury instruction ,you horn blowing idiot.


If it was meant otherwise....why the fucl< would anybody ever be arrested????



You gotta start being someone else....ya dope.

I find it funny...not you Morty, you're simply irrelevant...everytime I express any opinion that some folks here disagree with, the personal attacks start...explain why my opinion is me acting superior, getting on a soapbox etc while other's opinions when stated by them, are exempt from the same definition. I have an opinion, someone else has a different one...I express mine, they express their's....that's referred to as debate or simply a difference of opinion.
Anyway, I knew in advance the response I'd get so it's clearly on me...free will...but I stand by my posts and I trust Morty does also...and that speaks for itself!

Good for you.


Now listen carefully you pompous fucl<.

You keep throwing around the "innocent until proven guilty" nonsense everytime someone posts an opinion about a guy being guilty.

It's a jury instruction. They did not arrest Simpson because they presumed he was innocent.

Is this sinking into your fucl<in' numb skull?

Oh my God.











leff-eng may ess oaf!!!!

onebadbeast definitely had it right when he posted this in the smart threads to begin with.

Why am I preaching and you using "common sense"? I believe one way and you another...it's not preaching to express in a semi-articulate (I hope) manner what I think...any more than it is for you to state your's. I do understand the uneasyness that some folks feel about OJ walking the streets, as a parent, I feel uneasy about child molesters living among us...the system will never be perfect. It's hardly about me anymore than your opinions are about you. I don't say that you don't have the right to express your opinions and try to demean them by saying they are all about you...yet folks want to make mine "all about me"...believe me when I say at the very heart of my belief system is the core belief that we are all equal...so why would I need to feel superior?????

My my...musta hit a nerve! Innocent until proven guilty isn't nonsense and I don't care about folks opinions UNTIL they are presented as FACT. Using your logic, EVERY suspect ever arrested must be guilty cause they weren't arrested because the police thought they were innocent. It's much much more than a jury instruction...it's the foundation of our legal system.

You certainly have no idea what you are talking about....so that's a common trait.

You are one of the biggest fools here.


"You are being arrested for the murder of _______as we believe you are innocent of this crime."



And that's just for starters....FOOL.


Other things such as high or no bail...and a PROSECUTION team kinda infer otherwise, you blithering idiot.

I'll wade into this hostile thread to say that these f^ck faces better get more time than OJ did

http://news.aol.com/article/chained-...295x1200935562

The Juice does a nickel, comes out Martha Stewart style and patents his own flavor of chee-chee mixture, thus restoring his 'roll.

If a man is believed by most everyone to have killed a child but he goes through the justice system and is found not guilty........then the parent of that child goes and kills the alleged killer........it's my belief that the parent should be prosecuted fully. I may totally understand where they were coming from and to everyone, the killing may be justified. But going soft on the parent is not how the system is supposed to work. Allowing judges to put their personal feelings into decisions is scary. I thought that a man couldn't be tried for the same crime twice. Something about double jeopardy. The truth of the matter is that this judge today decided that she wasn't happy with the decision of his murder trial and imposed her own sentence for THAT trial, even though fairly or unfairly, he already went through that and was found not guilty. There's no way that any rational thinking person can agree that the punishment received fit THIS crime. In my opinion, this decision is as much a breakdown in the system as the one that found him not guilty in the murder trial.

Seriously now, how can you express an opinion without referencing that it's your opinion? Should I preference it with "some folks think"? Do your opinions directly conflict with your belief system? This is of course a tactic, attack the messenger to deflect from the message. Perhaps I've been too honest in the past, when folks ask me a personal question I will usually answer it...see no reason not to. For example...on ESPN board I was attacked as being "non-Christian" in my beliefs, I was truthful about that subject and from then on...I hear about it whenever I disagree with someone (latest example being TIMM). That's cool...and expected, but if you read the threads, it's usually in direct response to remarks from another. My beliefs are what they are and ironically, by definition, not a personal "need" to discuss. So again....a post with a lot of "me, me, me...but hard to see how else "some folks" could reply.

Agree with most of that...not ready to say the judge did that, as "some folks" stated earlier, if the sentence is upheld on what surely will be an appeal, then only she will know.